Madrid terrorism verdicts - if you're going to be on trial for terror, Spain is the place for you [Updated]

Aftermath of the attack in 2004

Remember the Madrid train bombings of 2004?

191 people lost their lives in an attack orchestrated by Al Qaeda, with the goal of persuading Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq (which they did), and reviving the Muslim Caliphate of southern Spain (which they have not done - yet).

Today, verdicts were handed out in the bombings. 28 people total were on trial, 19 Arabs of various nationalities and 9 Spaniards. All of them pleaded "not guilty" (which likely means that Spain had little to offer in exchange for guilty pleas). Seven were acquitted, and 21 convicted on various charges. One of the acquitted, an Egyptian named Rabei Osman Sayed Ahmed, will not go free, since he has already been sentenced in Italy for terrorism. If you want to dive into it, a detailed by-name list of the accused and their individual verdicts can be found here).

The support players in the attack were given sentences ranging from only 3 to 18 years in prison. But three of the leaders got, what initially looks like, a "real" sentence: Jamal Zougam, a Moroccan got an incredible 42,862 years (30 for each of 191 deaths, 20 for each 1,856 attempted murder, and 12 years for belonging to a terrorist organization). Using similar math, Otman El Ghanoui got 42,902 years (same formula as above but 60 added for "terrorist carnage") and Spaniard Jose Emilio Suarez Trashorras got 4,800 (25 years for each of 192 deaths - the 191 in the subway and 1 policeman during a later raid).

Those sound like pretty stiff sentences all right. Of course, it would be easier to use the US version, when we simply sentence someone to life without the possibility of parole (or execute them). But no matter, since such a stiff sentence means that Spain is really serious about combating terrorism, right?

Well, not so fast. The reality is that these sentences are all bark and no bite - in actuality, a legal fiction.

The reason is because, under Spanish law, the sentences must be all served concurrently. So the most they can really serve is 40 years. That's it. And that's assuming they don't get out earlier through flight or escape (ok to be fair, those escapes were in Spain's neighbors, the UK and France), exchanged in a hostage deal, or set free on parole. One of the reasons that the defendants were charged with so many individual crimes was specifically to make it more difficult to parole them later. The very fact that prosecutors would have to manipulate the system to prevent parole for these mass-murderers is further evidence that Spain's legal system is simply not equipped to handle crimes of this magnitude.

There was also evidence of this during the prosecution of Imad Eddin Barakat Yarkas (aka Abu Dahdah), an Al Qaeda member in Spain who funneled money to terror groups across the globe and helped mastermind the Sep 11 attacks. He was convicted of belonging to a terror organization, but the conviction for involvement in 9/11 was overturned by Spain's highest court for lack of evidence. He was also accused of helping plan the Madrid bombings from prison. But in all, he will only serve 12 years (if even that much).

With an ever-increasing population (mostly foreign-born), it would be a good idea for Spain to rethink its terrorism laws. You don't need to have secret tribunals in far off countries to do this. Some common sense changes, such as eliminating the rule on concurrent sentences would go a long way. Although Spain no longer supports the war in Iraq, they still support operations in Afghanistan, they are still among the conquests that Osama Bin Laden has repeatedly called for (Bin Laden refers to the loss of Moorish Spain as "the tragedy of Andalucia", and Zawrahiri has called for "jihad...from Spain to Iraq"), and they still face attacks from Basque separatists. The problem is not going to go away soon.

UPDATE 01/11/2007 06:02:00 PM:
I'm not the only one who thinks the verdicts were a little on the light side. "Madrid victims attack 'leniency'" was a headline in BBC News today.

Some were upset by the number of guilty verdicts:

Maria Jose Gutierrez, a Spaniard who lost her sister in the bombings, said: "There are far too few guilty verdicts for such a horrible crime."

That's a fair point, although it should be noted that in addition to the 21 guilty verdicts, seven people blew themselves up during a police raid in April 2004.

Some, like me, think the sentences were simply far too short. Isabel Presa, who lost her son, said:

"It has destroyed my life, it has condemned me and my husband to a life sentence-and these people get off scot free, some already on the street and others to 12 years, Mrs Presa said. "I have waited three years, and now? Now what?"

"Isaac" from Ohio, USA, left this comment on the BBC's "Have your say":

This amounts to a farce and they should be dealt the same blow that they served the 191 people on those trains. Blown up with bags full of expolsives and nails.

Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Monday World roundup

"L'Orage" (The Storm), by William-Adolphe Bouguereau, 1874

Ok, I had been trying to consistently do this on Thursdays, but got sidetracked last week by news of the California fires. I guarantee you this was worth the wait. Some important things you might have missed this week:

USA: Late justice, life lost. An absolutely tragic story from Georgia - an innocent man spent 22 years in prison for a crime he did not commit until exonerated through DNA evidence. He lost his youth, and whatever innocence he had left and cannot get it back. Also something I don't understand - he was originally sentenced to 45 years!!! That's an incredibly long sentence, even for a rape. By comparison, Mike Tyson got only six years for his conviction, and served three. Why are some of these sentences so wildly different? Even the 22 years he served seems much too long, and I'm not exactly a "go soft on criminals" kind of guy.


ASIA/AFRICA: Grim prospects. The world's 25 most endangered primates are so endangered, they could all fit inside a single football stadium. By the time your children read this, I predict they will all be gone, except maybe a few kept in zoos.


USA/IRAQ: Sloppy journalism. According to alternet.org, troops are so demoralized that they are pretending to patrol Iraqi streets, conducting "search and avoid" missions, avoiding IEDs by simply waiting in one place for hours before returning to base. I guarantee you this is nonsense. Any patrol sitting in one place for hours is a sitting duck for snipers. No one wants to do this, even if they are forced to. Once my unit had to overwatch a dead body we found, and waited for at least three hours. Those were pretty harrowing hours too. We very carefully watched every rooftop and didn't let any vehicles come close either. We would have rather taken our chances with IEDs, and could not wait to get out of there...


UK: The plank in your eye. On a visit to London this week, the Saudi King Abdullah said that the "UK was not taking the issue of global terrorism seriously". Are you kidding me? This from the same country that provided most of the 9/11 hijackers. This is from the same country that provides suicide bombers to Iraq (to kill the UK's soldiers). This is the same nation that holds telethons to raise money for the families of Hamas bombers. It's rare that you see such an unbelievably brazen act of hypocrisy. What's scarier is that this man might actually believe what he says...


HUNGARY/USA: Chomsky is no "truther" (video): Even a radical leftist like Noam Chomsky firmly does not believe in conspiracy theories that 9/11 was an "inside job" or that the Bush administration caused/knew about it. Surprisingly, he makes a lot of sense here, although he can't resist a chance to take a couple swipes at the Bush administration in the process. And strangely, at the end of the clip he says: "and even if it were true, which is extremely unlikely, who cares?". Who cares? What the hell??


SWEDEN/WORLD: Tax, tax, tax. According to the Economist, Sweden has the world's highest tax rate. That's not really surprising in itself, but what is much more of a shock is now high it really is: over 50%! Most of Europe, by contrast, hovers around 40%, and the United States is a tax haven at 29%. Mexico has the lowest tax rate of any developed country at 20.6%. Theoretically, that should boost their economy, but tax cheating is so widespread that I doubt the government really gets anything close to that amount.


USA/Hollywood: Artistic values. An interesting article on Hollywood's war against the War on Terror. According to many studios, the US is the real enemy, not the terrorists. This is a reflection of Hollywood's feelings, since it's obviously not driven by market demand.


NETHERLANDS/UK/US: Importing rich culture. "Voodoo" child prostitution trade in Europe. Who says multiculturalism is bad?

How Rall sees President Bush

USA: Battering-ram cartoonist. Ted Rall, the same cartoonist that had no problem trashing a great American like Pat Tillman, now claims that soldiers are complete idiots. Somehow, I don't think that Media Matters will dive into this one.


USA: Shut down that pesky free speech. David Horowitz, once a radical leftist and now a radical rightist, has long complained that the voices of conservatives are suppressed on college campuses. Of course, many people disagree with him. In fact, they disagree with him so much that they ironically proved his very point when their protests became so loud and disruptive that they managed to shut down his recent speech at Emory University.


USA/CALIFORNIA: The "Allah excuse". A lot of people have wild theories on what caused the California wildfires (including me). But maybe none so strange as "The Ignored Puzzle Pieces of Knowledge", a radical Islamist blog that claims that "Allah is implementing His wrath on America - with both minor and major disasters - because of what America is doing to the Muslims in ‘Iraaq, Afghanistan etc". I left a comment, pointing out that if this is God's retribution for the wars, then why would he choose Southern California, a part of the country that is solidly against the war? Not surprisingly, my comment was deleted (Found via the Jawa Report).


NIGERIA: "I agree"? A shockingly bold statement from a Nigerian who agrees with Dr. Watson's recent remarks on African intelligence:

I am really pained by our gross underachievement as a race. Instead of regarding bitter truths expressed by the likes of Watson as a wake-up call for us to engage in sober reflection, we take to the expression of woolly sentiment. For me, this type of reaction is a further evidence of our unintelligence. A man of intelligence recognises genuine criticism against him and takes steps to improve himself in order to prove his critics wrong.

ICELAND: How many children did this thing have? Totally off subject here, but incredible nonetheless. A 405 year-old clam is the oldest animal ever found on Earth. Shakespeare was writing his plays when this animal was born!





Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Comments

I suppose I should be somewhat flattered, as it is a symbol of this website's growing popularity, but it is very annoying, nonetheless: I have been inundated with a flood of spam comments this week.

Deleting them one at a time is a rather painful process. For that reason, I turned on the word verification to defeat the autospammers. You want to spam, you will have to do it manually. You can still leave anonymous comments and don't have to register with this site or with google.

As always, if anyone has any suggestions on ways to improve this site, let me know. I normally do not update it on weekends, as I have a full life, and need to get away from the internet sometimes. So except for that, please let me know - you can leave a comment here or send to my email address.

Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Mohamed Al-Fayed, Diana, and the need for a conspiracy

A new inquest into the death of Princess Diana officially began this month. If you are in the UK, you know all about this - it's in every tabloid. For anyone else, it's barely mentioned in the media.

I promised myself once that I would never waste my time writing about Princess Diana. This is sort of bending that rule, but not precisely. The issue here is not really the former Princess but the wasteful and ludicrious inquest of her death, and the entertainment of conspiracy theories, all due to the pressure of a sad and obsessed Egyptian millionaire named Mohammed Al-Fayed. It's even all the more ridiculous since both the British and the French have completed their separate investigations, and found nothing other than an accident caused by drunk driving.

If I were a taxpayer in the UK, I would be pretty angry right now. What is the purpose? Who knows? We already know how, where, and why she died. She was riding in a Mercedes limosine with her date Dodi Al-Fayed, when the driver, Henri Paul, crashed into a tunnel support pillar at 110 kph (70 mph) while trying to get away from the papparazzi. Unfortunately, Mr. Paul was under the influence of a combination of prescription drugs and alcohol. His blood alcohol content was 1.74 g/L (.17% BAC), which is more than three times the legal limit in France (and more than double the US limit). He was in no condition to drive a golf cart, not to mention a speeding limosine through the streets of Paris.

But unfortunately, that's not enough explanation for people with an exaggerated sense of self-importance. Mohamed Al-Fayed, the father of Dodi and the owner of Harrod's Department store in London (the most ridiculously overpriced place I've ever been in my life), has a fortune which is estimated anywhere between $800 million and $3 billion US dollars. And apparently the money is not enough for him - he also wants to imagine that his son was on the verge of marrying into British Royalty (or former royalty).

Maybe then, he felt, he might be accepted into society and become a UK citizen at last (Twice his application was blocked because the crown felt he lacked "good character", and one minister wanted him deported). The Independent ran an article recently about this long quest for acceptance, and ExPat Yank had a good observation on how unrealistic his goals may have been:

one must also never forget that most Christian British are not hugglingly accepted into the exceedingly small world [of Britain's upper society] either.

For years he has loudly proclaimed that: 1) Diana was pregnant with Dodi's child, 2) They were planning to get married, 3) Henri Paul was not drunk - the blood test results were switched with someone else, 4) The royal family, specifically Prince Philip, out of racism, ordered their deaths to stop the wedding, 5) the actual assassination was carried out by MI6 (The UK's intelligence agency) and the CIA. For more of this outlandish theories in his own words, you can check his own web site. I find it very strange though, that MI6 or the CIA would have the clairvoyance to know that they were getting married when they hadn't even told anyone about it. But if you believe some of these theories, then I guess you can believe in mind-reading spy drones.

I should mention that Mr. Al-Fayed also has a financial motive for claiming the couple were assassinated. The drunk driver, Henri Paul, was employed by the Ritz Paris Hotel, which is owned by Mr. Fayed. In a lawsuit, any liability from deaths caused by his negligence could ultimately be borne by Mr. Fayed. This is even more true since Mr. Paul died in the crash and is essentially beyond the reach of a lawsuit.

Elsewhere on his web site, he pours out his own fantasy about their relationship. Here is a sample:

It was a love affair. Two people who had known each other for years but then came together during a summer that was all too brief.

A little misleading - they had known each other for years, yes, but they only dated for a month.

On the day before they would have announced their engagement to marry, they were brutally killed in a tunnel beside the River Seine.

Dodi Fayed and Diana, Princess of Wales, were on their way from L’Hotel Ritz to his apartment, just off the Champs d’Elysses, near the Arc de Triomphe. Dodi’s butler had put a bottle of vintage Champagne on ice.

On their bedside table was the engagement ring they had selected. Dodi had collected it from the jeweller during the afternoon, whilst Diana had her hair done at the Ritz salon. The ring was called “Dit moi oui”, “Tell me yes”.

Whether he planned to give it to her, was greatly disputed by the French (Paget) investigation, but if it was for Diana, she might not have given him the answer he was looking for (see below).

He [Dodi] told friends that she was the love of his life and, despite the relentless media pressure, he had never been happier. The Princess confided in a woman, who knew her better than almost anyone, that in Dodi she had found the man she had always been seeking but never found: a strong, kind and loving man who fulfilled her completely.

According to an official investigation:

"We have spoken to many of her family and closest friends and none of them have indicated to us that she was either about to or wished to get engaged," he said.

"Prince William has confirmed to me that his mother had not given him the slightest indication about such plans for the future."

But the Fayeds go on:

It is inconceivable that the Princess would have continued with her love affair with Dodi had she not intended their relationship to become a permanent one.

This is actually a common belief in Islamic society, that a woman never has a relationship with a man unless she intends marriage. The idea of a woman simply dating just for fun is inconceivable.

In fact, the elder Mr. Fayed was so confident of Diana and Dodi's pregnancy and their inevitable engagement, that he falsely claimed the couple was looking to buy a house with a room "for the baby", and instructed his staff to lie about it as well. When photos were leaked to The Sun newspaper proving otherwise, he retaliated by suing for copyright infringement.

So in spite of no evidence at all for any of these conspiracy theories, the current inquest is entertaining them. Mr. Fayed describes his struggle thus:

I have had to fight for this to happen. So many people in the British Establishment never wanted the inquests, because they were afraid of what would be revealed in court. They were afraid that the cover-up would be exposed, that the truth of the circumstances of their deaths would emerge, embarrassing and humiliating them all over the world.

Maybe they were just afraid another investigation would be a big waste of time and of the UK's treasury.

Here is just a sample of the importance of the inquest, and the progress of their current professional "investigation":

2 OCTOBER 2007

The jury was shown a picture of the princess in a leopard-print swimsuit taken in the summer of 1997, often cited as evidence that she was pregnant with Dodi's child. But Lord Justice Baker pointed out that the photograph had been taken shortly before Princess Diana met Dodi.
...
8 OCTOBER 2007

The jurors were flown to Paris to retrace the final movements of Diana and Mr Al Fayed. They were driven by coach along the route the couple took from the Ritz Hotel, and through the Pont de l'Alma tunnel where their car crashed.

9 OCTOBER 2007

At the beginning of the second day of their two-day trip to Paris to retrace the final movements of Princess Diana and Mr Al Fayed, jurors were taken on a tour of the rooms of the Ritz Hotel where the couple spent their final evening together.

They saw the rooms where the couple and their body guards were caught by the hotel's CCTV, and visited the hotel bar where driver Henri Paul bought two alcoholic drinks.

They were then driven along a number of alternative routes to Mr Al Fayed's apartment, the destination the couple were driving towards at the time of the crash.

I think that nonsense speaks pretty plainly for itself.

Now, after having said all this, I do feel some sympathy for Mr. Fayed. This is a man who lost his beloved son in a terrible accident. But it is improper for the public sympathy to translate into taxpayer-funded indulgements for his pet theories. Two other people died in the crash, and their families have not made such demands. Finally, it's also worth asking if any non-celebrity British, French, or Egyptian citizen would have had such a thorough investigation of their death (three times over). The British should have given Mr. Fayed a very polite, but very firm "No" for an answer.





Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Bill O'Reilly condemns me! (maybe) Also, one suspected arsonist killed, several arrests in CA

San Clemente burning at night, by Erik Saulietis

From Bill O'Reilly's broadcast today:

Politics and the California fires, that is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points Memo." While thousands of Californians have lost their homes to the flames, and almost a million people have been displaced, the usual political loons are trying to define the fire in an ideological way.

A quick trip to the extremist Web sites is nauseated. One right-wing nut is blaming the fires on illegal immigrants. A left-wing loon is hoping President Bush is killed by the fire when he goes to California tomorrow. And then there are the politicians. Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi says that the president's visit will be a distraction. And the fire is worse because of Iraq.

Who is this "right-wing nut"? If it was me, I wish he would have mentioned my web site! I could use the publicity. (To my non-American readers - Bill O'Reilly is the host of a hugely popular "O'Reilly factor" program on the Fox News Channel in the US). In my previous article, I brought up the possible connection with illegal immigrant involvement in the Harris fire - their deliberate involvement in the other fires is unlikely.

If he was referring to another site, I can't find it though. I did a thorough Google and Yahoo search and couldn't find any other blogger making this direct connection. The closest I found was on Free Republic, but the accusation against illegal immigrants come in the comments section, not in the article. So I just might be the "right-wing nut" here.

Incidentally, a few interesting related developments yesterday - one suspected arsonist was shot by police, one arrested, and several illegal immigrants arrested for looting:

From the LA Times:

The confrontation that ended in the shooting death started about 6 p.m. Tuesday when San Bernardino university police spotted a man in a rural area of flood channels and scrub near the campus. University police tried to detain the man, but he got into his car and fled, authorities said. When he began to ram officers' vehicle, they shot him.

The suspect is described as a 27-year-old man with a home address in Arizona.

And later:

About three hours later in Hesperia, a man was seen by a female motorist squatting along the side of Highway 173 just south of Arrowhead Lake Road. Sheriff's officials say John Alfred Rund, 48, of Hesperia had just started a fire along the flat, isolated, scrubby road.

The woman called police, and Highway Patrol and sheriff's deputies were soon looking for the suspect, who witnesses said took off on a Honda motorcycle, wearing a red-and-white-striped helmet.

Four residents grabbed shovels and put out the fire with clods of dirt, said sheriff's spokesperson Jodi Miller.

A CHP helicopter, using infrared equipment, caught sight of Rund on his motorcycle, Miller said. Along with CHP officers, sheriff's deputies found and arrested him at a home along Highway 173 near Highway 138, she said.

He was being held on $750,000 bail on suspicion of arson and is to appear in court tomorrow in Victorville.

San Bernardino is a little ways east of Los Angeles. It is a fairly far distance NE from the largest fire clusters. Hesperia is a short distance north of San Bernardino (these cities can be seen on a current fire map here)

And more arrests yesterday, for another crime:

Six illegal immigrants who were suspected of stealing relief supplies from Qualcomm were arrested by Border Patrol agents.

A woman told San Diego Police she saw the group load up two pickup trucks and a car with cots and other supplies, leave and then return, said police Sgt. Jesse Cesena.

When officers stopped them, a member of the group said they were being paid to take things of value from the stadium.

“They were stealing a lot of stuff,” Cesena said. “We took the stuff back and we escorted them out. They were stealing from the people in need.”

Because some members of the group spoke Spanish, officers called Border Patrol agents who were at the stadium for relief efforts. They determined the people were in the country illegally and arrested them.

“We're not out there doing immigration stuff in the middle of a disaster. However, we still enforce the laws,” said Border Patrol spokesman Matthew Johnson.

Michelle Malkin responded: "Just looting the emergency aid no one else will loot."

As I mentioned earlier, there is a $70,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of any of the arsonists. There is also a toll-free tipline at: 1-800-540-7085.





Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Wildfires in southern Cal - caused by whom? [Updated]

Incredible shot of the Santiago fire by Kevin Labianco

With the massive wildfires raging in Southern California, this might be a good time to point out something the media is barely mentioning. Just how were these fires started? Most likely, there are multiple causes, including arson. Strangely, with the massive attention the story is getting, explanations on how the fires started is surprisingly scarce. This is all I could find:

At least one of the fires, in Orange County, was believed to have been set. And a blaze threatening the homes of the rich and famous in Malibu might have been caused by downed power lines, authorities said.

Mel Gibson, Kelsey Grammer and Victoria Principal were among the celebrities forced to abandon their homes over the weekend, their publicists said.

Another blaze was started by a car fire. Flying embers started new fires at every turn.

So we have a car fire (from unknown causes), the possibility of a downed power line, and at least one fire was set. I couldn't find any details on any of these, except that the fire that was set was probably referring to the blaze in in the Santiago and Siverado canyons, in Orange County, just a little ways south of Los Angeles.

Why so little information? Of course, with the effort right now focused on rescue and fire control, it's understandable that investigation of the cause is a low priority. Still, if, at this early stage, the media can already spend bandwidth discussing the celebrity angle of the fires, as well as the impact on the insurance industry, then I think they could spend a little more time on the cause. Well, Rep. Harry Reid speculated it was "global warming" (to some ridicule), but that doesn't count. Along with the dry grass and heavy winds, these are all conditions that made the fires worse but don't tell us how they ignited in the first place.

So why the silence? There may be political sensitivities involved. As I pointed out back in June, there has been a nasty trend in recent years regarding border fires:

Wildfires are being set by alien and drug smugglers, authorities said, to create a diversion in an attempt to gain undetected access across the border. The fires correspond to a dramatic rise in assaults against Border Patrol agents — up more than 100 percent over last year.

This is all speculation right now, but look at the map below. The "Harris" fire is one of the two largest of the blazes so far, and it's right on the border with Mexico. In fact, numerous fires have burned/are burning on the Mexican side as well. In addition, at least 50 illegal immigrants turned themselves into the Border Patrol today when they were caught inside the Harris fire. I hope the BP has enough sense to question them about what they have been doing in the last 72 hours.



One more thing I should point out. It's hard to really get a feel for the full scope of the damage here, but according to the State of California, as of right now, at least one life was lost, over 1,000 houses destroyed, approximately 400,000 acres of trees were burned, and 500,000 people displaced. In addition, this doesn't even include the countless loss to native wildlife and habitats. And it gets much worse - keep in mind that this inferno is still overall less than 10% contained! The worst is yet to come.

I am normally an opponent of capital punishment, but if anyone is proven to have deliberately set these fires, it would be justified here. Whoever did this has no regard at all for the sanctity of life, and has no compunction against destroying people's homes, lives, and massive amounts of our nation's resources simply for their own amusement.

So who is causing these fires? I welcome any suggestions.

UPDATE October 25, 2007 03:13:00 AM: The Santiago fire has officially been declared arson, and law enforcement officials have announced a $70,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of those responsible.

Meanwhile, for some reason, Think Progress is upset (!) that the Fox show "Fox and Friends" speculated that this is the work of Al-Quaeda, referring to an earlier FBI memo on the subject. Arson is not really Al-Qaeda's style, but since they have been unable to conduct another attack in the US since 9/11 (although not for lack of trying), I wouldn't be surprised if they decided to try a new method. Moreover, whoever is responsible, its not unreasonable to label this type of arson as "terrorism".





Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

UK population soaring [Updated]

Up, up, up, and away...

Today, the United Kingdom's office of official statistics released a report that is already making serious political waves in the country. It predicts the the UK's population will grow to 65 million by 2016, and 77 million by 2051. This is higher than the previous best estimate, which predicted an already alarming 69 million by 2051.

What the articles don't tell you, is that this is all the more remarkable considering that emigration from the UK is at its highest level in years. So how is this possible? If you are regular reader to this blog, you can probably guess: immigration.

Even the BBC, which normally cheers immigration in every form called this "a wake-up call to think about how the process of absorbing population growth was managed".

Simply put, native British are leaving their island, while immigrants are arriving in greater numbers, and having more children. In an article back in June, I already pointed out how the country had a shock when a study by the London Times found that the #2 most popular baby boy's name in the country was now Mohammed, and set to become #1 by next year.

Even today's 60 million is a far cry from the 2 million or so living in Britain during the early Middle Ages. And even then, the population had become too large for the island to support hunter-gatherers anymore. People had to grow food or starve. Now they have to import it or starve...

Numbers matter. This is one issue I wish the anti-racists, the immigration advocates, or the "world without borders" crowd would address. Crying about the racism of nativists or immigration restrictionists is all well and good, but then you need to provide your own answer to the question: how many people is too much? Because the ugly truth is, you either have to face it now or face it later. There is a limit to how many people a nation can hold. You and I may disagree on where that limit is exactly, but there is a limit nonetheless. No matter how much you value immigration and diversity, elementary physics dictate that a net population increase simply can't go on forever. And simply calling your opponents "racist" won't change that.

Meanwhile, films such as V for Vendetta, or Children of Men, try to scare us the other way, warning what happens if immigration restriction goes all the way - without even considering what will happen if it doesn't...

To be fair, I'm sure that Britain could hold a lot more people than today's 60 million. But is that desirable? More population means greater environmental degradation and land encroachment, more food needs to be imported, and simply less space for people to enjoy their lives. This is more than just an academic consideration. Every year the population increases it becomes just slightly more difficult to find a parking spot, enjoy space at the beach, watch rabbits run across the yard or even find a cemetery that's not full (Americans reading this site might think I'm joking, but in many countries, that is a real problem).

Right now, the UK's population density is 246 people per square kilometer. If these population projections hold (and they may be underestimates), by 2051 the UK will end up with a density of 317, over ten times that of the USA (31) and comparable to countries like Israel, Sri Lanka, or India. What happens when it goes higher? If unchecked, the UK will suffer the same fate as Bangladesh, a smaller country that allowed its population to rise above 150 million and its density hit 1045. It has no forests left. At all. Here is a description of their land usage from the CIA World Factbook:

many people are landless and forced to live on and cultivate flood-prone land; water-borne diseases prevalent in surface water; water pollution, especially of fishing areas, results from the use of commercial pesticides; ground water contaminated by naturally occurring arsenic; intermittent water shortages because of falling water tables in the northern and central parts of the country; soil degradation and erosion; deforestation; severe overpopulation

UK, thy future is being shaped right now. Do something about it.

UPDATE Oct 24, 2007 02:09:00 PM:
Expat Yank points out the water shortage in connection with this population increase. That's never a good thing.





Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

"Devo" [Update II]

For those following the case, Michael Devlin was sentenced this week to three life sentences, in addition to the one he is already serving, so that make four in all. I meant to write about this earlier, but I needed time to collect my thoughts. This is a post I have struggled over whether to write at all; even though I blog semi-anonymously I don't want to damage my reputation, but at the same time, I feel I have something to add.

Believe it or not, I actually knew this guy.

In January of this year, I was serving in Iraq. I was lying in my bunk on Camp Liberty one day, watching the news on a small TV I had bought. A few times they mentioned a Michael Devlin, a guy in Missouri (my home state) who had kidnapped two boys and kept one of them in his home for years. I didn't pay much attention to it, until the above photo showed up on Fox News. My first thought was: "hey, that looks a lot like Devo", a person I used to know from my hometown. Then I looked again. It really looked like Devo. Then suddenly I put together a few words I had heard floating around the report: Missouri...city of Kirkwood...Imo's Pizza..."Oh my G*d. It is DEVO!!"

"Devo" was the nickname everyone called him, and in fact, I didn't even know his legal name. But I did know him fairly well, although I wouldn't exactly describe him as a friend. As far as I knew, he had never committed any crime, other than occasionally smoking marijuana, and the last time I saw him was sometime in 2001, which was about a year before he got into the kidnapping business.

I grew up in Saint Louis County, in the city of Ladue (really a suburb), which was right next to Kirkwood. In late 1998, my initial enlistment with the Army was up, and I moved back to Ladue until 2001, when I left to work for the Army full time again after I was commissioned. It was during this time that I met Devo.

The reason I knew him was because he was the housemate of one of my long time best friends, who I'll just call "M.A." (who doesn't want to be publicly identified). M.A. was renting a house in Kirkwood, and when one roommate moved out, he needed another one to share the rent. Through mutual friends at the nearby Kirkwood Imo's Pizza (where Devlin worked) he met Devlin, and invited him to move in. Once he told me that Devlin was not the ideal housemate, but at least he consistently paid his share of rent and bills.

I saw Devo when I came over to visit, which was about once a week or so. My friend and I were into various role-playing/war/card games and played on a regular basis with some other friends. We were sort of reliving a hobby we all once had in high school (yes, I was a gamer geek). It got me out of the house once in a while, and as far as my wife was concerned, any time I spent off the computer was a good thing. As it so happened, Devo was a gamer too. He would always join us if he was there. A couple of our friends refused to play if he was around, because they didn't like his mannerisms. He annoyed me a little too, but he was a good player, and frankly, I felt sorry for him. Our usual game of choice was "Magic: The Gathering", which I used to love before it became too commercial. Devo was good at it. We would all spend hours into the night, having a few beers, and swapping stories. Devo spoke little about his family or personal life, even though I tried to get him to open up a little. He never did. He openly spoke about politics, news, anything else going on in the world however. He was more or less a libertarian and very opinionated.

The weird thing is, the Devo described on TV is not the one I knew at all. Some things were similar: the anti-social reclusive behavior, and his quick temper I remember very well. But some things don't fit. I mean, here he is in the news, driving around in a truck, waving a gun and kidnapping kids. But when I knew him, he: 1) didn't have a car or even a driver's license (a couple times I gave him rides places), 2) didn't know anything about guns, and 3) had zero ambition or motivation to do anything at all, much less a brazen act like kidnapping. In fact, it was a rare day he would even get his fat ass off the couch to do anything at all, except when he had to go to work. Otherwise, he would spend all long watching TV, eating potato chips, and using his PlayStation for hours at a time.

There was also no indication he was homosexual; he certainly didn't act effeminate - quite the opposite, in fact. He didn't date or ever have a girlfriend that I knew of, but we all assumed it was because he was overweight and had terrible hygiene habits. I never asked him about his love life, because I figured his luck with women was pretty dismal. What I wanted to tell him was to shave his beard, lose weight and take regular showers, and then he might find a girlfriend. Also he should go back to school and get a real job... (while everyone else from his neighborhood went off to college, Devo was 33 and had essentially stayed at the same job since high school). But I was too polite to say any of this. Instead, I was hoping he might emulate our example. No such luck.

I have a close (liberal) friend who insists that men who sexually abuse boys are not necessarily homosexual, since men who do this "cross those boundaries". Similarly, I've had debates with homosexual advocates who insist that since pedophilia is entirely different than normal sexual impulses, then you can't use the label "homosexual" to describe the abuse of boys by grown men. This self-help document echoes this sentiment:

Myth No. 2 - Homosexual males perpetrate most sexual abuse of boys.
Paedophiles who molest boys are not expressing a homosexual orientation any more than paedophiles that molest girls are practicing heterosexual behaviours. While many child molesters have gender and or age preferences, the vast majority of those who seek out boys are not homosexual. They are paedophiles.

This doesn't make any sense. Why isn't it possible to be both? I find these arguments unpersuasive, and more like a defensive reaction by gay advocates to disassociate homosexuals from child sexual abuse in the mind of the public. This abuse, by the numbers, is disproportionally man/boy. Devlin could have kidnapped girls instead of boys but he made a deliberate choice not to. He preferred boys. The most notorious such abuser in modern memory, Father John Geoghan has been accused of molesting over 130 people - all boys. He may have had more access to boys than girls, but the fact that he consistently chose boys time and time again over a period of many years shows that he definitely preferred boys over girls, which in my mind, is the very definition of homosexuality. Next they might try to tell me that men who prefer elderly men are not homosexual either?

I think there might be a strong cultural bias as well. Both Michael Devlin and John Geoghan didn't (openly) identify themselves as gay, or used "queer" as a badge of pride. Neither of them acted with the stereotypical mannerisms of homosexuals, or were involved with gay advocate groups or the political scene. It seems that to some, one or all of the above is the litmus test for homosexuality; nevertheless, I don't see what any of that really has to do with it.

I've also seen a variation of this argument, where some gay advocates agreed with the Iranian President's recent statement that "there are no homosexuals in Iran", an argument that drove Andrew Sullivan crazy recently. One of the few times I agreed with him.

But I'm getting off the subject. The lesson here? I don't know if there really is one. It was a tragedy however. Not only for the boys who were kidnapped, but for this wasted life as well. Devo was a smart guy. Very smart. I have no doubt he could have become a doctor, lawyer, or world class scientist if he wanted to. But for his own reasons, he was content to live an absolutely mediocre life, until his dissatisfaction boiled over into criminal action.

I never met his family, so I don't know how he was raised. But sometimes, I can't help thinking that my friends, especially my friend M.A., could have done more than we did. But people can be stubborn when you try to help them, and Devo was more stubborn than most. More importantly, none of us had any idea what he was capable of, or the vast, bottled up demons that he was dealing with inside.

Four life sentences is a hell of a sentence, although I suppose it is just. Still, it is far more than the outrageously light 5 year sentence given to the similar case of Kevin Parnell, who kidnapped Steven Stayner at age 7 and held him for seven years (years later, he got life after attempting another abduction however).

I'm tempted to visit Devo in jail someday, but I have no idea what I would say to him. I doubt he will ever get out of prison, nor am I certain he should. All I can do is pray for him and his two victims.

Meanwhile, back in Iraq, I told my teammates about Devo after the story broke - I couldn't resist; it just so happened that we had one officer that had insisted several times that hard core gamers like myself, the "Dungeons & Dragons crowd", were all nuts and wierdos. I guess I just wanted the chance to tease him and make him wonder if I was criminally insane as well. Instead, for a little while, "FREE DEVO!" become a rallying cry for my mates to tease me every chance they got...

UPDATE 24/10/2007 09:39:00 AM:
Just to clarify something: I stopped seeing Devo when my friend, M.A., got married and moved to Chicago. After that they both went their separate ways. That is probably one of the people Devo was referring to when he said:

"I guess you could say I was lonely. All my friends starting getting married and having kids," he said. "Hanging out with friends just becomes a lower priority [for them]."

Something else I just noticed from that same interview:

Devlin, 41, said his life took a dramatic turn in 2002, when he was diagnosed with diabetes, which led to amputations of the big toe and another toe on his right foot in 2003, shortly after Hornbeck went missing.

Undoubtedly, the diabetes was aggravated by the case after case of Mountain Dew soda that he would go through every day...

The loss of his toes made it difficult for him to maintain his balance and he had to give up his passion for hunting and fishing, Devlin said.

"I'm an outdoorsman, but not anymore," he said.

What the hell?? An "outdoorsman"? I never saw him do anything the slightest bit active or "outdoorsish". Nor did I ever see a fishing pole, hunting rifle, or even a tent anywhere near the man. But then again, he was keeping plenty of secrets from the world, so maybe that was another one...

UPDATE 16/11/2007 12:00:00 AM:
After weeks of trying to get ahold of him, I finally heard from "MA". He told me:

I agree with your assessment, except for the part where you state that we could have done more to alter the course of X's [Devo's] direction, ... One thing is for certain about X is that he was as deceptive in real life as he was with a deck of cards in his hand and we all just got chain lightninged for 666 points of damage. [a reference to Dungeons & Dragons meaning we were all burned] There was nothing that could have been done to keep him from playing that card, he was just waiting for the right time to play it all along.

Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Bobby Jindal win due to "ethnic cleansing"

Gov-elect Jindal, photo origin unknown

Normally, I don't like to discuss specific partisan political battles on this site, but this is almost too much.

Yesterday, US Representative Piyush "Bobby" Jindal won the election for governor of Louisiana with 53% of the vote. At 36, he will be the youngest Governor in the country, and the first one ever of Asian Indian extraction. He is the son of immigrants from India, and if you want to know more, his official biography can be found here.

If you are an American, but not familiar with Louisiana, you might be surprised to know that Mr. Jindal is a republican. As Michelle Malkin points out, the very fact that he is a Republican and an ethnic minority sends newspapers like the NYT into fits of confusion, as it doesn't fit their template on how the world should work.

Anyway, how is it possible that a Republican won when the country has supposedly taken a huge shift to the left in the wake of the continuing Iraq war and several high profile Republican scandals? And of all things, in a state that blamed George Bush for the devastating Hurricane Katrina in 2005?

To folks on the fringe political left, rational people would never elect a Republican, epecially under these circumstances (conveniently forgetting that Katrina was mostly a failure of response at the state and local level), so to explain this non-sequitor, another conspiracy theory is born (or I should say, an new twist on an old conspiracy): according to them, it was all due to the "ethnic cleansing" of Hurricane Katrina which forced black people out of the state! Didn't you know, this was all part of Karl Rove's plan to win Louisiana?

I am not joking. As a general rule, I don't like to cherry-pick quotes because you can always find crazy things said anywhere. But there were enough of these that it was actually becoming a groupthink theme. Some quotes below (spelling mistakes left as they were):

The Daily Kos is rich territory for conspiracy theories, and this one is no exception:

From "Walt star":
We now see the Katrina plan played out in full
Force the Dmeocrats to move out. That was the plan all along.

From "Bensdad":
Louisiana is red for one reason:
The Katrina Afermath.

If you "factor out" New Orleans, Louisiana is red because of all the fucking Baptists up North. New Orleans kept them honest, and purplish. Karl Rove knew that. That's why they didn't lift a finger after Katrina hit. It took awhile, but half the city left, and did not come back.

Mission accomplished.

From "Barry in MIA":
Ethnic cleansing, baby!

Why do really think NOLA is still in shambles - - remember who was in charge of reconstruction? ROVE

Later:
Ethnic cleasing works.

Jindal got 48% in 2003 and 52% in 2007, largely attributable to the shrinkage of the black vote due to forced relocation to other states / failure to rebuild New Orleans (we're too busy rebuilding the Sunni part of Iraq). I guess they run Milosevic in 2011.

From "Louisiana 1976":
It's Bush Administration...

ethnic cleansing by not letting New Orleans rebuild and repopulate that's turning Louisiana into a Red state. Because they don't want all the poor people of color who had to evacuate to come back.

From "LeftHandedMan":
Ethnic cleansing by Hurricane
pays off for the GOP handsomely I guess.

But of course, it's not just Daily Kos... The Internet is full of nuts everywhere:

A commenter at Hot Air:

Who here honestly doesn’t believe she [Gov Blanco] knew there was no chance she would get re-elected? Particularly after the effective ethnic cleansing job Bushitler did to replace the residents with white folk. Vanilla City here we come!

Democratic Underground:

Ethnic cleansing after Katrina?

Or:

[How did he get elected?] By Running Most of the Democrats Out of the State, In This Case

And, of course, obscure blogs:

FUCK YOU JINDAL!
...
You Piyush "Bobby" Jindal, are a potential deadly disease to this place. You are the Katrina of the potential candidates!

Classy.





Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Suicide bombing in Pakistan

The aftermath

About 20,000 people showed up to cheer former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto's return to Pakistan, after eight years in exile. And very soon, 136 of those people (at last count) were killed while 387 were wounded, from at least two suicide bombers.

Normally I don't write about things that already get plenty of press, but I'll make an exception here.

I know the typical reaction in the west to this kind of story is usually to ignore it. The bombing wasn't in America or Europe, so it gets low priority. Heck, it wasn't even in Iraq or Afghanistan, so those worried about the troops have little concern.

But it's still important, nonetheless. The body count here was massive, and you are dealing with a suicide bomber here - for every one you see, there's about a thousand you don't. Additionally, this wasn't in a backward country hostile to the West, this was in Pakistan, a backward country whose leaders have sincerely tried to embrace the west, and who share borders with Iran and Afghanistan. On top of all that, they also have atomic weapons. Add all this up, and you see how a civil war could be a very, very bad thing for the world in the long run.

Earlier, Ms. Bhutto blamed supporters of former president Mohammed Zia ul-Haq for the attack. No one has claimed responsibility for it, but the truth is, it has all the hallmarks of Al-Qaeda. While Bhutto has strong support among women and the poor, many islamic fundamentalists are not happy with a woman leading the country, particularly a woman who is sympathetic to the west and was educated there. Regarding the bombing, Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit quipped:

Have you noticed that the radical Islamists have basically one response to everything?

As usual, the Counterterrorism Blog has a good wrap up of reporting on the incident.





Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Donnerstag Welt zusammentreiben

"Les Sabines", or "The Intervention of the Sabine Women", by Jacques-Louis David, 1799

Thursday world roundup

WORLD: Art is good. A wonderful source of classical artwork, such as the above, is the Art Renewal Center website. It's literally packed with thousands of high resolution museum images. Even if you're not an art enthusiast, I guarantee you it's worth the trip.


USA: Denial is bad for your health. A Ms. Martinez in Colorado protests a school's policy to send home health reports as well as report cards. The reason? Her daughter opened and read it, and it caused "emotional distress" when she saw that the school considers her "overweight".

"My daughter is big boned," said Martinez.

Oh brother...


NEW ZEALAND: Liberated women, and how... According to a recent survey conducted by Durex condoms, of 26 countries and involving 26,000 respondents, women in New Zealand are the most promiscuous in the world, with a lifetime average of 20.4 sex partners per year! I can't find what country's women had the least, since the full report isn't available for download yet. But their 2005 survey of both men and woman, showed India at the bottom, with an average of 3.0 partners, and Turkey with the most, with 14.5. That seems a little hard to swallow, but that's what they came up with... Incidentally, European countries ran the gamut, while the USA was near the average, with 10.7 partners, compared to a global average of 9.


YEMEN: Terrorist walks Absolute outrage from a US "ally". A terrorist named Jamal al-Badawi, who was involved in the attack on the USS Cole in 2000, turned himself in to Yemeni authorities, and was promptly released on his own recognizance. The United States still has a bounty on his head. Will the DOJ seek extradition? According to the US State Department, Yemen is an ally in the war on terror, and receives military aid and funding from the United States. Maybe it's time to reconsider that. More info at A Blog for All.


UK: Disturbing the academic comfort zone. A Nobel prize winning geneticist, and the co-discoverer of DNA, James D. Watson, announces that black people are less intelligent than white people. It's controversial, but not entirely new. Professors such as Rushton, Jensen, Shockley, Ellis, and Murray have all made similar claims in the past (to the detriment of their careers). There should be a qualifier, however: this is mostly based on IQ tests, and one problem lost in this emotional debate is that IQ tests cannot measure the full range of a person's intelligence, such as artistic ability, emotional intelligence, navigation, etc. Serpico at The English Tavern has a good point, noting the irony of the same liberal community that is celebrating Al Gore for his recent Nobel Prize win, is now shunning and vilifying this Nobel recipient. This is an academic hot potato if there ever was one, but hopefully it will one day be seriously studied, not left to the fringes out of political correctness. Current rational debate is all but impossible. The Fark.com headline is appropriate: "Nobel Prize-winning geneticist claims black people aren't as smart as white people. Naturally, a calm assessment of his data and conclusions will ensue".


USA: Affirmative action is good for you. Just don't ask us what's in it...A controversial study published in the Stanford law review suggests that affirmative action (university preferences for racial minorities) actually hurt rather than help their recipients:

[The study] concluded that several thousand would-be black lawyers either dropped out of law school or failed to pass the bar because of affirmative action.

Known as the ‘mismatch’ effect, Sander claims students who are unprepared and whose academic credentials are below the median are admitted to law schools they are unqualified to attend. If those same students instead were to go to less elite or competitive schools, more would graduate, pass the bar and become lawyers.

This has prompted several groups to request that the California Bar association release its data from the last 30 years on student test scores, law school admissions, academic performance and bar passage rates. Put in a very uncomfortable position (and seeing the existence of affirmative action threatened), of course they refused:

"The release (bar exam) applicants sign does not allow us to release the information to third parties,"

Since they could just release the data without names, that excuse just doesn't wash.





Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed

Click here for more...

Truth is the first casualty

...of US Politics. (except on this site)

Unless you dig for yourself, you rarely hear the truth reported in US political battles these days. As I pointed out a few days ago, Democrats in the US congress used a 12 year old boy, named Graeme Frost, to read a statement promoting S-CHIP, a program expanding health care coverage to poor children.

To read the papers, you would think the Republicans and their allies in the media went on an all-out assault against the boy himself. Here are a few examples:

Quote from Newsweek magazine's "conventional wisdom" about Michelle Malkin:

(Arrow Down) Heartless right-wing blogger attacks 12-year-old brain-injury victim over insurance. Sick.

From the Las Vegas Sun:

Trashing a 12-year-old
Conservatives vilify a boy and his family in a mean campaign to kill children's health plan

And from the Think Progress site:

Right Wing Launches Baseless Smear Campaign Against 12 Year Old Recipient Of SCHIP...

Conservatives have more recently turned their targets on young Graeme Frost himself. A poster at the Free Republic propagated information alleging that Frost was actually a rich kid being pampered by the government.

Actually, that article at the Free Republic only said the boy was "not so poor", which, last time I checked, was not considered an "insult" or an "attack" - in fact, most would think it was more like a compliment.

In any case, none of these accusations are true. Neither Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, or any other right-wing pundit attacked the boy. The boy's parents were heavily criticized, because many people believed they misrepresented their financial situation, claiming to be poorer than they actually were. Most of this was groundless, but some of it was not. And that's beside the point. The point is, the boy was not attacked, and nobody can produce a single link, quote, audio clip, or anything else that proves otherwise, not even the sites I linked to above. There is literally nothing there to support such a claim. Go ahead, check them out for yourself.

But to some people, that doesn't matter. President Bush vetoed the bill, and it's up for an override vote - so the bill's supporters are doing whatever it takes to destroy their opposition - even if it means blatantly lying about them. That's how desperate they are to get this thing passed.

But this is the real absurdity here: if the bill does have merit, shouldn't those merits stand up for themselves? Why are so many supporters of S-CHIP willing to lie to get this thing passed? Why do they care about this bill so much?

Many Congressmen are genuinely concerned about the bill, but the current fight is about more than that. With the Presidential election on the horizon next year, Democrats are salivating at the chance to accuse their opponents of "attacking young boys" and "voting against health care for children".

What I found was seriously lacking from both sides in all this noise was: 1) An actual debate about the costs and benefits of the S-CHIP program, outside the one anecdote of this family, and 2) any real discussion of alternatives to the bill.

Incidentally, I am never shy about challenging my beliefs. I had quite a debate about this in a comment thread on another website, and even though I challenged dozens of hostile commenters to try and prove me wrong, nobody could. The closest they could get was to rationalize that since they are a family, any attacks on the parents mean an attack on the children. OK then, by that logic, any attacks on President Bush mean an attack on his twin daughters? How dare the anyone take potshots at young Jenna or Barbara Bush!





Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark