Saddam Al Quaeda Connection
The al-Qaeda leader who is thought to have devised the plan for the July 7 suicide bombings in London and an array of terrorist plots against Britain has been captured by the Americans.
Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi, a former major in Saddam Hussein’s army, was apprehended as he tried to enter Iraq from Iran and was transferred this week to the “high-value detainee programme” at Guantanamo Bay.
Abd al-Hadi was taken into CIA custody last year, it emerged from US intelligence sources yesterday, in a move which suggests that he was interrogated for months in a “ghost prison” before being transferred to the internment camp in Cuba.
Abd al-Hadi, 45, was regarded as one of al-Qaeda’s most experienced, most intelligent and most ruthless commanders. Senior counter-terrorism sources told The Times that he was the man who, in 2003, identified Britain as the key battleground for exporting al-Qaeda’s holy war to Europe.
function pictureGalleryPopup(pubUrl,articleId) { var newWin = window.open(pubUrl+’template/2.0-0/element/pictureGalleryPopup.jsp?id=’+articleId+’&&offset=0&§ionName=WorldIraq’,’mywindow’,’menubar=0,resizable=0,width=615,height=655′); }
Outlaw TP ?????
“I don’t want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights, but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required. “…
Sheryl Crow
If you outlaw toilet paper, only outlaws will have toilet paper!!
Questioning Global Warming.
Researchers Question Validity Of A ‘Global Temperature’
Science Daily — Discussions on global warming often refer to ‘global temperature.’ Yet the concept is thermodynamically as well as mathematically an impossibility, says Bjarne Andresen, a professor at The Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, who has analyzed this topic in collaboration with professors Christopher Essex from University of Western Ontario and Ross McKitrick from University of Guelph, Canada.
It is generally assumed that the atmosphere and the oceans have grown warmer during the recent 50 years. The reason for this point of view is an upward trend in the curve of measurements of the so-called ‘global temperature’. This is the temperature obtained by collecting measurements of air temperatures at a large number of measuring stations around the Globe, weighing them according to the area they represent, and then calculating the yearly average according to the usual method of adding all values and dividing by the number of points.
Average without meaning
“It is impossible to talk about a single temperature for something as complicated as the climate of Earth”, Bjarne Andresen says, an an expert of thermodynamics. “A temperature can be defined only for a homogeneous system. Furthermore, the climate is not governed by a single temperature. Rather, differences of temperatures drive the processes and create the storms, sea currents, thunder, etc. which make up the climate”.
He explains that while it is possible to treat temperature statistically locally, it is meaningless to talk about a a global temperature for Earth. The Globe consists of a huge number of components which one cannot just add up and average. That would correspond to calculating the average phone number in the phone book. That is meaningless. Or talking about economics, it does make sense to compare the currency exchange rate of two countries, whereas there is no point in talking about an average ‘global exchange rate’.
If temperature decreases at one point and it increases at another, the average will remain the same as before, but it will give rise to an entirely different thermodynamics and thus a different climate. If, for example, it is 10 degrees at one point and 40 degrees at another, the average is 25 degrees. But if instead there is 25 degrees both places, the average is still 25 degrees. These two cases would give rise to two entirely different types of climate, because in the former case one would have pressure differences and strong winds, while in the latter there would be no wind.
Many averages
A further problem with the extensive use of ‘the global temperature’ is that there are many ways of calculating average temperatures.
Example 1: Take two equally large glasses of water. The water in one glass is 0 degrees, in the other it is 100 degrees. Adding these two numbers and dividing by two yields an average temperature of 50 degrees. That is called the arithmetic average.
Example 2: Take the same two glasses of water at 0 degrees and 100 degrees, respectively. Now multiply those two numbers and take the square root, and you will arrive at an average temperature of 46 degrees. This is called the geometric average. (The calculation is done in degrees Kelvin which are then converted back to degrees Celsius.)
The difference of 4 degrees is the energy which drives all the thermodynamic processes which create storms, thunder, sea currents, etc.
Claims of disaster?
These are but two examples of ways to calculate averages. They are all equally correct, but one needs a solid physical reason to choose one above another. Depending on the averaging method used, the same set of measured data can simultaneously show an upward trend and a downward trend in average temperature. Thus claims of disaster may be a consequence of which averaging method has been used, the researchers point out.
What Bjarne Andresen and his coworkers emphasize is that physical arguments are needed to decide whether one averaging method or another is needed to calculate an average which is relevant to describe the state of Earth.
Reference: C. Essex, R. McKitrick, B. Andresen: Does a Global Temperature Exist?; J. Non-Equil. Thermod. vol. 32, p. 1-27 (2007).
Letter to a COWARD!!!
I am a former NYC Firefighter and former U.S. Marine. I have also been a Reservist in the U.S. Coast Guard for 17 years. I worked at the morgue sites going through bodies and body parts for 8 months following 9/11. As a result of the prolonged trauma of that type of work, I was disabled by the FDNY. I would like to make a statement regarding Mr. Reid’s irresponsible comments as follows:
Mr. Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader (D),
I cannot adequately explain my disappointment at the comments made by you today; “The war is lost”. It is inconceivable that someone in your position could be so irresponsible and ignorant of the fallout from those words.
With our troops overseas, on the front lines, putting themselves between your family and the terrorist extremists, you have cheered on the enemy and surely the video tape of your comments will be found at every terrorist camp and referenced by every terrorist group for the eternity of mankind. Your words have “tangibly” aided and given comfort to the enemy, in that such a high political figure in the Government of our great Country has conceded defeat to terrorism. You are a disgrace to every American, irregardless of political belief or religious background.
Your comments would have demoralized a less disciplined military. Fortunately, the military men and women on the battlefields far from home, protecting you and your families interests, are not cowards or quitters (as you are). We don’t train our military that way. Thank God you did not hold such a high office during other difficult and defining moments in the history of our country.
You have given the enemy reason to rejoice, reason to continue the fight and reason to step up their violence not just in Iraq, but all over the world. You have given the enemy “hope”. You have pointed them to light at the end of the tunnel. Congratulations.
For several years Saddam Hussein stood there ignoring U.N. resolutions, pushing his finger forward in his jacket pocket as if to say “stick-em up”. We responded to the “threat” and it turns out that we didn’t find a gun in his pocket. He was a murderer that placed no value on human life. The world is a better place without him.
On September 11, 2001, another group of people showed the world that they place no value on human life. If these terrorists had it their way, we would all be dead. Terrorists do not want to “rule” us or “enslave” us. They want to kill us. All of us. For no reason. Sound familiar? Ask a Holocaust survivor what that feels like.
Iraq could be described as decent people who have suffered under an evil regime. We are trying to help them. You have single handedly undermined that effort. You have also unwittingly caused severe damage to the Democratic party, for surely there are innumerable Democrats that have served, and do serve, in the military, and there are millions of Democrats that don’t believe in quitting or surrendering to evil. In your position as a spokesperson for Democrats, your party will suffer in 2008 for your irresponsible and ignorant comments.
For any person that believes America puts its nose where it doesn’t belong, or that we violate human rights, the litmus test for me, is when people stop trying to “kill” themselves to immigrate here. That’s when I will start questioning what kind of country I’m living in. Even after all the wars, the dropping of bombs, etc, we can’t accommodate the influx of immigration into our great Country. The “proof” stands before you. This is the greatest Country in the world and people from every walk of life and every background, race, creed, color and sex know it and want to be here in this country.
Mr. Reid, I don’t know what you were thinking. Please resign.
Sincerely,
J.
Now, Demotards Want Profiling??
Responding to the Virginia Tech massacre.
MEREDITH VIERA: Is there a profile for someone who would do something like this?
WOLF BLITZER: It seems like the classic profile.
PSYCHOTHERAPIST CARYN STARK: He’s a loner which fits the profile.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: What do you do when you have a kid that looks like a profile who might go on a rampage?
BRIAN WILLIAMS: The classic profile of a loner that exhibited trouble, isn’t that a trend now that deserves more resources?
HELEN MORRISON: We see the typical profile of a mass murderer!
Yet, the TSA is not allowed to profile airline passengers.
Dirty Little Secrets 