U.S. judge allows terror lawsuits against Arab Bank to proceed

At a time when the All-Hat-And-No-Cattleness of various important figures in the Bush Administration is being amply confirmed, the day after Karen Hughes, who shows up at a convention of Muslims to express her delight and enthusaism for their "denunciation" of "terrorism" (which of course has no connection to any passages in Qur'an, any stories in the Hadith, any activities by Muhammad as retold in the Sira -- no, striking terror in the Unbelievers is an idea that comes out of nowhere, summoned from the ether by madmen, who make other madmen believe it), and to offer a sincere handshake to a hijabbed Ingrid Mattson, a convert to Islam (and voluntarily converting to Islam is a far more disturbing way of becoming a Muslim than simply being born into it, where one has had no choice, and given it no thought), at this time, we must thank god for the tort bar, and lawyers, and what can only be called the privatization of the war of self-defense against the Jihad.

Yes, privatization. Our governments let us down. Our leaders, with their meetings, and their hand-shakes, and their platitudes, and their promises of stern resolve, and all those photographs that are all over official Washington of various officials being official, shaking hands with each other, giving speeches full of platitutes, offering their stern resolve to do this and do that -- our leaders, too lazy to study or ponder Islam, too timid and unimaginative to figure out the hundred sundry ways they could be weakening, dividing, demoralizing the menace that threats, too fearful of calling into question a belief-system if it has been called a "religion" (salaam-salaam), too fearful of course of getting out in front of any of the others in our ruling and running and honorarium-pocketing leaders, rulers, consultants, tutti quanti.

It should not have to be privatized. It should be part of the responsibility of rule. There should be a better class, a more intelligent class, a more learned class, of people in the government, in the security services, in the armed forces, everywhere, capable of breaking through with the truth. But there isn't.

So privatize, privatize, privatize -- until such time as the government, or someone in that government, or enough of those someones, placed highly enough so they have lost their timidity, begin to speak home truths.

And Karen Hughes, the "other" political advisor, aside from Grover Norquist's good friend Karl Rove (and who remains, apparently, the good friend of Norquist, a Muslim revert, and promoter-of-fellow-Muslims to high places), can then shake hands with the Ingrid-Mattsons of this world all she wants -- but on her own time, and without our having to endure or pay for or applaud it.

The meeting: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-050902hughes,1,6189013.story?coll=chi-news-hed

"Words are important," Hughes said. "It's important for people to hear ... terrorism is the epitome of injustice ... especially when we face an enemy that misappropriates words. Those are words the entire world needs to hear. My job is to amplify those voices."

Kareem Irfan, a Chicago attorney who serves on the society's national board, said he hopes the measure will cast out "inklings of doubt from segments of society" who do not understand that Islam is a religion of peace.

"This has not been taken for political correctness," he said. "This has not been taken to be apologetic. This was done because of a passionate belief."

But some Muslim participants said they were not impressed by the initiative or by Hughes' pledge to promote their cause to other nations. They called for straight talk instead of propaganda. By endorsing the fatwa and inviting Hughes, they said, the society is doing a disservice to the fight for civil liberties and colluding with the government.

"It will separate the Muslims," said Warith Deen Umar, a controversial New York cleric who helped found the National Association of Muslim Chaplains and who opposes the fatwa. "If we don't sign on to this, we are the bad guys."

Looks like the Muslims are learning the hard way that playing against the American people in the courtroom is a dumb idea. Nobody files lawsuits like we do.......We're the masters of this game.

Hugh, do you really think that you will get moral leadership from private industry?

I am reminded of a taped conversation among some big business reps during the California energy crisis who were gleefully anticipating the profits to be wrung from "grandma".

That's like hiring a fox to guard the henhouse.

Rand Corp: Green River Formation of CO, UT, & WY Contains Triple The Saudi Proven Oil Reserves

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1476429/posts

Please note the water issue. The Rand Corporation report raises the concerns of salts and toxics leaching into the Colorado river, one of the largest sources of water for the intermountain west. Not to mention other large scale environmental impacts....I would not view this as a panacea.

OIL SHALE

If a technology can be developed to economically recover oil from oil shale, the potential is tantalisingly enormous. If the containing organic material could be converted to oil, the quantities would be far beyond all known conventional oil reserves. Oil shale in great quantities exists worldwide: including in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Estonia, France, Russia, Scotland, South Africa, Spain, Sweden and the USA.

The term "oil shale" is a misnomer. It does not contain oil nor is it commonly shale. The organic material is chiefly kerogen, and the "shale" is usually a relatively hard rock, called marl. Properly processed, kerogen can be converted into a substance somewhat similar to petroleum. However, it has not gone through the "oil window" of heat (nature’s way of producing oil) and therefore, to be changed into an oil-like substance, it must be heated to a high temperature. By this process the organic material is converted into a liquid, which must be further processed to produce an oil which is said to be better than the lowest grade of oil produced from conventional oil deposits, but of lower quality than the upper grades of conventional oil.

There are two conventional approaches to oil shale processing. In one, the shale is fractured in-situ and heated to obtain gases and liquids by wells. The second is by mining, transporting, and heating the shale to about 450oC, adding hydrogen to the resulting product, and disposing of and stabilising the waste. Both processes use considerable water. The total energy and water requirements together with environmental and monetary costs (to produce shale oil in significant quantities) have so far made production uneconomic. During and following the oil crisis of the 1970’s, major oil companies, working on some of the richest oil shale deposits in the world in western United States, spent several billion dollars in various unsuccessful attempts to commercially extract shale oil.

Oil shale has been burned directly as a very low grade, high ash-content fuel in a few countries such as Estonia, whose energy economy remains dominated by shale. Minor quantities of oil have been obtained from oil shale in several countries at times over many years.

With increasing numbers of countries experiencing declines in conventional oil production, shale oil production may again be pursued. One project is now being undertaken in north-eastern Australia, but it seems unlikely that shale oil recovery operations can be expanded to the point where they could make a major contribution toward replacing the daily consumption of 73 million barrels of oil worldwide.

Perhaps oil shale will eventually find a place in the world economy, but the energy demands of blasting, transport, crushing, heating and adding hydrogen, together with the safe disposal of huge quantities of waste material, are large. On a small scale, and with good geological and other favourable conditions, such as water supply, oil shale may make a modest contribution but so far shale oil remains the "elusive energy".

Huzzah.

Make it financially painful for these buggers to play.

Saudi money you say ? Our petrodollars you say ? Pity.

As for Karen Hughes playing stinkfinger with the shills for the religion of peace, you'd think the smell would blow their cover.

I have to agree with the comments above regarding Oil Shale. What we need is a complete top to bottom energy independence program. I don't know if the political will is there, but the war in Iraq and recent events with some of our energy infrastructure in the Gulf Coast may change some minds. A comprehensive plan has already been developed, the book is readable in the pdf below.

http://oilendgame.com/pdfs/WtOEg_72dpi.pdf

The day we are not dependent on foreign oil is the day many monarchies in the middle east will face an angry public and slow but sure economic ruin ... that's when the buzzards will come home to roost.

"Hugh, do you really think that you will get moral leadership from private industry?"
-- from a posting above

You misunderstand my use of the word "privatize." It was a half-joke, meant to express my belief that the current administration, and that any administration to follow, will simply lack the wit and bravery to come close to saying what needs to be said, to realizing that it is Islam itself, what it teaches and preaches and screeches, that explains not merely Muslim terrorism -- terrorism of, by, and for Muslims, in order to "strike terror" into the Unbelievers (that's us), but also the employment of other instruments of Jihad (money, propaganda, Da'wa, and of course demographic conquest of Infidel lands) in order to spread Islam until it does not merely cover the globe, but Islam and Muslims dominate everywhere.

This government, and members of both parties (wi th the glorious exception of a few, such as Congressman Tancredo, a former history teacher who has a mind, and is apparently willing to use it), show few signs of understanding it -- well, when everyone is used to "taking a leadership role" and no one wishes to "be a leader," or even knows what that might mean, what can one expect? When our "taking-a-leadership-role" leaders are so busy glad=handing it, meeting with an army of advisors, going from Important Meeting to Important Meeting, who has time to read, and think, and figure out what Islam is all about, what those canonical texts say, what has been there effect on Muslims, as expressed or reflected in the history of Muslim conquest, over 1350 years, from Arabia to Spain in the west, all the way to the East Indian archipelago.

So when I use the word "privatize" I am referring not to corporations, but to private citizens, people who have recognized that they must learn about Islam, must encourage others to learn about it, must relentlessly distribute the fruits of that learning as best they can, and must do what in World War II and in all previous wars was done by the government -- produce the kind of information that makes the populace aware of what the enemy is like, and the answer to that question that in 1942 and 1943 was posed at campus meetings all over America -- Why We Fight. But government officials now are so busy meeting with Muslims, asking for their aid and their indulgence and their cooperation, and helping to mislead their own Infidel population, that one sees, every day with greater clarity, the need to "privatize" until such time as more people in the government -- perhaps beginning with young officers who have served in Iraq, have seen what Islam or a society made up of Muslims is like, and now wish to engage in more scholarly study of Islam to see how the theory and practice are connected. It is they, possibly, who will -- as they rise in the ranks, and gain power and influence -- help to save us. And so will some in the security services, who unlike the Michael Scheuers of this world, are not simpletons, and do not have their understanding clouded by that disturbing pathology, antisemitism, whose carriers, at this point, should be seen for what they were in the late 1930s and during the war -- obvious security risks.

"Privatize" was meant to point out that the dereliction of duty, the failure to fulfill the duty to instruct, the failure to articulate the real problem, puts the burden on citizens, and especially on those who have an inkling and a clue. Those who visit www.jihadwathc.org, www.secularislam.org, www.faithfreedom.org, www.co-jet.org, www.dhimmitude.org, and a hundred others, are those people, with that inkling, and more than a clue.

Hugh-

Thanks for clarifying.

Ben Franklin said "A Republic, if you can keep it".

I for one want to keep it, so guess I better get busy.

Hugh, your use of the word "privatization" may have been half-joke, but the other half is the accurate description, as you further point out, of private policy made for the public good.

I have great admiration for the legal eagles that took this case on and pressed it forward. That kind of litigation is exceptionally difficult and full of uncertainty because of the political aspects of every thrust and parry.

There were some suits brought against Iran due to the kidnaping of our embassy personnel in 1979. My memory is hazy, but I believe that the suits were pre-empted by some legislation (or, more likely, a treaty) that removed the right to recover, or removed the Iranian assets from the threat of attachment in civil litigation. In any event, the hostages were denied their relief. After 9-11, there was some relief legislation to pay indemnities to the families of the killed and injured. I believe the legislation required the abandonment of individual claims in order to collect from the pool. Something like that could happen again, and at any time.

It is important to realize that a TREATY trumps just about everything else, including constitutional claims. These bilateral or multilateral agreements cannot be undone as easily as ordinary legislation, and they are not subject to usual judicial review. So we have to be particularly alert to any talk of "peace initiatives" that could lead to a treaty or similar agreement (signed by the president and confirmed by the senate) with any of these enemies and their fronts (i.e., Palestine).

"It is important to realize that a TREATY trumps just about everything else, including constitutional claims."
-- from a posting above

Those damned migratory birds. That Oliver Wendell Holmes.