We are searching data for your request:
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
May 29, 2007 Peretz Tries to Turn Defeat into Victory
The first round of the elections is over, and all the talk today has been about the fact that Minister of Defense Amir Peretz won as many votes as he did. He and his supporters have been talking as if they are now the king makers in the Labor party. The feeling among many of his supporters is that despite what the Winograd Commission said, the fact he was able to get so many votes is a huge accomplishment.
Peretz is expected to try to enter into negotiations with both the Barak and the Ayalon camp to try to get as much of his agenda approved and to make sure that he is the number two member of any party list. Some observers noted that both the Ayalon camp and the Barak camp were skeptical- both feel that coming to any agreement with Peretz could lose core supporters. Let's put this into perspective. Even though Peretz did better than expected, he was just voted out as head of the party, and the number two garner of votes was MK Ami Ayalon. Most Labor supporters do not want to see Peretz as number two, they want him gone.
It seems the Hamas leadership has ordered a cessation of the rocket fire on Israel. The cost of the Israeli retaliations has become too high. There is only one problem: the military commander of Hamas forces refused to obey. Unless there is one government and one military, the most militant has the veto power over any agreement. Ze'ev Shiff wrote in this weekend's HaÕaretz how the Palestinians have a long history of not being able to observe ceasefires. He traces the story all way back to the Palestinians in Jordan in the early 70Õs, through their history in Lebanon, all the way to today. It is worth reading.
Another worthwhile piece to read is the testimony before the House's Foreign Affairs subcommittee by Lieutenant General Keith Dayton, head of the US military mission to train the Palestinian security personnel, on the situation in Gaza. Testimony
Finally, there was a very interesting piece on Israeli TV on Iraq. It depicted the total dominance of Iran in southern Iraq. Farsi is now becoming the language of business, with the Iranian representative the true ruler of the area. Remember why the US supported Saddam Hussein originally? It was to balance Iran. Well, since we forgot about that as we invaded, we will now pay the consequences of a country ever increasingly dominated by Iran. Even more incredible is our current policy which is to further train the Iraqi army to take over from us. We are training a Shiite dominated army who will be soon taking orders from Iran. Talk about an irrational policy.
Wuhan Coronavirus Thread
One aspect of Muslim social behaviour and politics in India has become clear to every Indian = Their tendency to act like a herd, a pack and act as a block - be it to react towards any event or to vote during elections.
There were (a significant numbers) many India who used to think that allegations of Muslims herding together based of religious identity and guided by dirty looking scary middle aged Mullahs who could not utter things beyond Allaha, were far fetched.
Many argued that Muslims were as divided as Hindus based on regional, cultural and linguistic identities, Corona behaviour of Muslims in Bengal, Assam, Bihar, UP, MP, TN and all over the country has firmy and without doubt has established that Islam has made them as one herd and they are indeed a social and political block.
The distinction of Ashraf and Ajlaf has also bee erased by the negativity and silence of the Ashrafs.
Another aspect that has been well established is the irrationality of Indian Muslims as self destructive tribe.
Many political parties specially Congress stalwarts must be happy with that.
Varun9509
Afako
Hindufying India
Local Urdu channels are reporting unusually high number of deaths of influential Maulanas in Maharashtra. This channel is from Adarsh town Nanded
Bhadra
AVERAGE INDIAN
EXORCIST
China’s claim of zero coronavirus infections in military is bogus, expert says
China has recast itself as a global leader in defeating coronavirus — and nowhere is that more apparent than in their military.
In fact, China has claimed that not a single member of its 2 million strong People’s Liberation Army has contracted COVID-19, a virus that was started in China and has infected 2 million people worldwide.
The fantastical claim is being labeled an implausible narrative that scientists and scholars find bogus and warn is a classic and transparent tactic meant to intimidate regional rivals.
Chen Jingyuan, health division director of the Logistic Support Department under the Central Military Commission, claimed there were no cases of infection because the military’s prevention measures had been perfect. He said in a press conference that instead of falling to the virus, the pandemic had actually “improved the combat readiness of the Chinese military.”
One person not buying that logic is foreign affairs expert Gordon Chang.
“It is virtually impossible, as claimed, that none of the 2.0 million soldiers, sailors and pilots of the People’s Liberation Army has been infected with coronavirus, especially since some of them went into Wuhan, the epicenter, at the heart of the outbreak,” he told Fox News.
Zack Cooper, a former U.S. official working on China-related issues at the White House and the Department of Defense, told Voice of America that “militaries are being impacted just like the rest of societies so, I would expect that to be the case in China, as well.”
https://nypost.com/2020/04/15/china. -infections-in-military-is-bogus-expert-says/
Enlarge Image
People’s Liberation Army soldiers march to their barracks opposite the Great Hall of the People in Beijing.Getty Images
Chen Chi-wen, editor-in-chief of Asia-Pacific Defense, a leading defense magazine published in Taiwan, pointed out that there are PLA units based in and around Wuhan, including airborne troops, a reserve anti-aircraft artillery battery and the central depot of the Joint Logistic Support Force, and that in towns with such a heavy military presence, “tens of thousands of the soldiers and their family members were interacting with local residents all the time.”
Timothy Heath, a senior international researcher at the RAND Corporation, told VOA that China’s claims of being virus-free is one that “no one would expect” or believe.
Countries including the United States, France, Great Britain, Japan, South Korea have all seen a rise in infection in their armed forces. In some places like the Philippines and Poland, the virus has hit top generals.
Chang believes that China’s inflated claims are part of a bigger and more aggressive military strategy.
“China is now acting as if it is ready for battle,” he said.
Over the weekend, a Chinese aircraft carrier sailed past Taiwan in a show of strength as the U.S. Navy continued to struggle with outbreaks on its military ships in the Pacific. The USS Theodore Roosevelt, in particular, has been badly hit by an outbreak and is currently docked in Guam.
While the American carriers have been sidelined, China’s Liaoning is the only one that is operating in the Western Pacific.
“We have to be concerned that the Chinese military is looking for trouble,” Chang said. “In recent weeks, it has moved belligerently against Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam and Indonesia. Beijing is taking on everyone at the same time. Not good.”
Japan’s ministry of defense said Monday that the Liaoning and its strike group, including five warships, passed through the 155-mile wide Miyako Strait between the islands of Okinawa and Miyako on Saturday, before turning south and passing east of Taiwan on Sunday. The strait is an international waterway. Taiwan’s navy also sent ships to monitor the strike group as it passed on Sunday, according to Taiwan’s ministry of defense.
“We have conducted reconnaissance and monitoring over the sea and air space around Taiwan,” ministry spokesperson Shih Shun-wen said.
In response, the U.S. Air Force then posted a tweet showing multiple bombers lined up on the runway in Guam.
While China’s military is flexing its muscle at sea, the PLA has also been engaged in an online campaign and has posted stories on its large-scale exercises as well as the sinking of a Vietnamese fishing boat. It also boasted about ramping up military industries in Wuhan.
AVERAGE INDIAN
EXORCIST
China’s Racism Is Wrecking Its Success in Africa
Over the past week, hundreds of African migrant workers, traders, and students in the southern city of Guangzhou, home to Asia’s largest African diaspora, were tossed out onto the street—some by their landlords, some by hotel managers, and some by local officials. Those evicted, mostly Igbo Nigerians, insisted that they had paid their rent, had valid visas and the right paperwork, and had no contact with anybody infected with COVID-19. Meanwhile, many others were forced into a 14-day quarantine and random testing without getting their test results. Tony Mathias, an Ugandan exchange student, told Agence France-Presse: “I’ve been sleeping under the bridge for four days with no food to eat. … I cannot buy food anywhere. No shops or restaurants will serve me.”
Over the past two decades, China and Africa have become inextricably entwined. China has built roads and railways across Africa and is the biggest trading partner for the entire continent. Eighty percent of Nigeria’s bilateral debt is owed to China. About 60 percent of foreign direct investments to Ethiopia came from China in 2019. China has repeatedly stressed the importance of China-Africa alliances based on “mutual prosperity.” Yet these partnerships face irrevocable disruption if the Chinese government continues to downplay deeply rooted racial prejudices and dismisses the international outrage concerning the treatment of African migrant workers and students in China.
The events of April 10 are part of the response to growing Chinese fear of a reemergence of coronavirus infection but also build on long-standing hostility toward Africans in southern China. Anti-African feelings in China go back decades, including riots aimed at Africans in 1988-1989 in Nanjing. In Chinese media, Africans are often characterized as backward or primitive and blackness as unattractive. Virulent racism common on social media is largely unchecked by censors, including claims that Africans are rapists, drug dealers, or AIDS carriers.
Those prejudices have led to a string of incidents amid coronavirus-induced paranoia. On April 4, reports of an infected Nigerian man attacking a Chinese nurse went viral, unleashing a slew of online trolls demanding the cleansing of a city they claimed was “littered with blacks.” Three days later, four Nigerians tested positive for the virus after having been seen eating together at a local restaurant. These reports sparked widespread fear that Africans were the primary cause of recent upticks in coronavirus cases.
African expats were left at the mercy of xenophobic attitudes and heavy-handed enforcement. “They are accusing us of having the virus,” Tobenna Victor, an evicted Nigerian student, told the BBC. A viral post shows McDonald’s staff in a restaurant in Guangzhou holding a sign that says: “We’ve been informed that from now on black people are not allowed to enter the restaurant.” Rumors quickly circulated that “300,000 black people in Guangzhou were setting off a second epidemic,” and even though public officials later debunked that myth, the damage to domestic perceptions in China had been done.
Video evidence of these mistreatments has sparked international outrage. A dozen African countries have summoned their Chinese ambassadors to explain the “inhumane treatment being meted out.” A coalition of African ambassadors in Beijing delivered a letter to China’s foreign minister demanding an immediate end to all discrimination. Moussa Faki Mahamat, the chairman of the African Union Commission, also expressed his “extreme concern.” Moses Kuria, a vocal member of the Kenyan Parliament, took a more aggressive stance, calling for the immediate removal of all Chinese nationals in Kenya.
Rhetoric in the African press was just as intense. The front page of the Daily Nation, Kenya’s biggest newspaper, led with the headline “Kenyans in China: Rescue Us From Hell.” Similar news stories were found in the Nigerian, Ghanaian, and Ugandan press. The hashtag #ChinaMustExplain quickly trended on Twitter, as users expressed their anger and frustration. However, many people on Chinese social media praised the forcible expulsions and mistreatments as responsible steps to “stemming the spread of virus by Africans.”
Sunday, June 05, 2011
VIDEO: Israel Annihilates Arab Enemies, Captures Jerusalem 44 Years Ago Today In Six Day War
Israel annihilated its arab enemies and captured the Old City of Jerusalem, fulfilling Zechariah 12:6, in a war which started 44 years ago today, and lasted only six days thus it is called "The Six Day War". I found this factual four minute news coverage video, which reveals important facts, that are ommitted from today's news from Israel National News.
Israel annihilated Arab enemies in the Six-Day War that began today (Sunday) 44 years ago, but the Arab world calls the loss a " setback " (Naksa, in Arabic) and tries to turn it into victory.
The war was one of the shortest in history, lasting only a little more than 133 hours, with the Arab enemies suffering 20 more times casualties as Israel, recalling the Biblical promise in Leviticus 26:8, that if Jews obey the Torah: "Five of you will chase a hundred, and a hundred of you will chase ten thousand -your enemies will fall before your sword."
News coverage of the debate in the United Nations at the time and films of the war note facts that often are omitted today – that Jordan had denied Jews the right to pray at the Western Wall since it occupied Jerusalem and that the holy site is the outside wall of the courtyard of the Holy Temple that King Solomon originally built.
Palestinian Authority clerics and several officials increasingly have denied any Jewish connection to the Temple and Western Wall, which they claim are "ancient" Muslim places.
The war restored to Israel all of Jerusalem as well as the Golan Heights, Judea and Samaria. In addition to the Arabs who fled Israel in the War for Independence in 1948, an additional 200,000 fled during the 1967 Six-Day War, assured by Arab military leaders that they would return after an expected destruction of the Jewish state.
Most of them fled to Jordan, which many Israeli nationalists have stated is the true home of the Palestinian Authority. Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and other countries host former Arabs from Israel and their descendants. These countries have refused to give them citizenship or equal rights.
The Arab world has pinned its hopes for destroying Israel as a Jewish state by demanding that a peace treaty with Israel include the immigration of those Arabs – now numbering approximately 5 million. Flooding Israel with foreign Arabs would in effect reduce Jews to a small minority.
Still trying to turn defeat into victory, the Egyptian Al-Ahram newspaper published an article Saturday under the headline "From Naksa to Freedom," using the Arabic term for "setback."
"Celebrating Naksa Day, the Arab world is able to convert their defeat into a victory and a launch of a political, economic and social cooperations [sic], in light of the severe changes being lived in the meantime," the article stated.
Spread The News
To share this post, click the "share icon" at the end of the post.
Civil War: U.S. Army Official History Volumes (1988-2019)
4,640 pages in 34 volumes. Civil War histories produced by Army historians and published between 1988 and 2019.
The Regular Army Before the Civil War, 1845–1860 (2014)
The fifteen years that preceded the outbreak of the American Civil War were eventful ones for the U.S. Army. After invading and defeating Mexico, the Army dispersed across the vast Western frontier undertaking a myriad of duties. It subdued American Indian tribes, explored and governed new territories, and generally worked to maintain peace. At the same time, it supported national development through mapping and engineering projects, grew in size, and undertook important steps toward modernization. While these activities did not fully prepare the Army for the cataclysm that was to come, they did provide opportunities for officers to hone their leadership skills under trying conditions. Many of the men who would become generals during the Civil War first tasted battle as junior officers in Mexico and the American West.
The Civil War Begins: Opening Clashes, 1861 (2012)
The Civil War Begins: Opening Clashes, 1861 is the first in a series of campaign brochures commemorating our national sacrifices during the American Civil War. Author Jennifer Murray examines the successes and challenges of both the Union and the Confederate forces during the early days of the Civil War. Notable battles discussed include: Fort Sumter, South Carolina Bull Run, Virginia Wilson’s Creek, Missouri Cape Hatteras, North Carolina and Port Royal, South Carolina. This brochure includes six maps and three tables.
Battle of First Bull Run (2007)
Battle of First Bull Run is an account of the first major land battle of the Civil War, which took place on 21 July 1861. This staff ride guide explores a number of key elements, especially the inexperience of both the commanding officers in leading large numbers of troops in battle as well as their newly recruited and poorly trained volunteer soldiers. It also examines the naivety of both the Union and Confederacy and their unrealistic expectations of the conflict. The work illustrates numerous lessons from the battle at First Bull Run, including the dangers of not having a well-prepared and trained force at the onset of hostilities and the difficulties of launching offensive operations without proper preparation.
Battle of Ball's Bluff (2001)
Battle of Ball's Bluff is an account of the small raid on a suspected Confederate camp near Leesburg, Virginia, on 20 October 1861, which turned into a Union military disaster. Ted Ballard has crafted an engaging story, relying principally on contemporary after-action reports and on the sworn testimony of participants called before the congressional Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War investigating the Union defeats at First Bull Run and Ball's Bluff. Although not in a class with Antietam and Gettysburg or other great Civil War clashes with respect to size or consequences, the Battle of Ball's Bluff nevertheless provides important lessons in small-unit actions, leadership, tactical planning, and the role of courage and military professionalism under fire.
The Civil War on the Atlantic Coast, 1861–1865 (2015)
In the Civil War on the Atlantic Coast, 1861–1865, R. Scott Moore states that, over the course of four years of war, Federal military operations along the Atlantic coast played a key role in slowly strangling the Confederacy. Between 1862 and 1865, Southern cotton exports fell to just 5 percent of prewar levels. The number of vessels entering Confederate ports steadily decreased as the war went on. The broad strategy first envisioned by Maj. Gen. Winfield Scott and detailed by the Commission of Conference ultimately proved highly effective. Bit by bit the North closed off rebel commerce while keeping Southern coastal communities in a state of alarm that tied down the Confederacy's own hard-pressed military manpower. Thus, despite their relatively few numbers and often forgotten efforts, the soldiers who served along the Atlantic coast played a crucial part in the outcome of the Civil War.
The Civil War in the Trans-Mississippi Theater, 1861–1865 (2015)
If the Civil War had a "forgotten theater," it was the Trans-Mississippi West. Starting in 1861 with the Lincoln administration's desire to maintain control of the far west, The Civil War in the Trans-Mississippi Theater, 1861–1865, covers battles in New Mexico, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas, including Pea Ridge in March 1862 and Pleasant Hill in April 1864. The Red River Expedition and Price's Raid are also covered. The narrative places these campaigns and battles in their strategic context to show how they contributed to the outcome of the war.
The Civil War in the Western Theater, 1862 (2014)
In The Civil War in the Western Theater, 1862, author Charles R. Bowery Jr. examines the campaigns and battles that occurred during 1862 in the vast region between the Appalachian Mountains in the east and the Mississippi River in the west, and from the Ohio River in the north to the Gulf of Mexico in the south. Notable battles discussed include Mill Springs, Kentucky Forts Henry and Donelson, Tennessee Shiloh, Tennessee Perryville, Kentucky Corinth and Iuka, Mississippi and Stones River, Tennessee.
The Virginia Campaigns, March–August 1862 (2016)
The Virginia Campaigns, March–August 1862, by Christopher Kolakowski, covers key battles in the Commonwealth of Virginia including Malvern Hill, Glendale, Gaines' Mill, Mechanicsville, and Second Bull Run. It also discusses the changes made in leadership of the Union command as President Abraham Lincoln and Secretary of War Edwin Stanton assumed direction of the war.
Battle of Perryville, 8 October 1862 (2005)
Abstract: In August and September 1862 Confederate armies were on the move northward. Robert E. Lee was invading Maryland, Earl Van Dorn and Sterling Price were moving into Tennessee, and Braxton Bragg and Edmund Kirby Smith were advancing into Kentucky. James McPherson, in his acclaimed Battle Cry of Freedom, cites this period as the first of the four major turning points of the American Civil War. The Confederate counteroffensive defeated Union hopes to end the war in 1862. However, by mid-October, hard on the heels of the broad Confederate advance the Union forces had regained the strategic and operational advantage, cited by McPherson as the second turning point of the war. Union victories at Antietam in the east and Perryville in the west carried significant weight in determining the final outcome of the conflict.
The Vicksburg Campaign, November 1862–July 1863 (2013)
The Vicksburg Campaign, November 1862-July 1863 continues the series of campaign brochures commemorating our national sacrifices during the American Civil War. Author Christopher R. Gabel examines the operations for the control of Vicksburg, Mississippi. President Abraham Lincoln called Vicksburg "the key," and indeed it was as control of the Mississippi River depended entirely on the taking of this Confederate stronghold. This brochure includes five maps and fifteen illustrations.
The Civil War in the West, 1863 (2016)
The Civil War in the West, 1863, by Andrew N. Morris, is the latest addition to the Center of Military History's U.S. Army Campaigns of the Civil War series. In 1863, Union and Confederate forces fought for control of Chattanooga, a key rail center. The Confederates were victorious at nearby Chickamauga in September. However, renewed fighting in Chattanooga that November provided Union troops a victory, control of the city, and drove the Confederates south into Georgia. The Union success left its armies poised to invade the Deep South the following year.
The Gettysburg Campaign, June–July 1863 (2013)
The Gettysburg Campaign, June-July 1863 continues the series of campaign brochures commemorating our national sacrifices during the American Civil War. Authors Carol Reardon and Tom Vossler examine the operations that culminated in the pivotal three-day Battle of Gettysburg, pitting the Union Army of the Potomac under Maj. Gen. George G. Meade against the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia under General Robert E. Lee. This brochure includes seven maps and seventeen illustrations.
The Chancellorsville Campaign, January–May (1863)
In the Chancellorsville Campaign, January–May 1863, author Bradford Wineman examines the battle of Chancellorsville in which a powerful Union Army, under Maj. Gen. Joseph Hooker, was pitted against a smaller but well-led Confederate force under General Robert E. Lee. Hooker planned a bold flanking maneuver to secure a Union victory, crush the rebel army, and open the way for a march toward Richmond, Virginia, the Confederate capital. He anticipated a glorious victory for his Federal troops.
In the end it was Lee, and his chief lieutenant, Maj. Gen. Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson, who achieved what many historians have called the South’s greatest victory during the Civil War. Once Hooker had maneuvered the bulk of his forces over the Rappahannock River the Union commander gathered his troops into a defensive position at Chancellorsville and waited for Lee to attack. Lee seized the initiative, made several risky tactical moves, and drove the Federals from the field after three days of intense fighting. Only the death of the “Stonewall” Jackson tarnished Lee’s crowning victory
The Atlanta and Savannah Campaigns, 1864
The Atlanta and Savannah Campaigns, 1864, author J. Britt McCarley covers the military operations in northern Georgia involving the Union army group led by Maj. Gen. William T. Sherman and the Confederate Army of Tennessee commanded by Generals Joseph E. Johnston and John Bell Hood. The Atlanta Campaign consisted of numerous engagements, including the Battles of Resaca, Kennesaw Mountain, Peachtree Creek, Atlanta, Ezra Church, and Jonesboro. The campaign ended with Sherman's capture of Atlanta, Georgia, the Confederacy's largest transportation and manufacturing center in the Deep South. McCarley's superb account concludes with an examination of the Savannah Campaign, more popularly known as Sherman's March to the Sea.
Campaigns in Mississippi and Tennessee, February–December 1864 (2014)
The Campaigns in Mississippi and Tennessee, February–December 1864, by Derek W. Frisby, begins with an examination of Maj. Gen. William T. Sherman's Meridian Expedition, often called a dress rehearsal for the more famous March to the Sea. He then follows with an account of the operations of Confederate cavalry commander Maj. Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest, including the notorious Fort Pillow Massacre and the brilliantly executed Battle of Brice's Crossroads. Frisby concludes his excellent study with a narrative of the pivotal Battles of Franklin and Nashville.
The Shenandoah Valley Campaign, March–November 1864 (2014)
The Shenandoah Valley Campaign, March–November 1864, by Raymond K. Bluhm Jr., covers Union and Confederate military operations in the Shenandoah Valley region of southwestern Virginia, and in Maryland and Washington, D.C., during the last full year of the conflict. Bluhm describes the Union advance in the Shenandoah Valley in May 1864 that led to the Federal defeat at the Battle of New Market, Maj. Gen. David Hunter's destructive campaign later that spring culminating in his retreat from Lynchburg, and Maj. Gen. Jubal Early's subsequent Confederate offensive against the U.S. capital, resulting in the Battle of Monocacy in July. Also covered is Maj. Gen. Philip Sheridan's tenure in command of Union forces in the Valley and his two key victories at Winchester and Cedar Creek, in which rebel forces under Early were defeated, giving Union forces control over the region by November 1864
The Overland Campaign, 4 May–15 June 1864 (2014)
In the spring of 1864, the Civil War's two legendary military leaders, Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee, confronted each other on the battlefield for the first time. Part of the U.S. Army's commemorative series of the Civil War, The Overland Campaign, 4 May–15 June 1864, by David W. Hogan, Jr. tells the story of the clash of these two titans through the burning scrub brush of the Wilderness, the bitter struggle for the Bloody Angle at Spotsylvania Court House, the cavalry encounter at Yellow Tavern, the maneuvering along the North Anna River, and the tragedy of Cold Harbor. It also provides analysis in light of the latest scholarship. This brochure includes eight maps and twenty-two illustrations.
Overland Campaign, Virginia, 4 May to 15 June 1864 A Study in Operational-Level Command (2009)
This Second Edition of the Staff Ride Handbook for the Overland Campaign, Virginia, 4 May to 15 June 1864, is an update to the tenth study in the Combat Studies Institute’s (CSI) Staff Ride Handbook series. The original handbook, prepared by Dr. Curtis S. King, Dr. William Glenn Robertson, and LTC Steven E. Clay (US Army, Retired), analyzed Lieutenant General Ulysses S. Grant’s 1864 Overland Campaign from the crossing of the Rapidan River on 4 May to the initiation of the crossing of the James River on 15 June. This new edition carries the story across the James and encompasses the initial assaults on Petersburg as well. Unlike many of CSI’s previous handbooks, this handbook focuses on the operational level of war. Even so, it provides a heavy dose of tactical analysis, thereby making this ride a superb tool for developing Army leaders at almost all levels.
The Petersburg and Appomattox Campaigns, 1864–1865 (2015)
In the Civil War's last year, two great adversaries squared off in central Virginia in a series of battles that eventually determined the struggle's outcome. After a month of battles from the Wilderness to Cold Harbor in May and June, 1864, Union Commander in Chief Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant was frustrated in his headstrong attempts to batter the Confederate forces under General Robert E. Lee and bring them to open battle. Seeking to sidestep Lee's army and attack Richmond, the Confederacy's capital city, Grant moved south to cross the James River and cut the rebel army's supply lines at Petersburg, Virginia, where several key railroads met to form a crucial logistical center. Lee, however, reacted in time to block the Union strike at Petersburg. A ten month siege ensued as Grant sought to pry Lee out of Petersburg with flanking maneuvers, and the Confederates desperately defended the city and Richmond.
Lee's lines finally collapsed on 2 April 1865 after a powerful Federal attack on his right, which forced the rebels to evacuate Richmond and Petersburg that night. In a seven-day retreat with Grant's Union forces closely behind them, the Confederates marched west to obtain supplies and join other rebel troops in North Carolina. Grant's forces, particularly the cavalrymen under Maj. Gen. Phil Sheridan, were able to get in front of Lee's column and block his progress at a small courthouse village called Appomattox. With no chance of victory or even escape left to him, Lee surrendered his forces to Grant on 9 April 1865.
The Civil War Ends, 1865 (2015)
Many people mistakenly believe that the American Civil War ended when General Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia evacuated the Confederate capital of Richmond, Virginia, after a long siege and surrendered to his Union counterpart, Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant, at Appomattox Court House on 9 April 1865. Although the capitulation of the South's premier field army foreshadowed the Confederacy's ultimate demise, important operations took place concurrent with the struggle between Grant and Lee operations which continued into May 1865. This brochure examines some of these events, starting with Maj. Gen. William T. Sherman's Carolinas Campaign, and continuing with several raids led by Union Generals George Stoneman, Edward E. Potter, and James H. Wilson. Other operations covered include the Federal assault on Mobile, Alabama, and the capture of Confederate President Jefferson Davis. The rest of the brochure describes how the remaining Confederate military forces from North Carolina to Texas laid down their arms in the spring of 1865.
The Army Medical Department, 1818-1865
Medical activities in the U.S. Army from the inception of the modern Army Medical Department through the Civil War, with emphasis both on medical service in the far West and on clinical, scientific, and organizational advances.
Staff Ride Guide Battle of Antietam
The Battle of Antietam was a crucial turning point in the American Civil War. This staff ride guide examines the Maryland Campaign and Battle of Antietam, the bloodiest day in American history. On 17 September 1862, the Army of the Potomac met the Army of Northern Virginia on the rolling farmlands around Sharpsburg, Maryland. While General Lee sought to bring the war to the North and "liberate" Maryland, General McClellan, having gained important intelligence, would endeavor to defeat Lee and reverse the momentum of several Union losses. Ted Ballard has once again crafted a definitive battle guide drawing on the Official Records of the War of the Rebellion. Though neither the Union nor the Confederate side gained the decisive victory both desired, the battle provides many lessons in command and control, communications, intelligence, technology versus tactics, and the "fog of war."
The Battle of Cedar Creek: Self-Guided Tour (1990)
Union General Philip H. Sheridan rallied his men to turn defeat into victory on 19 October 1864.
American Military History Volume 1 - The United States Army and the Forging of Nation, 1775-1917
The Battle of New Market: Self-Guided Tour (1988)
The battle between Confederate units under General John C. Breckinridge and Union forces commanded by Maj. Gen. Franz Sigel in the Shenandoah Valley, May 1864.
The Battle of Second Manassas: Self-Guided Tour (1991)
The Battle of Second Manassas, prepared as a self-guided tour, is intended to help today's soldiers study the American battlefields of the past not only to better understand the complexities and inevitable pressures of warfare but also to sharpen their knowledge of the art of war and their craft. The contest around Groveton, Virginia, on 29-30 August 1862 was characterized by complex maneuvers and fighting over the same areas at several different times. New units funneled into the battle throughout its course, while others were rushed from one point to another as the action shifted. This lack of order is a reflection of the high level of confusion experienced at the time. The courage of the men on both sides was exemplary, but technology has overtaken the tactics they used. Nevertheless, the lessons in leadership, command, the use of intelligence, and the performance of men under stress shown by this battle have a lasting value.
Centuries of Service: The U.S. Army, 1775-2005 (2005)
Centuries of Service is the right title for this readable and informative brochure. Since 1775 the United States has grown from a loosely organized confederation of thirteen English colonies to a superpower whose influence reaches around the globe. Over the course of American history, as David W. Hogan Jr. writes, one can truly say of the Army: "When it was needed, it was there," first as the shield of the Republic during its vulnerable early years and later as a means to project power in defense of American interests worldwide. Hogan examines the full range of the Army's contributions: its vital role in the growth and development of the nation, its dedicated efforts to preserve the Union during the Civil War, and its defense of the United States against external threats through to modern day. Because of the ready availability of disciplined and trained personnel, the Army has also been involved in a wide array of nonmilitary assistance, intervention tasks, such as internal improvements, natural disaster relief, economic assistance, domestic order, and a host of other contingencies. The Army answered the call and continues to do so.
Commanding Generals Chiefs of Staff 1775–2013 Portraits & Biographical Sketches of the United States Army’s Senior Officer (2013)
Commanding Generals and Chiefs of Staff, 1775-2005, first published in 1983 and periodically updated while preserving its original purpose and scope, continues the institutional history of the present-day Office of the Chief of Staff of the Army followed by side-by-side presentations of the biography and official portrait of the Army's senior officer in the line of succession. By and large the commanding generals and chiefs of staff leading the Army in peace and war moved in a competitive environment with evolving responsibilities in trying circumstances, their rise through the levels of leadership to the pinnacle of their profession revealing both striking parallels and fascinating contrasts. Interesting, informative, and inspiring, Commanding Generals and Chiefs of Staff honors these officers for their contributions as eminent leaders in the history of the Army and in the history of the nation. It is a valuable reference source for those interested in generalship at the highest levels. Although the complexity of technology and staff organization has increased radically over time, the essential elements of leadership remain unchanged.
Battlefield Atlas of Price's Missouri Expedition of 1864 (2016)
Abstract: The genesis for the publication of Battlefield Atlas of Price’s Missouri Expedition of 1864 goes back to 1985. Dr. Jerold E. Brown first developed the Battle of Westport as a staff ride for the Combat Studies Institute’s (CSI) curriculum at the US Army Command and General Staff College (CGSC). The study of the Battle of Westport, Missouri, provided the college with the opportunity to visit a nearby Civil War battlefield. Dr. Brown also used the Westport staff ride as a “train the trainer” exercise in what later became the Military History Instruction Course (MHIC) to teach staff ride methodology. Subsequent CSI instructors expanded Dr. Brown’s original work into a full-length staff ride. Most notable were Dr. Curtis S. King and Mr. Gary W. Linhart, both CSI Historians. They formalized the instructor notes into a standardized staff ride walk book (instructor guide) and widened the scope of both the preliminary study and the field study portions. The new preliminary study provided an overview of all of Price’s Missouri Expedition of 1864 (7 September 1864 to 28 November 1864) and the revised field study focused on the three-day battle of Westport (21-23 October 1864). Over time, the Westport staff ride became very popular with ROTC programs, Reserve Component units, and the Active duty Army from the surrounding region.
Staff Ride Handbook for the Battle of Chickamauga, 18—20 September 1863 (1992)
The campaign and Battle of Chickamauga, August-September 1863, is an excellent vehicle for a Staff Ride. Because of the size of the forces involved and the difficulty of the terrain encountered, it represents an opportunity to raise many challenging teaching points relevant to today's officer. Second, the nation has wisely preserved most of the primary battle area in the Chickamauga and Chattanooga National Military Park and has marked most unit positions for detailed study by visitors.
Operational Art and the Campaigns for Mobile, 1864–65 (2019)
Dr. Dan Jordan’s Staff Ride Handbook for the Mobile Bay campaign covers both the Navy-led action at the mouth of the bay in 1864 as well as the Army-led siege of the city itself in 1865, demonstrating the importance of the interoperability of forces operating in different domains to successfully enable joint forces to create decisive effects. The campaign highlights actions of ground forces in both supporting and supported roles and the importance of cross-domain fires to effect maneuver and achieve victory. The handbook covers ADM David G. Farragut’s famous action at the mouth of Mobile Bay and MG Edward Canby’s intricate plan of maneuver to place his forces in position to force the evacuation of Mobile, one of the Confederacy’s last major ports. This handbook is designed for either a single or multi-day staff ride and is intended for all members of the joint force.
Staff Ride Handbook for The Battle of Shiloh, 6-7 April 1862 (2004)
Abstract: Since the early 20th century the US Army has used Civil War and other battlefields as “outdoor classrooms” in which to educate and train its officers. Employing a methodology developed at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, in 1906, both the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College and US Army War College conducted numerous battlefield staff rides to prepare officers for duties in both war and peace. Often interrupted by the exigencies of the nation’s wars, the tradition was renewed and reinvigorated at Fort Leavenworth in the early 1980s. Since 1983 the Leavenworth Staff Ride Team has guided military students on battlefields around the world.
Staff Ride Handbook for The Vicksburg Campaign, December 1862-July 1863 (2001)
Abstract: The Vicksburg campaign of 1862-63 is an effective vehicle for a Staff Ride. It raises a variety of teaching points, at both the operational and tactical levels, that are relevant to today's officers. Several different types of combat occurred in the course of the campaign. Inaddition, the campaign featured prominent participation by the Navy, thus raising a joint dimension. It also offers examples of combat support and combat service support activities, most notably military engineering and logistics.
The Wilson's Creek Staff Ride and Battlefield Tour (2001)
Abstract: Armies of the North and South fought the Rattle of Wilson’s Creek about ten miles southwest of Springfield, Missouri, on Saturday, 10 August 1861. Like most battles, Wilson’s Creek provides fertile ground for studying military art and science. It is particularly useful for examining the dynamics of battle and the effect of personalities on the action. While the action at Wilson’s Creek was small compared to that at Gettysburg or Chickamauga, it remains significant and useful to students of military history.
Staff Guide to Battle of First Bull Run (2007)
A First Bull Run staff ride can offer significant military lessons. Revisiting this battle through the “eyes” of the men who were there, both leaders and rank-and-file soldiers, allows one insights into decision making under pressure and the human condition during battle. The campaign contains many lessons in command and control, communications, intelligence, logistics, the accommodation of advances in weapon technology, and mobilization in the absence of universal military training. First Bull Run was a first battle—a major engagement after a prolonged period of peace. For some it constitutes a metaphor of the price paid for military unpreparedness. Hopefully, this volume will prove a useful tool for those conducting a staff ride to First Bull Run.
Monday, June 27, 2011
Is The “Pre-Trib Rapture” “Imminent?”
During the past year, I have had an untold multitude number of viewers visiting this site, looking for biblical truth, and reading the several articles I have posted written by myself or others concerning the catching away of Christ’s church, one of which I wrote back in January of 2011 titled “Pre Tribulation Rapture “Imminency” Deception, wherein I explain some of the biblical reasons why a pre-trib rapture is not imminent.
I received a comment/reply today “Is The “Pre-Trib Rapture” Imminent?, the contents of which are included under the comments section of the blog entry “Pre Tribulation Rapture “Imminency” Deception, that was loaded with goodies explaining why, based on scriptural teaching, a “pre-trib” rapture is not imminent, and completely debunks this imminency theory, and the teachings of pre-trib die hards and their heretical schooling of an imminent pre-trib rapture.
These “goodies” deserve a front page entry all by itself. A big thank you to Lawrence for sending this on to me and Bruce, who had apparently posted it somewhere, further exposing the lie from pre-trib rapture peddlers, who call and proclaim themselves "biblical scholars", but spend hours of their time writing articles trying to explain away scripture to make a pre-tribulation rapture theory fit into their false belief system, rather than swallow their pride and admit they were wrong and let scripture speak for itself and believe it.
These are very serious times we are living in and God is about to shake everything that can be shook on the earth we need to be searching the scriptures daily for spiritual food and not be deceived by those promoting an escapism theology that's not going to happen. We need to be ready for the Great Tribulation that our Lord and Master warned us about, outlining the signs that would happen before His return to catch away His people in Matthew’s Gospel Chapter 24. Following are the goodies sent to me:
Is the Pretrib Rapture Imminent?
(Pretrib rapturists claim that Christ's return is imminent, that is, that it can occur at any moment. Theologian and pastor Norman MacPherson, in his excellent book "Triumph Through Tribulation," offers proof that the Bible has never taught an any-moment return of Christ. Here are the points brought out and discussed at length by MacPherson:)
1. Great Commission fulfillment implies a long period of time.
2. Seed growth in Matthew 13 is a time-consuming process.
3. Paul expected death, not rapture, in II Timothy 4:6-8.
4. Jesus predicted Peter's martyrdom in John 21:18-19.
5. Matthew 24 teaches that signs must come first.
6. Many passages speak of a large interval between Christ's ascension and return: Jewish dispersion into "all nations" (Luke 21) "man travelling into a far country," "after a long time the lord of those servants cometh" (Matthew 25).
7. Apostasy of last days takes time to develop.
8. Bridegroom tarried in parable of virgins.
9. Pastoral epistles teach Church's continuing ministry, which involves time.
10. Paul says Christ's coming is not imminent (II Thessalonians 2:1-3), for apostasy and Antichrist must come first.
11. View of seven phases of church history (seven churches of Revelation) involves big lapse of time and imminence difficulties for pre-tribs could Christ have come before the last phase?
12. Exhortations to watch and be ready are tied to what pre-trib teachers regard as the second stage (which is necessarily non-imminent) in Matthew 24 and 25, I Corinthians 1:7, Colossians 3:4, I Thessalonians 3:13, II Thessalonians 1:7-10, I Peter 1:13 and 4:13, and I John 2:28.
Spread The News
To share this post, click the "share icon" at the end of the post.
December 4, 2007
A Fat Man in a Palace
Lucia says: With all respect to the brave and energetic students, the moderate political opposition, and the tea-leaves-reading Baduel, the story of this referendum is Chávez.
The conventional wisdom is that Chávez is an immensely talented politician, with a common touch, loads of charisma, and a crafty talent for turning his anti-American agenda into votes.
It’s true he’s got the gift of blarney, massive self-confidence, and – sometimes -- a real way with words. But the real story behind Chávez’s success has always been the increase in oil revenues and the misiones they funded. Many, many Venezuelans – the entire crucial center, in fact – have supported Chávez despite his antics, despite his ideology and despite his narcissism.
That Chávez himself has never really understood this was crystal clear during the final days of the campaign. He could have spent those final days talking about the proposal to give the misiones constitutional status, he could have focused on buhonero pensions and shorter work hours, and on funding community councils. And most of all, he could have dialed down the crazy.
Instead, he let the crazy fly.
He looked befuddled in his concession speech because he didn’t, couldn’t, understand what had happened.
Katy nailed it: he’s become just a Fat Man in a Palace -- surrounded by Yes Men, disconnected from a shifting political dynamic. Not just drinking but inhaling his own Kool-Aid.
In the end, it's no surprise that man who imagines himself on par with Christ and Bolivar may have an especially hard time integrating reality.
What comes next? No one is predicting that the Chávez team will undertake a sober assessment of the unexpected defeat. Mostly, his people are too busy cringing in palace corners, hoping their heads get to stay on their shoulders a bit longer. Surely, Chávez won’t wait for the Venezuelan people to achieve the requisite maturity -- a barrage of far-reaching legislation is headed our way, as if the rebuke-by-vote never took place.
Heinz Dieterich blows a gasket
Quico says: For those of you who haven't had the pleasure, Heinz Dietrich is Chávez's favorite theorist. Or, maybe I should write "used to be", because I have a feeling when Chávez reads his referendum postmortem, well.
The piece is remarkable from start to finish. Parts of it look like he's lifted them straight off this blog, while others read like the guy keeps a stash of qualudes by his computer. His main point is that the referendum went badly due to bolivarianismo's "vertical system of leadership", which is a little bit like saying that the only problem with this table here is that it has four legs, and a top.
But definitely the best part is when he blames the defeat on. PSFs!
The political price the president has paid for [the vertical system of leadership] was the absence of information about reality, and the filling out of his cabinet and his Miraflores staff with opportunists from the New Political Class who are often not up to their jobs and guarantee his bureaucratic control of the process, but not closeness to the people. A further ring that filters his reality is inside Miraflores where, for instance, the inspectors he is able to send to investigate any problem, have to go through a bottleneck at the Ministry of the Presidency. Something similar happened with the analyses of the "situation room" at the palace where, moreover, control was handed off to a gaggle of young foreign "advisers" (French, Spanish) without political experience, but with very juicy salaries.
That situation with his courtesans was reproduced internationally, generating for him a circuit of individual intellectual sycophants fed with absurd cultural prizes worth $150,000 or $100,000 dollars, and collective ones, such as some leftwing web pages that suppress or marginalize all critical debate about the development of the progressive processes in Venezuela, Cuba and Bolivia.
Alas, Dieterich is too much of a "gentlemen" to name names here, but still, I'm dying to know. which intellectuals. which web pages?
Read his entire postmortem here.
It's not that we're questioning the result - it's that we want to know what the result is!
Quico says: First the good news: Sunday night's referendum proved that, when the chips are down, the Smartmatic voting system (electronic voting with an audited paper trail) makes it essentially impossible to fake the final outcome. You might think that, after years of deep suspicion from opposition folk certain that "a chavista elections council will never, ever announce Chávez lost", the No side's win would at last have put concerns about CNE's credibility to rest.
Really, this should be CNE's star turn. but it isn't, because the way they're handling the final results announcement is an ongoing fiasco.
First, lets just remind ourselves why our voting system makes it nearly impossible to cheat credibly:
One of the system's big selling points was supposed to be speed: doing the official tally electronically allows you to generate results pretty much immediately, as they come in.
On Sunday afternoon, CNE said it would announce results around 7:00 p.m. And they did indeed have enough tallies for a first announcement ready early that evening. But, it was past midnight before CNE head Tibisay Lucena came on the air to announce results, a delay that needlessly scared the hell out of everybody.
What on earth was that about?
Chávez gave us a good hint during his concession speech, saying he'd been faced with a dilemma that night and had been "considering his options." What options? Chávez isn't supposed to have any options at a time like that. CNE is meant to be an independent branch of government. Results come in results are announced. If they show triple congruence, they're credible. If they don't, they aren't.
Rumors are rife that the first announcement was delayed because Chávez insisted on "negotiating the margin": he didn't want the world to think he'd lost by a lot. (Other conspiracy theories are way more alarming.) To massage the results in this way, he would've had to pressure CNE to manipulate which Tally Sheets were included in the first bulletin, (the election night announcement), gaming the sample to make the outcome look closer than it really was.
For now, those are just rumors. But we can't dismiss them because, bizarrely, CNE did not tell us what percentage of the voting centers their first bulletin covered. That, when you think about it, is totally crazy and weird. Isn't that the first thing usually announced in a situation like this, in Venezuela or anywhere else in the world? (You know what I'm talking about, right? " With X% of precincts reporting, results show. ")
This morning, the plot thickened as CNE posted the geographic breakdown of results on its website. These are exquisitely detailed, but are they complete? Nope. As a cryptic footnote tells us, they "correspond to the percentage of Tally Sheets received at the time of the first election night bulletin." And what, pray tell, would that percentage be? That they don't say!
It's higher order opacity, this: it's not just that they're withholding information, it's that they're withholding information about how much information they're withholding.
The situation we have on our hands now is really quite bizarre. On the one hand, CNE is willing to tell us that at voting table number one at the Escuela Estadal Unitaria de Sabana Dulce voting center in Ca ño Delgadito parish of Papelón Municipality, in Portuguesa State, the Sí side cleaned our clocks by 155 votes to 16. On the other hand, they're not willing to tell us what percentage of the tally sheets they've added up! The disconnect between their willingness to disclose arcane detail and their reticence to disclose the heart of the matter is. interesting.
They also don't report the number of null votes. Or turnout details. Or the number of actas tallied per voting center. In fact, all of the data that were included in the "Ficha Técnica" in their 2006 presidential election results, are mysteriously missing this time.
In the end, CNE wasted a golden opportunity to shut up all their critics once and for all. At 7 p.m. on Sunday Night, Tibisay Lucena could perfectly well have gone on TV to say, "having counted X% of the tally sheets, here are the results. " Then we could've checked that announcement for triple congruence, and that would've been the end of that. The long, divisive, barren debate on CNE would've been over.
That's not how they chose to play it, though, and now, idiotically, they have to think up a way to climb out of the hole they've dugged themselves into. If the final tally shows a substantially larger margin of victory for the No vote than the one announced on Sunday night, Tibisay Lucena has to resign.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Work Choice Howard's achilles heel
The working people of Australia, spearheaded by the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), have been fighting a bitter battle with the John Howard's hard-line neo-liberal government for years. Howard, cut from the same cloth as George Bush in the US, has been anti-labor, pro-war, pro-deregulation and pro-tax-cut.
These policies have created the same conditions in Australia as they have everywhere else, namely increased wealth polarization, reduced workers rights and a destruction of civil society.
But now it looks like people are finally waking up to the truth. The ACTU and many others have been campaigning to stop Howard and remove him from office. Their Your Rights at Work campaign (YRAW or YR@W) has, through a massive grassroots effort, put the Howard administration on its heels.
The Howard government won a legal bid yesterday to suppress secret Work Choices documents, saying the release of the papers would lead to speculation that the coalition planned a new wave of workplace changes.
A spokesman for the prime minister told News Ltd last night that the documents could not be released because "the majority of them were cabinet documents".
Grassroots activism has sullied the Work Choices brand now it stands to topple the Government.
In marginal seats around Australia, the Your Rights At Work logo, YR@W, is more conspicuous than the Labor Party banner. It appears on so many T-shirts and placards that it threatens to depose Che Guevara as the new emblem of activism and resistance. There are 46 groups around NSW and John Robertson, the secretary of Unions NSW who devised the blueprint for the grassroots campaign, believes they will revive the labour movement.
"They're the future of unions," Robertson says. "Over the past 20 years we got very complacent and lost members. But these groups are made up of locals, not blow-ins. They're the same people you see running chocolate wheels at school fetes.
"Even if Rudd gets in and overturns Work Choices, these groups won't disappear. I don't know, or even care, if they get involved in party politics, but we will have trained future community leaders, who will be able to fight on issues like transport, infrastructure, schools and housing."
Historic strikes in France, Korea
The last few days have seen extraordinary struggles taking place in Korea and in France.
Those struggles have also illustrated the need for the trade union movement to have its own independent media. Let me explain what I mean.
France saw a huge wave of strikes this week. This gigantic struggle is the long-awaited counter-attack by unions to a right-wing government with an explicitly anti-union agenda.
I've been able to follow the coverage a bit in the British media, and was not surprised to hear a discussion yesterday on the radio about whether French President Nicolas Sarkozy would be "tough enough" to resist the unions. As one reporter put it, would he be as strong a leader as Margaret Thatcher was back in the 1980s?
That's an extreme example, but the more common coverage has focussed entirely on the difficulties faced by commuters, with photos illustrating empty Metro stations in Paris to make the point.
In other words, the news story for most mainstream media has been about Sarkozy's toughness and the suffering of commuters -- and not about the actual workers on strike and what they are calling for.
Korea this week provided us with what I think was an even more extraordinary example of how mainstream media covers labour disputes.
Every November, tens of thousands of trade unionists rally in the capital, Seoul. I know because I was there ten years ago. This year's national workers' rally was used by Korean unions to focus attention on the free trade agreement between Korea and the USA, and thousands of farmers and students joined in the protest.
According to one eyewitness account, their protest was blocked by some 25,000 baton-wielding riot police, who proceeded to attack them with water cannon in an attempt to disperse the demonstration.
The main foreign news agencies such as Reuters and AFP reported this as an "anti-FTA" protest, without mentioning that it was actually an annual trade union event. Normally reliable news sources like the BBC didn't even bother to report the event at all. As a friend of mine in Paris put it, local coverage in France of the Korean rally described it as "a bunch of rebellious farmers going wild about a trade agreement with the USA which they mistakenly believe will deprive them of income."
What we have here are gigantic protests by national trade unions in two of the world's most important industrialized countries, which are either being under-reported or mis-reported.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
53 Tidiness
I like to keep things tidy. My room has, over the years of it's transformation, been titled 'austere', 'monastic', 'sparse' and 'ugly'. Tidiness os one of those odd virtues which isn't a virtue at all. The whole purpose is to make life easier, more efficient. To quote Buckaroo Banzai "Wherever you go, there you are." I want to apply that principle to my stuff.
I own more stuff than greets the eye. Some of my stuff is in Pacifica, California. Some is in Boston, and some is still in Colorado. After a while You just don't need to carry as much stuff around with you. I could bring five posters, but three will do quite nicely.
George Carlin's best bit, in my opinion, is on losing things. Tidiness is the counter-artillerey against losing things. Yet sometimes things still get lost, as happened with my copy of 'The Oresteia', the cycle of revenge of the house of Atreus in three parts by Aeschylus. I'm not a big fan, but it was my personal copy that I think was stolen. But Carlin warns me:
"You know how some people thier first reaction is 'Who stole it? It's gone: Who stole it?' It's an ego defence. They can't handle the fact that they might have been stupid enough to lose something, even if it's something no one really wants.
'Hey. Hey! Who stole my toenail collection? And they also got away with my nude photos of Ernest Borgnine!'"
I have no idea why anyone would want to steal the Oresteia, but whatever. I left it in public, scoured the area after it disappeared, and have given up on it. If they really want to read a crappy translation of a meh play, they can. After all, we live in an age where people are more important than things.
Getting back to tidiness. Tidiness is a mindset, I realized, instead of a virtue. I'm not just a tidy room keeper. I like to keep life, in general, kinda tidy. My inbox in my email. I always try to empty and archive it in the appropriate folder. And yet.
I realized that there has been, for over a year last Monday, a message rotting in my inbox. There's nothing to keep it company, it just sits there. Sadly it's a message I sent to myself: a link to some scientific papers by Hans Dreisch I'm interested in. I keep it in the inbox as a reminder that I should read it.
So my inbox is not optimally tidy. There is a quirk in the plan, this little defiant message. I tried to archive it in Gmail once, but throughout the day could picture it alone in the sea of other emails, unread and unloved. When I got back I restored it to it's rightful home in my inbox. Who knows how long it will live there. Perhaps it'll never be read, it will play the part of sentinal, and doorman, greeting the new emails as they arrive, encouraging them to chin up as they are archived in the sea of thousands of lost emails that constitute my account. It is defiant, a symbol, it has taken on meaning of it's own, nothing can stop it, it is the wilderness of the autumn of our lives, rage, rage against the dying of the light! Booorn freeeee.
You know what else is untidy about my life? Cheese dip. That nasty 'con queso' salsa chese dip that has MSG and hosts of other crap. Here am I, trying to eat healthy, usually organic, vegetarian. But that stuff tastes so good, it is my vice.
But let's not discuss vices here. If tidiness is not a virtue than the inconsistency of my eating habits cannot be vices. Things here require that I go and prepare for class. The slef-same class for which I'm reading the Orestiea. And look! There it is, right where I left it! On top of the other ancient greek texts.
I'll return it to the library this weekend.
May 29, 2007 Peretz Tries to Turn Defeat into Victory - History
Oh no. Tora, Tora, Tora .
I mean. Mayday, Mayday, Mayday .
It looks as if Stephen Harper's plans for Total World Domination, have come crashing down to earth.
The F-35 jet fighter purchase, the most persistent thorn in the Harper government’s side and the subject of a devastating auditor-general’s report last spring, is dead.
Faced with the imminent release of an audit by accountants KPMG that will push the total projected life-cycle costs of the aircraft above $30 billion, the Harper Conservatives have decided to scrap the controversial sole-source program and go back to the drawing board, a source familiar with the decision said.
Yes it's true. The plane is a turkey, or a flying broomstick, and the Cons can't count.
The cost of buying and servicing the F-35 stealth fighter jets that Ottawa has been planning to purchase has skyrocketed to about $40 billion, CTV News has learned, as the Conservative government considers alternative aircraft. A report commissioned by the government, which will be released next week, will kick off a review of the entire jet fighter procurement process and the need to replace Canada’s aging fleet of CF-18 jets.
So after all that time, after all those lies, after all those millions, we're back to where we started. With the Cons in a panic.
PMO spokesman Andrew MacDougall took to Twitter Thursday evening to deny a decision has been made. “The government will fulfill its seven-point plan,” he tweeted.
Preparing to roll Rona Ambrose out to try to make it sound like they planned this whole debacle. And turn defeat into VICTORY.
While their credibility prepares to crash and burn. At home and all over the world.
The decision is sure to have ripple effects around the world, as any reduction in the number of aircraft on order causes the price to go up for all the other buyers. Canada is one of nine F-35 consortium members, including the United States.
Because the Cons going to need a good ejection seat to get out of this one eh?
And they don't have one.
Oh wait. I'm WRONG .
There comes Stephen Harper trying to make a smooth landing.
Oh NOOOOOOOOO.
Great Helmsman Leader managed to eject in the nick of time. With only his pants on fire. But his government is a total write off.
And anybody who still thinks those Con klowns are good money managers, or good managers of anything, must be either very dumb or very crazy. Or both.
Simon to the Con Air Farce: You are cleared to CRASH.
Mayday . Mayday . #@!#!
Muahahahaha.
Vote here to recommend this post at Progressive Bloggers
6 comments:
Nothing wrong with $40 billion in cost over runs, move right along. In the current state of our country, this too will pass with little scrutiny and Peter McKay keeps his job. Good idea to stick it on Rona as this bunch loves to have women take the fall.
The F35 is a turkey in the air and a princess in the Hanger.
The best solution for Canada is to extend the life of the CF18 for another 10 years, use the saving to develop a drone version of the Dash 8. Thats all we need. The Economist says a Dash 8 is the perfect low cost bomber/ground support tool for the 21st Century.
Stephen Harper, January 14, 2011. “Contracts like this are not a political game,” Harper said, speaking from a blue podium with government Action Plan slogans perched in front of him and behind him. ”It is about lives and, as you well know, it is about jobs.”
Peter MacKay, February 25, 2011. ”Many figures have been circulated on the cost,” the minister said in a speech Friday before the Conference of Defence Associations. ”Let me repeat it. $9 billion. I have no idea where these other figures are coming from. They’re simply made up — or they’re guessing. If this procurement is cancelled … so another competition can be held, it will cost taxpayers $1 billion and will create an operational gap for the air force in the future.”
Stephen Harper, March 10, 2011. Mr. Harper told reporters on Thursday that he refused to “get into a lengthy debate in numbers.” “This is the option that was selected some time ago, because it is the only option available,” he said. “…This is the only fighter available that serves the purposes that our air force needs.”
Stephen Harper, April 8, 2011. “You have to understand that in terms of the F-35 costs, we’ve been very detailed with those to the Canadian public,” Harper said after releasing the Conservative platform in Mississauga, Ont. ”A lot of the developmental costs you’re reading in the United States, the contract we’ve signed shelters us from any increase in those kinds of costs. We’re very confident of our cost estimates and we have built in some latitude, some contingency in any case. So we are very confident we are within those measures.”
Julian Fantino, November 9, 2011. “We will purchase the F-35,” Fantino asserted. “We’re on record. We’re part of the crusade. We’re not backing down.”
Julian Fantino, November 18, 2011. “There’s a plan A, there’s a plan B, there’s a plan C, there’s a plan Z and they’re all F-35s,” he said.
Stephen Harper, April 8, 2011. “You have to understand that in terms of the F-35 costs, we’ve been very detailed with those to the Canadian public,” Harper said after releasing the Conservative platform in Mississauga, Ont. ”A lot of the developmental costs you’re reading in the United States, the contract we’ve signed shelters us from any increase in those kinds of costs. We’re very confident of our cost estimates and we have built in some latitude, some contingency in any case. So we are very confident we are within those measures.”
Julian Fantino, November 9, 2011. “We will purchase the F-35,” Fantino asserted. “We’re on record. We’re part of the crusade. We’re not backing down.”
Julian Fantino, November 18, 2011. “There’s a plan A, there’s a plan B, there’s a plan C, there’s a plan Z and they’re all F-35s,” he said.
W News release, July 16, 2010. The Government of Canada today announced it is acquiring the fifth generation Joint Strike Fighter F-35 aircraft to contribute to the modernization of the Canadian Forces, while bringing significant economic benefits and opportunities to regions across Canada.
Peter MacKay, September 15, 2010. “This is the right plane. This is the right number. This is the right aircraft for our Canadian forces and for Canada,” he said. ”If we don’t make this purchase there is a real danger we’ll be unable to defend our airspace, unable to exercise our sovereignty or unable to share our responsibility to both NORAD and NATO.”
Stephen Harper, November 3, 2010. ”We are going to need to replace the aircraft at the end of this decade, and the party opposite knows that. But instead, for the sake of getting the anti-military vote on the left, with the NDP and the Bloc, the Liberals are playing this game. The mistake is theirs. It would be a mistake to rip up this contract for our men and women in uniform as well as the aerospace industry.”
Peter MacKay, December 13, 2010. “Mr. Speaker, let us look at the actual contract. What the Canadian government has committed to is a $9 billion contract for the acquisition of 65 fifth generation aircraft.”
Stephen Harper, January 14, 2011. “I do find it disappointing, I find it sad, that some in Parliament are backtracking on the F-35 and some are talking openly about cancelling the contract, should they get the chance,” Harper said at the Heroux-Devtek plant in Dorval.
Stephen Harper, January 14, 2011. “I need your help making MPs from this region and elsewhere in Canada listen to reason,” Mr. Harper told workers at Héroux-Devtec, which is manufacturing door and wing parts for the F-35. “Honestly, I can’t understand how a Liberal MP from the Montreal region would want to cancel this contract. It’s unbelievable.”
News release, July 16, 2010. The Government of Canada today announced it is acquiring the fifth generation Joint Strike Fighter F-35 aircraft to contribute to the modernization of the Canadian Forces, while bringing significant economic benefits and opportunities to regions across Canada.
Peter MacKay, September 15, 2010. “This is the right plane. This is the right number. This is the right aircraft for our Canadian forces and for Canada,” he said. ”If we don’t make this purchase there is a real danger we’ll be unable to defend our airspace, unable to exercise our sovereignty or unable to share our responsibility to both NORAD and NATO.”
Stephen Harper, November 3, 2010. ”We are going to need to replace the aircraft at the end of this decade, and the party opposite knows that. But instead, for the sake of getting the anti-military vote on the left, with the NDP and the Bloc, the Liberals are playing this game. The mistake is theirs. It would be a mistake to rip up this contract for our men and women in uniform as well as the aerospace industry.”
Peter MacKay, December 13, 2010. “Mr. Speaker, let us look at the actual contract. What the Canadian government has committed to is a $9 billion contract for the acquisition of 65 fifth generation aircraft.”
Stephen Harper, January 14, 2011. “I do find it disappointing, I find it sad, that some in Parliament are backtracking on the F-35 and some are talking openly about cancelling the contract, should they get the chance,” Harper said at the Heroux-Devtek plant in Dorval.
Stephen Harper, January 14, 2011. “I need your help making MPs from this region and elsewhere in Canada listen to reason,” Mr. Harper told workers at Héroux-Devtec, which is manufacturing door and wing parts for the F-35. “Honestly, I can’t understand how a Liberal MP from the Montreal region would want to cancel this contract. It’s unbelievable.”
Stephen Harper, January 14, 2011. “Contracts like this are not a political game,” Harper said, speaking from a blue podium with government Action Plan slogans perched in front of him and behind him. ”It is about lives and, as you well know, it is about jobs.”
Peter MacKay, February 25, 2011. ”Many figures have been circulated on the cost,” the minister said in a speech Friday before the Conference of Defence Associations. ”Let me repeat it. $9 billion. I have no idea where these other figures are coming from. They’re simply made up — or they’re guessing. If this procurement is cancelled … so another competition can be held, it will cost taxpayers $1 billion and will create an operational gap for the air force in the future.”
Stephen Harper, March 10, 2011. Mr. Harper told reporters on Thursday that he refused to “get into a lengthy debate in numbers.” “This is the option that was selected some time ago, because it is the only option available,” he said. “…This is the only fighter available that serves the purposes that our air force needs.”
Harper also promised ship building contracts? Armored vehicles. New trucks for the army. It's a given, there will be no F-35 jets either. Despite Harper starting out with a, $13 billion surplus. He now has Canada in the worst debt, we have ever known. Harper was right. This isn't Canada anymore, what-so-ever.
The only promise Harper has ever kept? We would not recognize Canada, when he was through with this country. Harper is the only P.M. who would ever sell this country out, to Communist China. Who would permit Communist China to sue Canadians, who object to China's intrusions into Canada. Who, would give the resource jobs to a Communist country, before his own citizens. Harper is the only P.M. who, so blatantly cheated to win the election. Harper's asinine omnibus bill is absolutely bizarre? It's a damned good thing Harper purposely stayed out of Parliament that day. Harper and his Cons, expense accounts, are obscene. Harper's abuse of Canadians tax dollars is, the worst in this country's recorded history.
The list of Harper's lunacy, is three football fields long. He had better take his security with him if, he ever does attend Parliament again, that is? Harper may have to make the same law Hitler did. No other party was permitted in Germany. We won't need the House of Commons. No opposition party's salary's and gold plated pensions to pay. The upkeep of the H of C is horrendous. With no Democracy, Harper can dictate by e-mail or teleconferencing. Harper could then, cut his horrendous security bill.
December 15, 2007
Big Brother Jeopardizes Jersey
As an expatriate New Jerseyite, I still have an interest in current events in my old home state. I was more than a little dismayed therefore to learn that the beginnings of a full-blown police state will be firmly and legally in place on December 18.
The Public Health Council voted on Monday, December 10, for New Jersey to become the first state in the country to require annual flu shots for children attending preschool or licensed day care. Three additional vaccines will be required beginning in Sept. 2008.
Forced vaccinations? Parental rights violated? Looks like a done deal. The council approved it, Gov. Jon S. Corzine has already approved it, and all that remains is for State Health Commissioner, Dr. Fred M. Jacobs to sign off on the mandates by Dec. 18 - which he is expected to do.
The new rules will save lives and prevent disease and suffering, according to Deputy Health Commissioner, Dr. Eddy Bresnitz. Sorry, Deputy, but that’s the exact opposite of what you can expect. And sorry, New Jersey, but you are entering a new and untested twilight zone - the results of which you can’t begin to imagine.
Ask the terrorized parents of children in Maryland’s Prince George County what it’s like. More than a thousand kids were recently herded into a courthouse to be forcibly vaccinated while armed police and attack dogs stood guard.
Parents were threatened with fines and prison sentences if they failed to have their children immunized. State Attorney General Glenn F. Ivey admitted that no law mandated shots be given, and claimed that exemption forms were available. For some strange reason, however, information packs given the parents prior to the forced vaccinations failed to include the so-called waiver forms.
Attorney General Ivey said, “We can do this the easy way or the hard way.” Implying. what? Tasering of non-complying parents? Maybe a little waterboarding would be in order. Welcome to the fascist state of Maryland, where gunpoint medicine is the rule of the day.
An interesting note: General Ivey also admitted that he had chosen NOT to give his own children the vaccines! I wonder why? Perhaps because of their well-documented dangers.
Another interesting note: The school district demanding forced vaccinations is set to lose a considerable amount of state funding if their Draconian orders are not complied with. Obviously, such non-complying parents are a danger to public health and should be incarcerated until they see the light. And their children should be medicated - by whatever force is necessary.
Most people - at least, some people - are aware that vaccines contain the toxic mercury preservative Thimerosal, which has been banned for decades in every civilized country in the world concerned with the health and well-being of its citizens.
It is a well-documented fact that Thimerosal is linked to autism and autoimmune diseases. Some vaccines contain aluminum, linked directly to alzheimers. Some contain known carcinogens such as formaldehyde, anti-freeze and a long list of other poisons linked to glaucoma, migraines, and even AIDS.
Flu shots can increase your risk of developing multiple sclerosis, juvenile diabetes, allergies, colitis, eczema, psoriasis, ADHD, Lupus, Graves disease, Chron’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, Lou Gherig’s disease, seizure disorders - and on and on.
Vaccines contain DNA fragments, harmful chemicals, fetal tissue, pig, sheep and horse blood, rabbit brains, dog kidneys, and potentially deadly bacteria. Among other things. Many other things. Too many to even list. The current flu shot, of course, is based on last year’s flu virus. Which no longer exists. It mutates constantly.
Did you know that more than 70% of doctors and nurses in this country refuse to get an annual flu shot? I wonder why.
Since the flu shot weakens your immune system, you are more vulnerable to the illness and more likely to come down with the flu after getting a flu shot. I know some people who succumb to the scare propaganda and religiously get their flu shots every year. It apparently never occurs to them that the flu they suffer from immediately thereafter is a direct result of their flu shots.
As to forced vaccinations for your children, try to explain to the armed guards at your “health” clinic - if you’re a resident of Maryland or New Jersey - that you are concerned with the health of your children and would rather go to jail to prevent their deliberate poisoning.
Try to explain that vaccines prohibit a child’s immune system from adapting and growing stronger and that vaccinations suppress normal immune response. Leaving your children completely unprotected against future infection.
Such protestations fell on deaf ears in Prince George’s County, Maryland, as they will no doubt be equally disregarded in New Jersey. No word yet as to the penalties for non-compliance in the Garden State.
Cui Bono? Who benefits? Drug companies. Big Pharma - and the politicians they have paid for. Vaccinations are based on questionable science. Doctors dismiss reports of any dangerous side effects - because their Big Pharma masters insist on it.
The real motivation? Money. The almighty bottom line. Unbelievable, obscene profits derived by a predatory “health” system that preys on its intimidated victims, coerced by a tyrranical bureaucracy to relinquish yet another freedom. It’s all about money and control.
Maryland enforces mandatory vaccinations as if they were harmless. They are not. They are poison. Unfortunately, New Jersey is about to join the medical police state, with perhaps other misguided states soon to follow.
Concerned parents have the responsibility and the right to reject forced vaccinations. Threatened with fines and imprisonment, however, the parents in Maryland didn’t object. Their kids were herded in line and forced to take their shots, with no consideration as to any medical history. Most parents fell into line and followed orders without question.
If the medical Gestapo comes to your town and threatens at gunpoint, with attack dogs ready to strike, to throw you in jail and remove your children for 30 days if you refuse a potentially dangerous vaccination - what will you do? Will you dare to protect your children? Or will you join the ranks of the terrified, intimidated Sheeple most of us have become?
When it comes to protecting your children, perhaps the time has come to draw the line. Accept this fascist infringement on what’s left of your rights, and the next step is government enforcement of gunpoint medicine on everyone of every age and state of health.
You will be arrested, drugged and restrained and forcibly medicated against your will for taking safe and effective vitamins instead of deadly high-profit pharmaceutical drugs. Think it can’t happen here? Think again.
Don’t give up the right and freedom to choose what medical treatment is best for your children.
Don’t accept your government’s fear-based lies and attempts to manipulate and control every aspect of your lives.
Don’t depend on organizations like the FDA or the American Medical Association to protect your rights. They work for Big Pharma. The only rights they are willing to protect are the rights of the pharmaceutical companies that own them. Given a choice, they would forcibly vaccinate everybody in the country. Regardless of the consequences to their health.
Remember freedom? It’s almost gone. Either we protect what’s left of it, or watch it disappear forever. In which case we’ll deserve whatever we get.
Perhaps the protests and attendant publicity as New Jersey tries to enforce its new dictatorial powers will be enough to provide a wake-up call that something has to be done and done now. In all probability, however, the controlled, mainstream media will do their usual sterling job of providing minimal coverage - if the story isn’t ignored altogether.
It’s an almost insurmountable task trying to deliver the real news about almost anything to an indifferent audience, whose interest and concern barely exists. What we have become and what we’ve lost in this country is a genuine trajedy. There’s still time to change - but in the grand scheme of things, that time can be measured in seconds.
Just as an aside, you are probably aware that we have the most expensive health care in the world - and far from the best. You probably didn’t know that many Americans are choosing to go abroad for their medical care.
In fact, an estimated half million Americans traveled to foreign countries for medical treatment in 2006. So-called Medical Tourism is now a booming industry. Patients report being treated as respected guests, and given as good or better medical treatment - at a far lower cost - than anything offered here in America.
Many of these “medical tourists” have decided not to come back. Another option, if your choices are jail time in lieu of forced, gunpoint vaccinations. There are some places - in fact, many places - where freedom still exists.
