Monday, October 29, 2007

The Frogs are going after the Toadie

According to the Rude Pundit, Donald Rumsfeld was forced to beat feet to get outta France before being indicted as a war criminal. I guess he quick hopped into Germany where they are more sympathic to extraordinary diplomatic negotiating techniques.

(Vee huv ways.....)

According to the Center for Constitutional Rights: "Rumsfeld’s presence on French territory gives French courts jurisdiction to prosecute him for having ordered and authorized torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of detainees in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and elsewhere."


Dr. Zaius said...

Count Rumsfeld strikes again! Condi is still keeping his coffin warm for him.

Sorghum Crow said...

Does this mean we have to go back to eating Freedom Fries?

no_slappz said...

Jess, by citing the example of Fazlur Khan, you have made my point. Too bad you can’t see the obvious. The problem with the muslim world is islam. Not inherent intellectual inferiority. Khan left his home country of East Pakistan for the US, where he obtained his education and practiced his trade. He and his American firm – Skidmore, Owings and Merrill -- were eventually retained to design some buildings in the middle east, because, once again, there was no local talent able to handle the work.

The middle east is an intellectual dead zone.

Fazlur Rahman Khan (April 3, 1929 - March 27, 1982), born in Dhaka, Bengal, East Pakistan (now in Bangladesh), was a Bangladeshi American structural engineer. He is regarded as the "Einstein of structural engineering" and considered "the greatest architectural engineer of the second half of the 20th century" for his constructions of the Sears Tower and John Hancock Center, and for his designs of structural systems that remain fundamental to all high-rise skyscrapers.


After completing undergraduate coursework at the Bengal Engineering College, University of Calcutta (Now Bengal Engineering & Science University,Shibpur), Fazlur R. Khan received his bachelor’s degree from the University of Dhaka in 1951 while placing first in his class.

A Fulbright Scholarship and a Pakistani government scholarship enabled him to travel to the United States in 1952 where he pursued advanced studies at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. In three years Khan earned two Master's degrees — one in structural engineering and one in theoretical and applied mechanics — and a PhD in structural engineering.

In 1955, employed by Skidmore, Owings and Merrill, he began working in Chicago, Illinois.

Dr. Fazlur Khan's design innovations improved the construction of high-rise buildings, enabling them to withstand enormous forces generated on these super structures. These new designs opened an economic door for contractors, engineers, architects, and investors, providing vast amounts of real estate space on minimal plots of land.

He is noted for his efficient designs for Chicago’s 100-story John Hancock Center and 110-story Sears Tower, the tallest building in the United States since its completion in 1974.

Khan left the intellectual vacuum of the middle east and never returned. That should tell you something.

dguzman said...

Oh good lord, slappy. Get lost.

Jess, if only zee gendarmes had been a little quicker in busting Rummy. That would've been some sweet justice.

Jess Wundrun said...

The problem with the muslim world is islam.

Wow. How does one argue with logic like that?

The problem with peanut butter and jelly sandwiches is jelly and peanut butter!

As I mentioned, I know Mr. Khan's brother. The Khan's remain(ed) firmly linked to Bangladesh. Being an expatriat is not the same as repudiating your upbringing.

And you are way off thread.

no_slappz said...

jess, I wrote:

"The problem with the muslim world is islam."

You responded:

"Wow. How does one argue with logic like that?"

How about this? The problem with nazi Germany was the nazi-ism. Not the Germans. The nation went down the wrong road and it took a major war to repair the madness.

The muslims have been on the wrong road far longer than the Germans ever were.

You wrote:

"As I mentioned, I know Mr. Khan's brother."

So what? But I assume that you know him only because he lives in the US. He's another who left the vacuum of muslim non-culture behind. Your statements fully support my point. But you are willfully blind to the obvious.

You wrote:

"The Khan's remain(ed) firmly linked to Bangladesh."

What does that mean? They send money to relatives?

You wrote:

"Being an expatriat is not the same as repudiating your upbringing."

I see. So you are stating that the Khan's are not US citizens. And I guess you want to suggest that the children of the Khans are not Americans either.

Anyway, moving to another country at a relatively young age and living there till you die is pretty much a good-by-forever message to the country of your origin. In fact, that's a defining characteristic of almost every American family.

Jess Wundrun said...

Thankyou for expressing your ignorance and continuing to do so in more expansive ways.

I mention that I am personally acquainted with Mr. Khan's brother because I know how he figures in Bangladeshi history. He helped write the Bangladesh constitution. Not really a step one makes when repudiating the country they were born in, is it?

You are making a spurious correlation in determining that because the Khans moved to the United States that is somehow a spurning of their muslim roots. It hasn't got a thing to do with that.

First, they were born Indians, subjects of the King of England, spent time briefly as East Pakistanis and then were Bangladeshis. (Per politics).

Therefore, if there wasn't the opportunity to study engineering in India, wouldn't that be an indictment of the capitalist/colonial system? See, just because the majority of the population of Bangladesh is muslim does not mean that the problems that exist there are due to the religous faith of the citizens. Rather, one would make a better case blaming christianity since that is the religion of the colonialist leaders, isn't it?

Your point at Franiam was that Muslims are incapable of contributing to the arts and sciences because of 'islamo-fascism' or some such. Obviously, the Khans were given enough freedom to travel wherever they chose and to pursue whatever interests they had. Terribly fascistic, isn't it?

These statements are so ridiculously stupid and exemplify such a dim mentality that I can't even reply. "I see. So you are stating that the Khan's are not US citizens. And I guess you want to suggest that the children of the Khans are not Americans either.

Anyway, moving to another country at a relatively young age and living there till you die is pretty much a good-by-forever message to the country of your origin. In fact, that's a defining characteristic of almost every American family

You make up the craziest shit. Really.

no_slappz said...

jess, you wrote:

"Therefore, if there wasn't the opportunity to study engineering in India, wouldn't that be an indictment of the capitalist/colonial system?"

Khan received an undergraduate degree in India in 1951. That's after India broke from Great Britain. That's also after Pakistan declared its independence from India. Pakistan was the muslim region of the original Indian land mass.

As far as opportunities went, it was the influence of the British that led to the establishment of effective education on the subcontinent. The British introduced higher education to the Indians. Without their influence, India would lack democracy and the capitalistic base that is moving it toward increasing prosperity.

You wrote:

"See, just because the majority of the population of Bangladesh is muslim does not mean that the problems that exist there are due to the religous faith of the citizens."

In fact it does. They are the ones who rejected the British efforts aimed at moving that backward portion of the world into the present.

Khan is proof. To do what he wanted to do, he had to leave.

That makes him like millions of other people who immigrated to the US. Like I said, that's the defining characteristic of almost all American families. Most came to the US not very long ago. Like Khan.

And you haven't given me any examples of islamic art. That's understandable. There are so few, they're hard to spot.

Jess Wundrun said...

"They are the ones who rejected the British efforts aimed at moving that backward portion of the world into the present."

Sorry, but this statement only underscores your total lack of understanding of the situation in Bangladesh. It is complete and total conjecture on your part. You are blaming islam for problems without being able to draw a link between the two. Historically, these problems can more easily be correlated to an exploitative colonial system, than to a religious ideology in a country that is not a theocracy.

As I said before, spurious correlation.

For it to be true, the muslims of Bangladesh would have wanted to close themselves off from the west. Hardly.

Your ignorance cannot be used to justify your bigotry. You should just stop, unless you have actual facts.

no_slappz said...

jess, here's a little Bangladeshi history for you. This muslim country is a model of fairness and opportunity. Really. After reading the following you'll wonder why a guy like Khan would want to move to America.

When India was partitioned in 1947, Bengal was partitioned along religious lines, with the western part (hindu) going to India and the eastern part (muslim) joining Pakistan as a province called East Bengal (later renamed East Pakistan), with its capital at Dhaka.

In 1950, land reform was accomplished in East Bengal with the abolishment of the feudal zamindari system. However, despite the economic and demographic weight of the east, Pakistan's government and military were largely dominated by the upper classes from the west. The Bengali Language Movement of 1952 was the first sign of friction between the two wings of Pakistan.

Dissatisfaction with the central government over economic and cultural issues continued to rise through the next decade, during which the Awami League emerged as the political voice of the Bengali-speaking population. It agitated for autonomy in the 1960s, and in 1966, its president Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was jailed; he was released in 1969 after an unprecedented popular uprising.

In 1970, a massive cyclone devastated the coast of East Pakistan, and the central government responded poorly. The Bengali population's anger was compounded when Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, whose Awami League won a majority in Parliament in the 1970 elections, was blocked from taking office. After staging compromise talks with Mujib, President Yahya Khan arrested him on the night of March 25, 1971, and launched Operation Searchlight, a sustained military assault on East Pakistan. Yahya's methods were extremely bloody, and the violence of the war resulted in many civilian deaths.

Chief targets included intellectuals and Hindus, and about ten million refugees fled to neighbouring India.

Estimates of those massacred range from three hundred thousand to 3 million.

Most of the Awami League leaders fled and set up a government-in-exile in Calcutta, India. The Bangladesh Liberation War lasted for nine months. The guerrilla Mukti Bahini and Bengali regulars eventually received support from the Indian Armed Forces in December 1971. Under the command of Lt. General J.S. Arora, the Indian Army achieved a decisive victory over Pakistan on 16 December,1971, taking over 90,000 prisoners of war in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971.

After its independence, Bangladesh became a parliamentary democracy, with Mujib as the Prime Minister. In the 1973 parliamentary elections, the Awami League gained an absolute majority.

A nationwide famine occurred during 1973 and 1974, and in early 1975, Mujib initiated a one-party socialist rule with his newly formed BAKSAL. On August 15, 1975, Mujib and his family were assassinated by mid-level military officers.

A series of bloody coups and counter-coups in the following three months culminated in the ascent to power of General Ziaur Rahman, who reinstated multi-party politics and founded the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP).

Zia's rule ended when he was assassinated in 1981 by elements of the military. Bangladesh's next major ruler was General Hossain Mohammad Ershad, who gained power in a bloodless coup in 1982 and ruled until 1990, when he was forced to resign under western donor pressure in a major shift in international policy after the end of communism when anti-communist dictators were no longer felt necessary.

Since then, Bangladesh has reverted to a parliamentary democracy. Zia's widow, Khaleda Zia, led the Bangladesh Nationalist Party to parliamentary victory at the general election in 1991 and became the first female Prime Minister in Bangladesh's history. However, the Awami League, headed by Sheikh Hasina, one of Mujib's surviving daughters, clinched power at the next election in 1996 but lost to the Bangladesh Nationalist Party again in 2001.

Bangladesh enjoys the distinction of having two female politicians leading national politics.

In January of 2007, following widespread violence, a caretaker government was appointed to administer the next general election. The country had suffered from extensive corruption, disorder and political violence. The new caretaker government has made it a priority to root out corruption from all levels of government.

To this end, many notable politicians and officials, along with large numbers of lesser officials and party members, have been arrested on corruption charges.

The caretaker government claims to be paving the way for free and fair elections to be held before the end of 2008.

Jess Wundrun said...

Dumbass, have you forgotten your argument? I believe you have.

Where is the role of fundamentalist islam in your cutting and pasting?

It doesn't exist.

If you are finding other reasons that the Khans may have wanted to leave, then fine. But you have just nicely negated what you were originally arguing.

Way to go.

no_slappz said...

jess, islam is the reason the middle east has been at an intellectual standstill for a thousand years.

I never said wahabbism or the hard-line fundamentalists were the cause. I said islam is the cause. Because it is.

It is a dogmatic religion that commands every aspect of life for muslims. Thus, it controls political life as well as spiritual life.

Unfortunately, the al-qaeda wahabbists want to make things worse. They want to reverse the clock that hasn't run for a millennium. The fundamentalists want to return to the days of muhammad.

As backward as islamic life is in islamic countries, the fundamentalists want to accelerate the drive into the past.

But the chief problem is islam itself. As long as people "submit" to islam, they will forgo creative action. If islam defines the government of their country, they will live in non-productive societies that depend on other nations for everything except the few items that grow in the islamic earth.

Jess Wundrun said...

You are not describing Bangladesh in your comments. You have just come back to the nut of your argument which is that you have a bigoted hatred for a group of people.

Jess Wundrun said...

Oh, and the Ottoman Empire.

no_slappz said...

jess, here's a little news follow-up on another subject:


November 1, 2007 -- While flying to Phoenix on the day she died, Carol Anne Gotbaum was crying and quaffed a Blood Mary, a flight attendant says.

The account is contained in the final Phoenix police report, released yesterday, of Gotbaum's death Sept. 28 in a holding cell at the city's airport.

The US Airways flight attendant, identified only as Ms. Jackson, tried to comfort Gotbaum, the daughter-in-law of Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum, but was told there was nothing she could do.

Carol Anne then "collected a magazine and returned to her seat."

The report covers much of the same ground as an initial police report released Oct. 4, saying Gotbaum went ballistic after missing a connecting flight to Tucson, where she was to enter an alcohol-rehab program.

Gotbaum, cuffed behind her back and shackled to a bench, suffocated while trying to maneuver the cuffs to the front of her.

The report again raises the question of why Gotbaum was allowed to fly to Phoenix by herself.

A family friend, David Watson, is quoted as saying that Gotbaum's husband, Noah, called him the night before the flight and asked if he and his wife, Christina, could help Carol Anne in Phoenix.

Watson replied that they couldn't because they were out of town.

The couple did fly to Phoenix the next day after receiving an anguished call from Noah - who couldn't find out about his wife - and learned that Carol Anne had died.

Watson called Noah to tell him the tragic news and the distraught husband yelled, "They killed her! They killed her!"

Michael Palombo, a Phoenix cop, said Betsy Gotbaum then called twice, asking if police could give out Carol Anne's maiden name, Stiger, "so as to insulate her and her family from media coverage."

"I have absolutely no comment," Betsy Gotbaum said last night."

The question of why this deeply troubled woman's husband allowed her to travel across the country unattended has not been answered.

no_slappz said...

jess, you wrote:

"You are not describing Bangladesh in your comments."

Really? How so? Bangladesh is a muslim country that is even more miserable than most due to its geography and climate.

Furthermore, Bangladeshis agree. They depart at a quick pace. The net migration rate is negative.

You wrote:

"You have just come back to the nut of your argument which is that you have a bigoted hatred for a group of people."

I have focused on the simple fact that islam is a destroyer of human ambition and advancement.

Meanwhile, you seem quite willing to ignore the determination and desire of muslims to kill Jews. Why is that?

Jess Wundrun said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jess Wundrun said...

You are really completely incapable of thinking for yourself, aren't you?

One has a better chance of survival as a Persian jew than as a Palestinian muslim.

no_slappz said...

jess, the wikipedia entry is like the cheese. It stands alone.

There were about 100,000 Jews in Iran in 1948. The best estimate for today is about 25,000. And they live in oppressed circumstances.

Under the Phalevi Dynasty, established in 1925, the country was secularized and oriented toward the West. This greatly benefited the Jews, who were emancipated and played an important role in the economy and in cultural life.

On the eve of the Islamic Revolution in 1979, 80,000 Jews lived in Iran. In the wake of the upheaval, tens of thousands of Jews, especially the wealthy, left the country, leaving behind vast amounts of property.

The Council of the Jewish Community, which was established after World War II, is the representative body of the community. The Jews also have a representative in parliament who is obligated by law to support Iranian foreign policy and its Anti-Zionist position.

Despite the official distinction between "Jews," "Zionists," and "Israel," the most common accusation the Jews encounter is that of maintaining contacts with Zionists. The Jewish community does enjoy a measure of religious freedom but is faced with constant suspicion of cooperating with the Zionist state and with "imperialistic America" — both such activities are punishable by death.

Jews who apply for a passport to travel abroad must do so in a special bureau and are immediately put under surveillance. The government does not generally allow all members of a family to travel abroad at the same time to prevent Jewish emigration.

Again, the Jews live under the status of dhimmi, with the restrictions im posed on religious minorities. Jewish leaders fear government reprisals if they draw attention to official mistreatment of their community.

Iran's official government-controlled media often issues anti-Semitic propaganda. A prime example is the government's publishing of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a notorious Czarist forgery, in 1994 and 1999.

Jews also suffer varying degrees of officially sanctioned discrimination, particularly in the areas of employment, education, and public accommodations.

The Islamization of the country has brought about strict control over Jewish educational institutions. Before the revolution, there were some 20 Jewish schools functioning throughout the country. In recent years, most of these have been closed down. In the remaining schools, Jewish principals have been replaced by Muslims.

In Teheran there are still three schools in which Jewish pupils constitute a majority. The curriculum is Islamic, and Persian is forbidden as the language of instruction for Jewish studies. Special Hebrew lessons are conducted on Fridays by the Orthodox Otzar ha-Torah organization, which is responsible for Jewish religious education. Saturday is no longer officially recognized as the Jewish sabbath, and Jewish pupils are compelled to attend school on that day.

There are three synagogues in Teheran, but since 1994, there has been no rabbi in Iran, and the bet din does not function.

Following the overthrow of the shah and the declaration of an Islamic state in 1979, Iran severed relations with Israel. The country has subsequently supported many of the Islamic terrorist organizations that target Jews and Israelis, particularly the Lebanon-based, Hezbollah. Nevertheless, Iran's Jewish community is the largest in the Middle East outside Israel.

On the eve of Passover in 1999, 13 Jews from Shiraz and Isfahan in southern Iran were arrested and accused of spying for Israel and the United States.

Those arrested include a rabbi, a ritual slaughterer and teachers. In September 2000, an Iranian appeals court upheld a decision to imprison ten of the thirteen Jews accused of spying for Israel. In the appeals court, ten of the accused were found guilty of cooperating with Israel and were given prison terms ranging from two to nine years. Three of the accused were found innocent in the first trial.

In March 2001, one of the imprisoned Jews was released, a second was freed in January 2002, the remaining eight were set free in late October 2002. The last five apparently were released on furlough for an indefinite period, leaving them vulnerable to future arrest. Three others were reportedly pardoned by Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

At least 13 Jews have been executed in Iran since the Islamic revolution 19 years ago, most of them for either religious reasons or their connection to Israel. For example, in May 1998, Jewish businessman Ruhollah Kakhodah-Zadeh was hanged in prison without a public charge or legal proceeding, apparently for assisting Jews to emigrate.

Today, Iran's Jewish population is the second largest in the Middle East, after Israel.

Reports vary as to the condition and treatment of the small, tight-knit community, and the population of Iranian Jews can only be estimated due to the community’s isolation from world Jewry.

Jess Wundrun said...

There is ONE jew in Afghanistan, a country that is supposedly been freed from islamic fundamentalism by the US liberators.

And how have you refuted that life is worse for jews in Iran than for muslims in Palestine? Do you reckon that more than 13 Palestinians have been murdered by Israelis?

Jess Wundrun said...

oh. and you still haven't explained why you continue to blatantly ignore the entire Ottoman Empire.

no_slappz said...

jess, you wrote:

"There is ONE jew in Afghanistan, a country that is supposedly been freed from islamic fundamentalism by the US liberators."

It appears that the point you are making about Afghanistan and Jews is that if there are no murderous anti-Semites in the vicinity, Jews should rush in to populate the place.

For perspective, consider that today, 60 years after the destruction of nazi Germany and the ending of the genocide that occurred in Poland, there are very few Jews in Poland. Therefore, don't hold your breath for the sudden arrival in Afghanistan of Jews looking for a new country into which to wander.

You wrote:

"And how have you refuted that life is worse for jews in Iran than for muslims in Palestine?"

Since I never set out to answer this silly question, it has not been answered. In fact, I don't recall the raising of this question. When did this question enter the dialogue?

The left-field appearance of this question aside, it's clear you are searching for some bizarre equivalence between Jews in Iran and the non-palestinians in Israel.

Starting with the fact that the Jewish population in Iran was about 100,000 in 1948, when Israel was founded, and is now down to roughly 25,000, I'd say the Jews of Iran have spoken with their feet. Maybe a 75% reduction in the Jewish population tells you nothing, but I think it says leaving Iran is more popular than staying.

People don't leave their native land unless they believe a better life is to be found elsewhere. If people on the other side of the Atlantic felt the same about their homelands as Jews in Iran, the population of the US would be a billion and Europe would be a ghost town.

You wrote:

"Do you reckon that more than 13 Palestinians have been murdered by Israelis?"

The population of Iran is around 70 million. That number includes 25,000 Jews whose lives are limited by law.

On the other hand, Israel has a population of about 6.5 million. Of that total, about 1.5 million are muslims. They are Israeli citizens. Of course that makes them unlike the non-palestinians who have been trapped in refugee camps in neighboring muslim countries. Those kind, considerate and compassionate governments refuse to accept these muslims as citizens, even if the people were born in the neighboring countries.

Now, to the question of whether more than 13 so-called palestinians have been murdered by Israelis?

What do you mean? Murders occurring in the commission of crimes? Like robbery? The victim refuses to part with his cash, so the assailant shoots his victim?

Or are you referring to something like murder of a muslim driven by anti-muslim bias? Or do you mean state-sanctioned killing?

Both hamas and hezbollah kill Israelis in suicide bombings, dispatching about 1,000 Israelis so far. Despite the carnage, it's pretty clear that Israelis, on an individual level, don't engage in vigilante justice.

I can't recall reading about a murder of a muslim as an act of bias. I do recall one case of a mentally ill Jew in the West Bank who killed a couple of muslims. He was prosecuted. Had he been a muslim killing Jews, his family would have received a cash bonus. I see a difference. How about you?

no_slappz said...

jess, you refernced the Ottoman Empire.

Yeah. Nice tilework. The Ottoman Empire has been out of commission a rather long time. More importantly, nothing has succeeded it.

In other words, it didn't give birth to a new and better society or political structure. In fact, the muslim world has been backsliding since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Moreover, the muslim world didn't advance much during the period the empire existed.

The leading nations of the world left it in the dust and it suffered from overwhelming and debilitating corruption.

Are there are any noteworthy contributions to the world that you can attribute to the Ottoman Empire?