One good thing

About the recent snowstorm is that it seems to have reduced the number
of boom cars blasting (c)rap music driving by.

Economic naughty bits

Some rather sobering analyses of how we got into the current economic climate:

First, Wizbang asks the question Is Wall Street to blame for the 2008 'Oil Bubble'? From 60 Minutes (yeah, I know, just keep reading):

To understand what happened to the price of oil, you first have to understand the way it's traded. For years it has been bought and sold on something called the commodities futures market. At the New York Mercantile Exchange, it's traded alongside cotton and coffee, copper and steel by brokers who buy and sell contracts to deliver those goods at a certain price at some date in the future.

It was created so that farmers could gauge what their unharvested crops would be worth months in advance, so that factories could lock in the best price for raw materials, and airlines could manage their fuel costs. But more than a year ago those markets started to behave erratically. And when oil doubled to more than $147 a barrel, no one was more suspicious than Dan Gilligan.

As the president of the Petroleum Marketers Association, he represents more than 8,000 retail and wholesale suppliers, everyone from home heating oil companies to gas station owners.

When 60 Minutes talked to him last summer, his members were getting blamed for gouging the public, even though their costs had also gone through the roof. He told Kroft the problem was in the commodities markets, which had been invaded by a new breed of investor.

"Approximately 60 to 70 percent of the oil contracts in the futures markets are now held by speculative entities. Not by companies that need oil, not by the airlines, not by the oil companies. But by investors that are looking to make money from their speculative positions," Gilligan explained.

Gilligan said these investors don't actually take delivery of the oil. "All they do is buy the paper, and hope that they can sell it for more than they paid for it. Before they have to take delivery."

"They're trying to make money on the market for oil?" Kroft asked.

"Absolutely," Gilligan replied. "On the volatility that exists in the market. They make it going up and down."

He says his members in the home heating oil business, like Sean Cota of Bellows Falls, Vt., were the first to notice the effects a few years ago when prices seemed to disconnect from the basic fundamentals of supply and demand. Cota says there was plenty of product at the supply terminals, but the prices kept going up and up.

"We've had three price changes during the day where we pick up products, actually don't know what we paid for it and we'll go out and we'll sell that to the retail customer guessing at what the price was," Cota remembered. "The volatility is being driven by the huge amounts of money and the huge amounts of leverage that is going in to these markets."

About the same time, hedge fund manager Michael Masters reached the same conclusion. Masters' expertise is in tracking the flow of investments into and out of financial markets and he noticed huge amounts of money leaving stocks for commodities and oil futures, most of it going into index funds, betting the price of oil was going to go up.

Asked who was buying this "paper oil," Masters told Kroft, "The California pension fund. Harvard Endowment. Lots of large institutional investors. And, by the way, other investors, hedge funds, Wall Street trading desks were following right behind them, putting money - sovereign wealth funds were putting money in the futures markets as well. So you had all these investors putting money in the futures markets. And that was driving the price up."

In a five year period, Masters said the amount of money institutional investors, hedge funds, and the big Wall Street banks had placed in the commodities markets went from $13 billion to $300 billion. Last year, 27 barrels of crude were being traded every day on the New York Mercantile Exchange for every one barrel of oil that was actually being consumed in the United States.

Read the whole story. Wizbang tries to shorten the explanation a bit:

It appears that the big investment banks were actually trying to corner the US oil market, taking advantage of Clinton-era deregulation to control the lion's share of domestic oil trading, then using commodities swapping to lock in low to moderate oil delivery prices while encouraging investor enthusiasm that pumped billions of dollars into the oil futures market and allowed speculators to wildly increase futures prices. If you're sitting on reserves swapped at $65/bbl that could sell in six months for $145/bbl, that's some serious money.

The whole thing fell apart, it seems, when the real estate meltdown robbed the banks of their cash supply and they could no longer afford to engage in large-scale oil futures trading. When their futures-indexed investment funds started failing, investors yanked their cash, and normal supply/demand economics pulled the price of oil back down to a level that more accurately reflected the abundant supply on the market and the reduced demand brought on by the unreasonably high prices.

So who is to blame politically? Some of the responsibility certainly rests on the Clinton administration, which repeatedly ignored Enron's financial irregularities while enlisting its Commerce and Energy Departments to aid Enron in one sweetheart energy deal after another. But we should also ask why the Bush Administration, which repeatedly expressed concerns about the runaway subprime mortgage market, seemed either ill-informed or indifferent about the runaway price of crude oil.

The long-term sustainability of the free market is based in part on its ability to shake out irrational trends. The market did indeed work in this case, because the rapid spike in crude oil futures pricing was unsustainable and not based on true supply and demand. But the price that we all paid -- and will keep paying in the form of long-term debt -- for that brief period of market irrationality was very high. Let's hope that next time the market can dampen irrational price increases before they do so much collateral damage.

Second, it appears that the Chinese government's manipulation of its currency has contributed in no small measure to the current global economic crisis:

At his confirmation hearings last week, Tim Geithner branded China a currency manipulator. This is a designation that the Bush Treasury Department never formally affixed to the Chinese. It may signal a nerve-racking shift in how the United States manages its most pivotal relationship.

Geithner is correct that China manipulates its currency. What's more, this manipulation is arguably the most important cause of the financial crisis. Starting around the middle of this decade, China's cheap currency led it to run a massive trade surplus. The earnings from that surplus poured into the United States. The result was the mortgage bubble.

China's leaders protest that they are being unfairly scapegoated. Yet while there are rival accounts of the origins of the crisis, neither has the explanatory force of the blame-China narrative.

The first rival account is that the crisis reflected failings of U.S. financial regulation. Such failings exist, but most have been around for years. The mortgage bubble reached its craziest extremes in 2005-07, when China was flooding the world with cheap capital.

Moreover, regulatory failings exist not just at one regulator but many. The Securities and Exchange Commission failed to check risks at broker-dealers such as Bear Stearns. State insurance regulators failed to prevent the collapse of AIG. The Federal Reserve failed to see that banks were pouring capital into toxic securities that they then held off their balance sheets. European regulators were no better, even though they had adopted a supposedly more up-to-date set of capital standards. The lesson: Faced with a deluge of cheap money, no regulatory regime can be expected to prevent bubbles.

The second rival account of the crisis accepts that its origins lie less in regulatory failings than in economic pressures. But it blames the bubble on two mistakes at home rather than on the glut of capital from China. Americans should have controlled the urge to splurge, the thinking goes, and borrowed less Chinese money. And the Fed should have shut down the easy-money party by raising interest rates.

If Americans' insatiable appetite for loans explained the flood of Chinese capital into the United States, we would have seen the evidence in a rising price for those loans -- that is, higher interest rates in the bond market. But bond rates were strikingly low at mid-decade. This strongly suggests that it was the supply of lending that went up, not the demand for it. Chinese money flooded into the United States because of the push factor from China, not the pull factor from Americans.

Could the Fed have raised interest rates to avert the bubble? The Fed's monetary policy was indeed too loose. But as Martin Wolf argues in his recent book, "Fixing Global Finance," it's not clear that higher interest rates could have prevented the trouble. Once China decides to export vast quantities of capital, that capital has to go somewhere. Higher interest rates in the United States might have encouraged the world's savers to park even more of their capital in this country.

So there is no getting around China's culpability. The country relies on the sort of export-focused growth strategy that other Asian Tigers have pursued, with the difference that China is too big to go this route without destabilizing the world economy. The real question is whether it is diplomatically fruitful to push China to change. The Bush administration tried and failed. Why would the new team fare better?

The wrong answer is to say that Barack Obama's guys will be tougher. However egregious China's currency policy may be, it's counterproductive to punish Beijing with sanctions. For one thing, a trade war is the last thing the world economy needs. For another, as Geithner explained, the immediate priority is to get global growth going, so it's more important to persuade China to extend its fiscal stimulus than to revalue its currency. Besides, reforming China's exchange-rate policy is not the only way to wean the country off its high-savings, high-export model. The savings rate partly reflects China's lack of social safety nets. If the Chinese spend some of their stimulus on pensions and health care, they will be heading in the right direction.

Still, there is an opportunity to nudge China toward currency reform, and the Obama team should take it. China's leaders are not fools: They can see the effects of their policy not only in collapsing Wall Street banks but also in their own collapsing exports. The bubble that China inflated has brought China's foreign customers to their knees. Because China pushed its export model too aggressively, its export markets have cratered.

To which I respond, what makes you think the Chinese want to "reform" their currency? They have used the yuan as a weapon here. An economic collapse of the US and Europe serves, in the view of the Chinese leadership, their long-term strategic interests.

Like I said, the Chinese are not our friends.

Vigilante justice

and law enforcement's apparent opinion thereon:

An Oak Ridge man was arrested Tuesday morning after he allegedly shot at a would-be thief's car outside the Jackson Square apartment building on Broadway. A short time later, the would-be thief was arrested for drugs and auto burglary.

Oak Ridge police arrested David Ray Phillips Jr., 22, 110 Broadway, shortly after midnight for reckless endangerment and going armed.

He allegedly fired a handgun at a car he saw leaving the apartment building parking lot, telling officers he thought he shot the car in the radiator. He had called the police department shortly after 3:30 a.m. and reported that someone was breaking into a pickup truck. The call was the second call Phillips had made, the first was a few minutes before midnight, when he also alerted police to an auto burglary. He told them at that time that he had a gun permit and an unloaded handgun.

In both cases, the would-be thief left the area in a vehicle, but in the second incident, Phillips identified the car as a Nissan Altima.

Paul David Fuller, 23, 123 Rockbridge Greens, was arrested about 5 a.m. when police stopped his Nissan Altima on North Illinois Avenue.

He was charged with auto burglary after Officer Victor Owen found evidence of the earlier auto burglary inside his car, said Capt. Rick Stone.

Other officers and a canine came to the scene, and Fuller was then charged with possession of Schedule II drugs and possession of drug paraphernalia.

Stone said Fuller was released at the scene on the misdemeanor drug charges but taken to jail on the auto burglary charge. He said he did not know what type of drugs the officers found because reports had not been completed.

Stone said two other men were passengers in the Altima but neither was charged.

Phillips is being held on $15,000 bond, and he has no history of arrests in Anderson County.

Fuller is being held on $10,000 bond, and has a history of domestic violence charges, resisting arrest and evading arrest. He has also been charged several times for violation of probation and failure to appear in court.

(Emphasis mine)

Short story long: MAN WHO TRIES TO STOP BURGLAR GIVEN HIGHER BAIL THAN BURGLAR.

With only the local newspaper account to go on, I can't form a final opinion of the case, but from this account it seems that local law enforcement in this Tennessee burg has some public service issues.

It would not surprise me if we see a lot more of this type of "self help" in the future. The perpetrators in crimes such as burglary and auto theft are rarely caught, let alone punished, and law enforcement doesn't seem to take too much of an interest in such crimes. For victims of such crimes as myself, the experience is frustrating and extremely disconcerting with the realization that you property is essentially at the mercy of thugs and you can do nothing about it, for if you do, you are at the mercy of an overzealous prosecutor as has apparently happened in this case.

Prosecutors and police need to understand the public frustration with the perception that we are at the mercy of criminals, because law enforcement is becoming increasingly ineffective. The problem is not people using excessive force to defend themselves and their hard-earned property from criminals; it is the criminals.

It is said that vigilante justice is no substitute for real justice, and that may be true.

But if the choice is between vigilante justice and no justice at all, as is usually the case with burglary and auto theft, most of the innocent public will take the vigilante justice and its deterrent effect.

Kinda makes one rethink their position on abortion, doesn't it?

From the Knoxville News Sentinel (via Instapundit):

Dismissed for 175 years as a fake, a letter threatening the assassination of President Andrew Jackson has been found to be authentic. And, says the director of the Andrew Jackson Papers Project at the University of Tennessee, the writer was none other than Junius Brutus Booth, father of Lincoln assassin John Wilkes Booth.

Putting the "Reich" in Robert Reich

Roger Kimball discusses the racism of Robert Reich:

I wonder whether Robert Riech, America’s 22nd Secretary of Labor and currently one of Obama’s top economic advisors, has read Animal Farm? On January 7, Mr. Reich testified on C-SPAN that throwing gobs of government (i.e., your) money at revamping the nation’s “infrastructure” was a good way to “stimulate” the economy. Let’s leave aside the question of whether he is right about that that and consider how he thinks the government’s (i.e., your) money ought to be spent. “I am concerned,” he said on C-SPAN, “. . . that these jobs not simply go to high skilled people who are already professional or to white male construction workers.”

Here’s little experiment thought: what if Mr. Reich had said “I am concerned that these jobs not go to black male construction workers”? What then?

In case you think Mr. Reich had misspoke in the heat of the moment, he returned to this theme on his blog the next day, when he favored readers with his plan to “Create Jobs Without Them All Going to Skilled Professionals and White Male Construction Workers.” How was he going to keep the government’s (i.e., your) money from getting into the hands of white males? Simple. Quotas for a start. “I’d suggest that all contracts entered into with stimulus funds require contractors to provide at least 20 percent of jobs to the long-term unemployed . . .” At least 20 percent, mes amis: a number that can always be adjusted if there are too many white male workers bustling about the place with jobs.

Mr. Reich’s outrageous plan elicited no comment, and certainly no criticism, from his master, “I won” Obama. It has been picked up here and there on the internet–as usual, Instapundit was there straight off the mark. But Mr. Reich’s comments–and the culture of coercive political correctness out of which they emerged–deserve much more public exposure and criticism than they have yet received.

Exposure? Criticism? Early signs suggest that the administration of Barack “I won” Obama will not be particularly receptive to either: “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done,” Obama lectured Republican lawmakers who had assembled to listen to–er, “discuss”–how Obama planned to spend all those billions of the government’s (i.e., your) money “stimulating” the economy, banks in Barney Frank’s back yard, and musuems devoted to organized crime in Las Vegas (so long, of course, as there are not too many “professionals” or white males involved in those enterprises).

Will people speak out while they still can?

Not our friends

A few less-than-pleasing intelligence nuggets:

Russia sells Iran its best air defense system:

Esmaeil Kosari, deputy head of the Iranian parliament’s foreign affairs and national security commission, recently announced that Russia had started supplying components for S-300 surface-to-air missile systems to Iran. The sophisticated S-300 missile defense system is capable of intercepting 100 ballistic missiles or aircraft at once within a range of over 90 miles at low and high altitudes. They are also effective against cruise missiles and, because of their range, a danger to non-combat aircraft such as AWACS planes, stand-by rescue planes, and other planes with protective missions.

Iran’s defense minister, Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar, also verified such delivery, adding that Tehran would elaborate on the missile defense system “when the occasion presents itself.”

The U.S. administration’s failure to serve notice to Russia after its delivery of the TOR M-1 air defense system earlier this year to Iran has emboldened Russia to disregard the international community’s will in stopping Iran from its pursuit of building a nuclear bomb. The mullahs who rule over Iran will soon have the means to protect their nuclear sites against any possible attacks by Israel or the United States. Revolutionary Guards personnel were sent to Russia to train on the S-300 system, so when the missile system was delivered to Iran, the Guards personnel were ready for its deployment.

Iran, which has defied the world and the UN Security Council with the continuation of its uranium-enrichment process, is also expanding its ballistic missile program, which currently is capable of targeting Tel Aviv, Riyadh, U.S. bases in Iraq, and the Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain. Now with these new air defense systems, Iranian leaders feel more protected in their pursuit of a nuclear bomb.

"The Chinese Plan for World Domination":

Chinese defense spending for this year is expected to be close to $60 billion. China spent $45 billion on defense in 2007 (for a force of two million troops), and over $50 billion in 2008. Even with the increase, the U.S. is still spending about ten times what China. American defense spending accounts for about half the world total.

Unlike Russia and the U.S., which try to maintain modern, high tech forces, across the board, about 80 percent of Chinese forces are pretty, well, cheap and low tech. That means aircraft, tanks and ships that are either old, or built using old technology. Still, that's a lot of guys with guns, plus several hundred thousand of them armed with the latest implements of destruction. Long term, China strives to build a huge, world class, industrial base, that will provide the tax income, and technology, that will make it the premier military power on the planet. In a century or less. The Chinese like to think long term, and believe history is on their side. As long as they are patient and persistent.

Random question

Is anyone else sick of thug Ray Lewis' mug being rammed down our
throats during NFL broadcasts?

Brillllllliant!!!

The idea of closing the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba is bad. The ideas for potential replacements are far worse:

The U.S. military has prepared a list of U.S. military bases that could be used to house as many as 250 detainees currently being held at the U.S. Naval base in Guantanamo Bay, military officials tell ABCNews.com.

The list — which includes Camp Pendleton in California, Fort Leavenworth in Kansas; the Marine Air Station in Miramar, California; and the U.S. Naval Consolidated Brig in South Carolina — has been circulated in a classified brief to members of Congress and was prepared by the Pentagon’s Joint Staff.

[...]


The preliminary list was based on cost, logistic, and security concerns, but the Department of Defense is expected to present a more comprehensive recommendation based on a variety of factors, according a military official.
Camp Pendleton was determined to be the least expensive option and officials say its vast 125,000 acre size would allow for a new prison to be built in an isolated and secure area.

Anybody see problems here? Here's a hint:


That, my friends, is the San Onofre nuclear power plant. In the background you can see a freeway, the 5, which pins the plant to the Pacific coastline. I'll let Ed Morrissey explain:

San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station isn’t just near Camp Pendleton. It’s surrounded by Camp Pendleton. (Not exactly; the west side of the plant borders the Pacific -- Ed.) The nuclear power plant would make an excellent target for terrorists looking to create a disaster in response to the detention of their comrades on the military base.

That’s not the only stupid notion in this plan. An interstate freeway runs all the way through Pendleton as well, Interstate 5, which goes from Mexico to Canada. If any of the terrorists manage to escape Gitmo, they have nothing but water for a destination. If they escape a detention facility in Pendleton, they would have access to the Eisenhower federal highway system.

Camp Pendleton is located in Oceanside, CA, in San Diego County's populous and rich northern areas. Wanna bet the residents of Carlsbad, Encinitas, San Marcos, Vista and Rancho Santa Fe will be on board with this? They don't like San Onofre as it is. Heck, they don't even like the little Encinas power plant in Carlsbad.

But Captain Ed has spotted only part of the problem. Another candidate listed is the Marine Corps Air Station Miramar (formerly the Navy's "Top Gun" flight school), also located in San Diego County in the University City area. San Diego civic leaders have always had their eye on Miramar as a potential replacement for San Diego's tiny Lindbergh Field international airport. And why not? Miramar has easy access to both the 5 and the 805, which means an easy escape for terrorists. University City is a reference to the nearby campus of the University of California-San Diego in La Jolla, where escaping terrorists could easily blend in with the international student base. Surrounded by University City, La Jolla, Rancho Bernardo, Scripps Ranch and other San Diego suburbs, Miramar is in a very populous area.

Any other bright ideas?

Don't panic; there will be plenty of time for that later.

Um, this isn't good:

Mexico is one of two countries that "bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse," according to a report by the U.S. Joint Forces Command on worldwide security threats.

The command's "Joint Operating Environment (JOE 2008)" report, which contains projections of global threats and potential next wars, puts Pakistan on the same level as Mexico. "In terms of worse-case scenarios for the Joint Force and indeed the world, two large and important states bear consideration for a rapid and sudden collapse: Pakistan and Mexico.

"The Mexican possibility may seem less likely, but the government, its politicians, police and judicial infrastructure are all under sustained assault and press by criminal gangs and drug cartels. How that internal conflict turns out over the next several years will have a major impact on the stability of the Mexican state. Any descent by Mexico into chaos would demand an American response based on the serious implications for homeland security alone."

The U.S. Joint Forces Command, based in Norfolk, Va., is one of the Defense Departments combat commands that includes members of the different military service branches, active and reserves, as well as civilian and contract employees. One of its key roles is to help transform the U.S. military's capabilities.

In the foreword, Marine Gen. J.N. Mattis, the USJFC commander, said "Predictions about the future are always risky ... Regardless, if we do not try to forecast the future, there is no doubt that we will be caught off guard as we strive to protect this experiment in democracy that we call America."

The report is one in a series focusing on Mexico's internal security problems, mostly stemming from drug violence and drug corruption. In recent weeks, the Department of Homeland Security and former U.S. drug czar Barry McCaffrey issued similar alerts about Mexico.

Ed Morrissey gives his take:

Why the concern? Mexico’s security forces have deteriorated sharply, and corruption has created conflicting loyalties within them. Drug cartels have perverted the state organs of law enforcement and security, turning them into mercenaries and worse. Earlier this week, Mexico’s government sent 2,000 troops into Juarez to quell a rising war on the streets that has already killed 35 people — since the beginning of the year. That’s a murder every eight hours since New Years Day. Even Mexico’s federal government can’t trust the local police.

How would the US protect itself from a warlord-ridden Mexico? We’d have to give serious consideration to arming the southern border to a far larger extent than any time in our history. Cross-border cooperation on drug smuggling would come to a halt, as we might find ourselves in a situation shown in the movie Traffic in which we wind up unwittingly allying with one cartel over another in the guise of official governmental contacts. And that’s not even mentioning the opportunities for terrorist groups to exploit lawless regions for their own purposes, right on our doorstep instead of half a world away.

In fact, a failed Mexico would quickly become our primary national-security concern. Immigration issues would become secondary, at best.

The signs of this have been revealing themselves for some time -- incursions into US territory by Mexican troops to cover drug shipments, street wars in Tijuana, arrests for high-ranking law enforcement officials in Mexico -- and continue to do so with increasing frequency.

Are we ready? Yeah, right ...

Ancient WMD

Anyone wondering what happened to Saddam hussein's WMD might want to ask the Sassanid Persians:

A researcher from the University of Leicester has identified what looks to be the oldest archaeological evidence for chemical warfare - from Roman times.

At the meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America, University of Leicester archaeologist Simon James presented CSI-style arguments that about twenty Roman soldiers, found in a siege-mine at the city of Dura-Europos, Syria, met their deaths not as a result of sword or spear, but through asphyxiation.

Dura-Europos on the Euphrates was conquered by the Romans who installed a large garrison. Around AD 256, the city was subjected to a ferocious siege by an army from the powerful new Sasanian Persian empire. The dramatic story is told entirely from archaeological remains; no ancient text describes it. Excavations during the 1920s-30s, renewed in recent years, have resulted in spectacular and gruesome discoveries.

The Sasanians used the full range of ancient siege techniques to break into the city, including mining operations to breach the walls. Roman defenders responded with 'counter-mines' to thwart the attackers. In one of these narrow, low galleries, a pile of bodies, representing about twenty Roman soldiers still with their arms, was found in the 1930s. While also conducting new fieldwork at the site, James has recently reappraised this coldest of cold-case 'crime scenes', in an attempt to understand exactly how these Romans died, and came to be lying where they were found.

Dr James, Reader in the School of Archaeology and Ancient History at the University of Leicester, said: "It is evident that, when mine and countermine met, the Romans lost the ensuing struggle. Careful analysis of the disposition of the corpses shows they had been stacked at the mouth of the countermine by the Persians, using their victims to create a wall of bodies and shields, keeping Roman counterattack at bay while they set fire to the countermine, collapsing it, allowing the Persians to resume sapping the walls. This explains why the bodies were where they were found. But how did they die? For the Persians to kill twenty men in a space less than 2m high or wide, and about 11m long, required superhuman combat powers - or something more insidious."

Finds from the Roman tunnel revealed that the Persians used bitumen and sulphur crystals to get it burning. These provided the vital clue. When ignited, such materials give off dense clouds of choking gases. "The Persians will have heard the Romans tunnelling," says James, "and prepared a nasty surprise for them. I think the Sasanians placed braziers and bellows in their gallery, and when the Romans broke through, added the chemicals and pumped choking clouds into the Roman tunnel. The Roman assault party were unconscious in seconds, dead in minutes. Use of such smoke generators in siege-mines is actually mentioned in classical texts, and it is clear from the archaeological evidence at Dura that the Sasanian Persians were as knowledgeable in siege warfare as the Romans; they surely knew of this grim tactic."

It is a common misconception that chemical and biological warfare is a relatively recent phenomenon, dating back at most 250 years, but mostly to the last century.

The truth is that the use of chemical and biological agents in warfare is as old as warfare itself. Greek mythology, for instance, gives us the legend of Hercules (Herakles) and the Hydra, whose venom was used for poison-tipped arrows. The Scythians were famous for their devastating use of poison arrows, with their specially developed poison known as scythikon. The most famous chemical weapon from the ancient period is, of course, napalm-like substance known as "Greek Fire," used by the Eastern Romans.

A great book for discussion of these ancient WMD is Greek Fire, Poison Arrows, and Scorpion Bombs: Biological & Chemical Warfare in the Ancient World by Adrienne Mayor.

Random thought

Is there any bigger indictment of ESPN than its forcing the odious,
obnoxious and worthless Tony Kornheiser down our throats?

Is Yellowstone about to pull a Vesuvius?

Apparently, a recent increase in earthquake activity at Yellowstone National Park is renewing concerns about the supervolcano in which the park sits:

Hundreds of earthquakes have hit Yellowstone National Park, raising fears of a more powerful volcanic eruption.

The earthquake swarm, the biggest in more than 20 years, is being closely monitored by scientists and emergency authorities.

The series of small quakes included three last Friday which measured stronger than magnitude 3.0. The strongest since this latest swarm of quakes began on December 27 was 3.9.

No damage has yet been reported but scientists say this level of activity - there have been more than 500 tremors in the last week - is highly unusual.

"The earthquake sequence is the most intense in this area for some years," said the Yellowstone Volcano Observatory. Some of the larger earthquakes have been felt by park employees and guests, according to the observatory.

The swarm is occurring beneath the northern part of Yellowstone Lake in the park. Yellowstone sits on the caldera of an ancient supervolcano and continuing geothermal activity can be seen in the picturesque geysers and steam holes, such as Old Faithful.

About 1,000 to 2,000 tremors a year have been recorded since 2004. The most devastating earthquake in recent history in the Yellowstone region occurred on August 17, 1959, when a magnitude 7.1 earthquake hit.

It was centered near Hebgen Lake, Montana and it caused landslides that killed 28 people and caused more than $11 million in damage.

Geysers in Yellowstone National park changed eruption times, and new ones began to erupt. On June 30, 1975, a magnitude 6.4 tremor hit the park.

Professor Robert B. Smith, a geophysicist at the University of Utah and one of the leading experts on earthquake and volcanic activity at Yellowstone, said that the swarm was significant.

"It's not business as usual," he said. "This is a large earthquake swarm, and we've recorded several hundred. We are paying careful attention. This is an important sequence."

The last full-scale explosion of the Yellowstone Supervolcano, the Lava Creek eruption which happened approximately 640,000 years ago, ejected about 240 cubic miles of rock and dust into the sky.

Geologists have been closely monitoring the rise and fall of the Yellowstone Plateau as an indication of changes in magma chamber pressure.

The Yellowstone caldera floor has risen recently - almost 3in per year for the past three years - a rate more than three times greater than ever observed since such measurements began in 1923.

Hugh Hewitt, who calls Yellowstone "An Inconvenient National Park," has a roundup, including a handy-dandy map. I like maps.

In the meantime, in order to help prepare everyone for Yellowstone to go Krakatoa on us, I present to you this handy-dandy video showing what you should do in the event of a volcanic eruption:

Cawfee Tawlk

Talk amongst yourselves. I'll give you a topic.

Hamas fires 7,000 rockets into the air over Israel and we call it
"terrorism."

People here fire 7,000 rockets into the air over a midsummer holiday
and we call it "the 4th of July."

Discuss.

And if you think my point is that we shouldn't allow the consumer sale
of fireworks, you're right. We shouldn't.

Wishful thinking

Stop me if you've heard this one before:

After years of refusing to see Iran’s aggressive intentions, most sensible observers of things Middle Eastern now recognize that the most important terrorist organizations, from Islamic Jihad to Hezbollah and Hamas, are essentially Iranian proxies. Figaro this weekend carries a story bluntly headlined “Iran Behind Hamas’ Grad Missiles,” and flatly states that Hamas military commanders have been trained in Iran and Syria to use the deadliest missiles in their inventory. The battle of Gaza is therefore the second between Israel and Iran in two and half years, the first being the 2006 conflict with Hezbollah (which, lest we forget, was kicked off when Hamas kidnaped three Israeli soldiers).

It follows that Iran could well lose this battle, and defeat is very dangerous to a regime like Tehran’s, which claims divine sanction for its actions and proclaims the imminent arrival of its messiah and of the triumph of global jihad. If Allah is responsible for victory, what can be said about humiliating defeat? The mullahs are well aware of the stakes, as we can see in their recent behavior.

For some time now, the regime in Tehran has shown signs of urgency, sometimes verging on panic. Of late, the mullahs have organized raucus demonstrations in front of numerous embassies, including those of Egypt (with chants of “Death to Mubarak”), Jordan, Turkey, Great Britain, Germany and today (imagine!) France. These demonstrations were not mere gestures; the regime’s seriousness was underlined on Sunday, the 4th, when it offered a million-dollar reward to anyone who killed Mubarak (the Iranians called it a “revolutionary execution”). Significantly, the announcement came at a rally of the Basij, the most radical security force in the country, at which the Revolutionary Guards official Forooz Rejaii spoke. The Egyptians take it seriously; they have been on alert of late, looking for the possibility of a Mumbai-type operation in Cairo or elsewhere.

At the same time, the regime intensified its murderous assault against its own people, most notably hanging nine people on Christmas Eve, and assaulting the headquarters of Nobel Prize Winner Shirin Ebadi.

This intense tempo of activity bespeaks alarm in Tehran, which is fully justified by a number of setbacks. First of all, the dramatic drop in oil prices is devastating to the mullahs, who had planned to be able to fund terrorist proxies throughout the Middle East, Europe and the Americas. Suddenly their bottom line is tinged with red, and this carries over onto their domestic balance sheets, which were already demonstrably shaky (they were forced to cancel proposed new taxes when the merchant class staged nation-wide protests). No wonder they seize on any international event to call for petroleum export reductions. Just today they called for a drastic reduction of oil shipments to all countries that supported the Israeli military incursion into Gaza.

No doubt, the Iranians believe the fall in oil prices is the result of satanic will, rather than the shock to demand produced by the runup to $140/barrel. Not for them the subtleties of the free market; given the way they view the world, they must be convinced that the same strategy that beggared the Soviet Union–Saudi cooperation with America to hold down prices–is now deployed against them. This belief was no doubt reinforced when the recent official cut in petroleum production did not lead to markedly higher prices.

Second, their terror strategy has not been working as well as they wished and expected. Most American and European analysts have not appreciated the effect of the defeat of al Qaeda, Hezbollah and the Revolutionary Guards in Iraq, but you can be sure that the high and mighty in Arab capitals have taken full notice. The Iranians not only lost a considerable number of skilled and experienced terror leaders–Imad Mughnieh, the long-time operational chieftain of Hezbollah is the most important, and Abu Musab al Zarqawi was close behind, having created al Qaeda in Iraq alongside a network throughout Europe–but also several of their own Revolutionary Guards officers. Some of these were captured, others have defected, and most all have provided details of the Iranian network. This sort of thing is bad for operations, bad for recruiting, and weakens the Iranians’ efforts to bully their neighbors into appeasement or more active cooperation.

Third, despite all their efforts to crush any sign of internal rebellion, many Iranians continue to publicly oppose the mullahs. A few weeks ago, students at universities all over the country demonstrated in significant numbers, and as one Iranian now living in Europe put it to me, “they were surprised that the regime was unable to stop the protests, even though everyone knew they were planned.” This is the background for the new wave of repression, accompanied by an intensification of jamming on the Internet, and an ongoing reshuffle of the instruments of repression; Khamanei and Ahmadinejad have no confidence in the efficacy or blind loyalty of the army or of large segments of the Revolutionary Guards. Most public actions are carried out by the Basij, who are judged more reliable, and repression is less in the hands of the traditional ministries than in new groups freshly minted in the Supreme Leader’s office.

In short, we are dealing with a regime that is very concerned about its future, and is not very comfortable with its friends, allies, and proxies. The mullahs know that most Iranians would like to see their leaders treated the same way as the nine executed on Christmas Eve, and, like all tyrants, the Iranian despots are trying to demonstrate that they dominate both Iran and the region.

You know, I want to believe Michael Ledeen here. Really, I do. But I've been hearing this for, what, five years? Ten years, now? I sure haven't seen any tangible weakening of the Iranian mullahcracy or even a noticeable change in their behavior.

Kind of like our China policy, about which more later, this seems to be a whole lot of nothing.

Dumb question

Is there anyone who actually likes Dick Vitale?

My official statement

on my team: America's team -- the San Diego Chargers wrecking the season of the evil Colts. Again.



HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!

Oh, let's do some audio, too:



I screamed so loudly when Darren Sproles hit the east end zone my ears were ringing.

When my Chargers win, America wins.


America's Team -- the San Diego Chargers.