► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Archive for the ‘Europe’ Category

Actually, this is a boring post.

by 1389AD ( 102 Comments › )
Filed under Russia, Technology at May 12th, 2014 - 10:00 pm

The deepest hole in the world, and what we’ve learned from it

Published on May 5, 2014 by SciShow
SciShow takes you down the deepest hole in the world — Russia’s Kola Superdeep Borehole — explaining who dug it and why, and what we learned about Earth in the process. Don’t fall!
———-
Like SciShow? Want to help support us, and also get things to put on your walls, cover your torso and hold your liquids? Check out our awesome products over at DFTBA Records: http://dftba.com/artist/52/SciShow

Or help support us by subscribing to our page on Subbable: https://subbable.com/scishow
———-
Looking for SciShow elsewhere on the internet?
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/scishow
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/scishow
Tumblr: http://scishow.tumblr.com

Thanks Tank Tumblr: http://thankstank.tumblr.com

Sources:
http://www.atlasobscura.com/places/kola-superdeep-borehole
http://www2.gi.alaska.edu/ScienceForum/ASF7/725.html
http://www.damninteresting.com/the-deepest-hole/
http://www.wirelinedrilling.com/sites/default/files/Kozlovsky%20Kola%20Deepest%20Well%20.pdf
http://www.csmonitor.com/1985/0822/drock.html
http://www.nytimes.com/1981/09/29/science/russians-plan-dramatic-expansion-of-effort-in-earth-drilling.html

Location of Kola well and other deep bores
Location of Kola well and other Soviet deep bore project sites

British Jews vote Tory because they are rich, according to “Red” Ken Livingstone

by Speranza ( 12 Comments › )
Filed under Anti-semitism, Headlines, Judaism, UK at May 8th, 2014 - 8:42 pm

Red Ken Livingstone is an appalling person but then again Britain is loaded with people who think just as he does.

by Christopher Hope

British Jews have switched their support from Labour to Conservative because they have got richer, according to a Labour politician.

Ken Livingstone, a former Labour MP and Mayor of London, said that income rather than skin colour was the reason why people voted for different political parties

Speaking on the BBC’s Newsnight programme on Tuesday night, he said: “People vote according to their income. Now that can change – it might be a generation before people catch up.

“If we were talking 50 years ago, the Roman Catholic community, the Irish community in Britain, the Jewish community was solidly Labour. Still the Irish Catholic community is pretty still solidly Labour because it is not terribly rich.

“As the Jewish community got richer, it moved over to voting for Mrs Thatcher as they did in Finchley.”

Mr Livingstone was discussing how politicians can do more to appeal to the growing proportion of Britons who have an ethnic minority background.

He said: “People come to Britain to become part of Britain, they don’t come to change it. I think the defining issue is not your colour or your religition it is your level of income.”

Referring to Sajid Javid, who was recently made Culture secretary, he continued: “David Cameron has just appointed the first British person of Pakistani origin – I look at him and I don’t see a Pakistani, I see a banker who earned £3million a year. That is why he is in the Tory party.”

The comments were dismissed by Adrian Cohen, chairman of the London Jewish forum.

Mr Cohen said: “Ken Livingstone last made comments to this effect during the Mayoral election. It’s pretty obvious that politicians shouldn’t write off parts of the electorate based on crude assumptions about their perceived relative affluence.

“Many Jews are not rich, indeed many struggle to make ends meet. In any event there are many factors which influence how a person chooses to vote and one shouldn’t refer to Jewish Londoners as if they were homogeneous.”

Life under the Obama doctrine

by Speranza ( 115 Comments › )
Filed under Al Qaeda, Barack Obama, China, Iran, Israel, Japan, Libya, Libya, Russia, South Korea, Syria, Ukraine at May 6th, 2014 - 7:00 am

It seems as if Obama is an even worse foreign policy president than he is on domestic issues. Our friends and allies need to wait him out.

by Caroline Glick

For most commentators, President Barack Obama’s biggest achievement in his four-nation tour of Asia was the enhanced defense treaty he signed with Philippine President Benigno Aquino. The pact permits US forces to operate on Philippine military bases and sets the conditions for joint training of US and Philippine forces, among other things.

There are two problems with the treaty, however.

And they reflect the basic problem with US foreign policy generally, five-and-a-half years into the Obama presidency.

First, there is the reason that the treaty became necessary.

The Philippines has been under attack by China since 2012 when China seized the Scarborough Shoal from the Philippines. Despite its mutual defense treaty with Manila, Washington did nothing.

This non-response emboldened China still further.

And today China is threatening the Second Thomas Shoal, another Philippine possession.

So, too, late last year China extended its Air Defense Identification Zone to include Japanese and South Korean airspace. The US responded to the aggressive move by recommending that its allies comply with China’s dictates.

The administration’s top priority in all these cases, as well as in the case of Beijing’s challenge to Japan’s control over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea, has been to avoid conflicts with China.

But American timidity and refusal to abide by US treaty obligations to the Philippines and Japan have had the opposite effect.

By not responding to Chinese aggression, far from moderating China’s behavior, the Obama administration emboldened it. And in so doing, it destroyed the US’s deterrent posture in Asia. As China’s increasingly belligerent behavior has made clear, Obama’s attempt to appease China was perceived in Beijing as a green light for further aggression, because the Chinese correctly determined that Obama would never make them pay a price for seizing territory and otherwise harming America’s Asian allies.

Under these circumstances, Obama had no choice but to sign an enhanced defense treaty with the Philippines.

Far from calming the situation, though, the treaty increases the chance of war between China and its neighbors. No one, least of all China’s leadership, is fooled by Obama’s whiny insistence that the defense pact isn’t directed against China. And now China, already itching for more confrontations, will feel compelled to respond strongly.

This brings us to the second problem with the Obama administration’s new assertiveness in Asia. It simply isn’t credible.

[........]

We already know Obama lacks the will to confront China. And his decision to downsize the US military ensures the US will lack good options for confronting it in the coming years.

During his joint press conference in Manila on Monday with Aquino, Ed Henry from Fox News asked Obama to explain his foreign policy doctrine.

“What do you think the Obama Doctrine is in terms of what your guiding principle is on all of these crises and how you answer those critics who say they think the doctrine is weakness.”

Obama responded with his signature peevishness.

Before launching into a 900-word assault on a series of straw men to whom he attributed positions that at best distorted and at worst willfully misrepresented the positions of his critics, Obama muttered, “Well, Ed, I doubt that I’m going to have time to lay out my entire foreign policy doctrine.”

One thing that Obama did have the time do was signal to the Philippines that the US is no longer a reliable ally. After touting the new defense pact in one sentence, Obama proceeded to explain in the next that his administration cannot be expected to honor any commitment to defend the Philippines militarily.

Obama’s bloviations demonstrated why Henry’s question was so important.

For five-and-a-half years, Obama has not given a straightforward presentation of his foreign policy.

Instead, he has tailored his foreign policy statements to what he thinks the public wishes to hear.

So for instance, in responding to Henry, Obama sounded an isolationist note, attacking imaginary critics for their automatic rush to arms in all circumstances.

Beyond being a gross mischaracterization of his critics, Obama’s remarks ignored the inconvenient fact that he sent US forces on a NATO mission to overthrow the regime of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya without congressional authorization.

No Republicans forced his hand. Since 2004, Gaddafi had posed no threat to US interests.

And in the aftermath of Obama’s unauthorized war in Libya, the US ambassador to Libya and three other Americans were killed in Benghazi.

Al-Qaida and other jihadist groups that benefited from NATO’s operation have taken over large swathes of the country and sunk it into ungovernable chaos.  [........]

Although Obama’s 900-word rant obscured rather than explained his foreign policy doctrine, the Obama Doctrine is easily understood from his actual policies – including his military adventure in Libya.

If Ronald Reagan’s foreign policy doctrine was “Peace through strength,” Obama’s doctrine can be summed up in two sentences: “Speak loudly and carry no stick.” And “Be good to your enemies and bad to your allies.”

The defense treaty with the Philippines, like Obama’s bluster in Ukraine and Syria, is a sterling example of the first part of his doctrine.

And Obama’s obsequious policies toward China, Russia and Iran on the one hand, and his coldness toward Japan, South Korea, Poland, the Czech Republic, Ukraine and Israel on the other hand demonstrate the validity of the second part of his doctrine.

The reason that Obama has not shared his own doctrine with the American people is not because he can’t explain it in the course of one speech. It is because he knows that they won’t accept it.

For their part, the American people seem to have him figured out. According to a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll published on Wednesday, Obama’s approval rating for his handling of foreign policy is at an all-time low. Only 38 percent of Americans approve of his handling of foreign policy and 53% disapprove.

The same poll gave respondents two foreign policy doctrines and asked them to choose the one they preferred.

The first was, “We need a president who will present an image of America that has a more open approach and is willing to negotiate with friend and foe alike.”

The second was, “We need a president who will present an image of strength that shows America’s willingness to confront our enemies and stand up for our principles.”

Thirty-nine percent preferred the first policy course and 55% the second one. These numbers are nearly identical to the approval numbers for Obama’s foreign policy.

[......]

For America’s allies this reality requires them to carve out their own courses the best they can.

In Israel’s case, this involves first and foremost taking a less idealistic and more mercenary view of the world. This means not shrinking away from opportunities with the likes of Russia and China when they arise. And certainly it means not automatically siding with the Obama administration against them.

The Obama administration is reportedly angry with Israel for refusing to join America in scolding Russia for its aggression in Ukraine. But it is far from clear that the Obama White House offers Jerusalem a better option. To date, Obama has repaid Israel for its willingness to toe his line by undermining its core interests, publicly attacking it and seeking to subvert the elected government.

Israel has no interest in getting on Russia’s bad side in order to placate the Obama administration.

Nor is there any reason for Israel to obey the Obama administration’s demands for belligerent rhetoric when the next step of the Obama White House would doubtless be to turn around and castigate the “Israel lobby” for allegedly pushing the US toward war.

The same goes for China. There is no reason for Israel to jump into conflict with the growing Asian power. While Secretary of State John Kerry is egging on the Europeans to expand their trade war against Israel, China is assiduously expanding its trade with Israel. According to the Economy Ministry, next year Asia will surpass the US as Israel’s largest trading partner.

Then, of course, there is Iran. Out of loyalty and basic trust in the US’s strategic sanity, for the past decade, Israel has been willing to play second fiddle to the US in contending with Iran’s illicit nuclear weapons program.  [.......]

Since his first days in office, Obama has signaled clearly through his deeds that he had absolutely no interest in blocking Iran’s nuclear progress. On the contrary, Obama’s policies in the Middle East have consistently involved strengthening and legitimizing the Iranian regime and the Muslim Brotherhood at the expense of Israel and the less radical Sunni Arab states.

Out of habit, and in the hopes that something would change, Israel pretended away this reality and continued to follow Washington’s lead, limiting its goals to covert operations against Iran – that Obama leaked to the media – and lobbying Congress for sanctions that never had any chance of blocking Iran’s race to the nuclear finishing line.

[.......]

And so Israel must ignore it. Every day that Israel does not set back Iran’s nuclear progress brings Israel closer to being the subject of nuclear blackmail, Iranian-backed terrorism, and even nuclear Armageddon.

Obama may hide his doctrine behind petulance, populist canards and straw men, but it is clear enough. And that means that as far as Israel is concerned, its goal of securing its survival and prosperity for at least the next two-and-a-half years requires Jerusalem to act on its own and in the face of White House opposition.

It isn’t pleasant to defy the American president.

It isn’t easy. But in light of the Obama Doctrine, defying the White House is required to preserve the freedom of the Jewish people.

Read the rest - Life under the Obama doctrine

Obama angry over lack of Israeli support on Ukraine

by Speranza ( 2 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Chechnya, Headlines, Iran, Israel, Joe Biden, John Kerry, Russia, Ukraine at April 28th, 2014 - 7:13 pm

Israel should keep out of it!

by Daniel Greenfield

The source of the article is Haaretz, a left-wing paper in Israel that tries to play up “crises” with the US in order to undermine Netanyahu.

So its credibility in this case is weak.

Still Israel is probably not too enthusiastic about jumping in on the conflict, considering that Kerry just blamed Israel for the collapse of peace talk, the history of the Holocaust and its general lack of escalating foreign geopolitical conflicts. Or to put it another way, Israel isn’t a world power and isn’t trying to be one.

In this respect, the present dilemma is reminiscent of the last, at the end of the 1990s, when Washington naturally expected support from client states like Israel for its anti-Serbian Balkans policy – and found the Israeli foreign minister, Ariel Sharon, much less than enthusiastic. This happened despite Prime Minister Netanyahu’s repeated urgings that Israel broadcast its support for its patron.

Considering that Clinton was working to overthrow Netanyahu, and eventually succeeded, a lack of enthusiasm was not surprising. Sharon was somewhat blunter about it.

You can’t expect support from a government that you’re busy undermining.

Israeli policy is driven by its own security interests and does not need to be identical to that of the U.S., a senior defense official said Sunday in response to Haaretz’s report that White House and State Department officials in Washington have built up a great deal of anger over Jerusalem’s “neutrality” regarding Russia’s invasion of the Crimean Peninsula.

Obama Inc. has been building up a great deal of anger over Israel long before it was even in office.

 White House and State Department officials in Washington have built up a great deal of anger over Jerusalem’s “neutrality” regarding Russia’s invasion of the Crimean Peninsula.

The Israeli government does not. But unfortunately both sets of relations are basically hostile.

This follows multiple paragraphs claiming that Israel abstained from the UN vote on Crimea due to its support for
Russia when in fact its diplomats were on strike.

(Yes, that happens in Israel.)

According to the Israeli official, in response to U.S. inquiries Israel attributed its absence at the vote to the strike by the Foreign Ministry’s employees. The White House and the State Department found the explanation wanting, especially in light of the lack of advanced notice from Jerusalem.

If the State Department had been paying attention to events in Israel not involving new housing, it wouldn’t have needed advanced notice for a major story. Does no one at Foggy Bottom read the Jerusalem Post?

Adding more fuel to the flames in Washington were public remarks by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman in which they maintained their “neutrality” and failed to back up the United States.

“We have good and trusting relations with the Americans and the Russians, and our experience has been very positive with both sides. So I don’t understand the idea that Israel has to get mired in this,” Lieberman told Israel’s Channel 9 television when asked about the Ukraine crisis.

When White House and State Department officials read these comments, they nearly went crazy. They were particularly incensed by Lieberman’s mentioning Israel’s relations with the United States and with Russia in the same breath, giving them equal weight.

Tellingly, Haaretz does not quote the supposed Netanyahu neutrality statement. Lieberman has extensive connections in Russia and his party depends on a Russian vote so his views are not terribly surprising.

They also don’t particularly matter. It’s like getting angry about something that Biden says.

[.......]
So yes, Israel is making a show of cutting ties. Probably more of one than D.C. is.

Israel’s relations with Russia have consisted largely of empty diplomatic gestures and appeasement, surrendering territory to Russia. Israel certainly hasn’t gotten anything out of it and unlike China, there’s no point to the relationship. Russia is going to keep on backing Iran and assorted terrorists because it’s playing a larger war game with the West. Israel has no way of opting out of that game.

But neither does Israel have any incentive for tagging along on foreign policy after Obama has given the green light to Iran’s nuclear program and after Kerry blamed Israel for the collapse of the peace process.

Read the rest – Obama angry over lack of Israeli support on Ukraine

 

The Battle of Warsaw 1920

by Rodan ( 109 Comments › )
Filed under Communism, Marxism, Poland, Progressives, Russia at April 28th, 2014 - 6:00 pm

BattleofWarsaw

One of the most decisive battles of world history occurred outside of Warsaw  in  August 1920. The Soviet Army invaded Poland to link up with Communist revolutionaries in Germany. Their goal was to install Communist regimes all over Europe and spread the Bolshevik revolution. After  series of defeats the Polish Army was pushed back to Warsaw, but ended up defeating the Soviet invasion force.

The 2011 Polish movie Battle of Warsaw 1920 celebrated the miraculous Polish victory over the Red Army.

For English subtitles, please use the caption option on Youtube.

 

The disappearance of American will

by Speranza ( 157 Comments › )
Filed under China, Iran, Israel, Japan, Russia, South Korea, Syria at April 21st, 2014 - 7:00 am

Is there a more pathetic looking cabinet member than Chuck Hagel? Seriously, we would have been better off picking any random name out of the phone book and installing them in the Pentagon than having the drunken, incompetent, boob Hagel running the department.

by Caroline Glick

The most terrifying aspect of the collapse of US power worldwide is the US’s indifferent response to it.

In Europe, in Asia, in the Middle East and beyond, America’s most dangerous foes are engaging in aggression and brinkmanship unseen in decades.

As Gordon Chang noted at a symposium in Los Angeles last month hosted by the David Horowitz Freedom Center, since President Barack Obama entered office in 2009, the Chinese have responded to his overtures of goodwill and appeasement with intensified aggression against the US’s Asian allies and against US warships.

In 2012, China seized the Scarborough Shoal from the Philippines. Washington shrugged its shoulders despite its mutual defense treaty with the Philippines. And so Beijing is striking again, threatening the Second Thomas Shoal, another Philippine possession.

In a similar fashion, Beijing is challenging Japan’s control over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea and even making territorial claims on Okinawa.

As Chang explained, China’s recent application of its Air-Defense Identification Zone to include Japanese and South Korean airspace is a hostile act not only against those countries but also against the principle of freedom of maritime navigation, which, Chang noted, “Americans have been defending for more than two centuries.”

The US has responded to Chinese aggression with ever-escalating attempts to placate Beijing.

And China has responded to these US overtures by demonstrating contempt for US power.

Last week, the Chinese humiliated Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel during his visit to China’s National Defense University. He was harangued by a student questioner for the US’s support for the Philippines and Japan, and for opposition to Chinese unilateral seizure of island chains and assertions of rights over other states’ airspace and international waterways.

As he stood next to Hagel in a joint press conference, China’s Defense Chief Chang Wanquan demanded that the US restrain Japan and the Philippines.

In addition to its flaccid responses to Chinese aggression against its allies and its own naval craft, in 2012 the US averred from publicly criticizing China for its sale to North Korea of mobile missile launchers capable of serving Pyongyang’s KN-08 intercontinental ballistic missiles. With these easily concealed launchers, North Korea significantly upgraded its ability to attack the US with nuclear weapons.

As for Europe, the Obama administration’s responses to Russia’s annexation of Crimea and to its acts of aggression against Ukraine bespeak a lack of seriousness and dangerous indifference to the fate of the US alliance structure in Eastern Europe.

[.......]

Clearly not impressed by the US moves, the Russians overflew and shadowed the US naval ship. As Charles Krauthammer noted on Fox News on Monday, the Russian action was not a provocation. It was “a show of contempt.”

As Krauthammer explained, it could have only been viewed as a provocation if Russia had believed the US was likely to respond to its shadowing of the warship. Since Moscow correctly assessed that the US would not respond to its aggression, by buzzing and following the warship, the Russians demonstrated to Ukraine and other US allies that they cannot trust the US to protect them from Russia.

In the Middle East, it is not only the US’s obsessive approach to the Palestinian conflict with Israel that lies in shambles. The entire US alliance system and the Obama administration’s other signature initiatives have also collapsed.

After entering office, Obama implemented an aggressive policy in Pakistan, Yemen and elsewhere of killing al-Qaida operatives with unmanned drones. The strategy was based on the notion that such a campaign, that involves no US boots on the ground, can bring about a rout of the terrorist force at minimal human cost to the US and at minimal political cost to President Barack Obama.

The strategy has brought about the demise of a significant number of al-Qaida terrorists over the years. And due to the support Obama enjoys from the US media, the Obama administration paid very little in terms of political capital for implementing it.

But despite the program’s relative success, according to The Washington Post, the administration suspended drone attacks in December 2013 after it endured modest criticism when one in Yemen inadvertently hit a wedding party.

[......]

This week, jihadist websites featured an al-Qaida video showing hundreds of al-Qaida terrorists in Yemen meeting openly with the group’s second in command, Nasir al-Wuhayshi.

In the video, Wuhayshi threatened the US directly saying, “We must eliminate the cross,” and explaining that “the bearer of the cross is America.”

Then there is Iran.

The administration has staked its reputation on its radical policy of engaging Iran on its nuclear weapons program. The administration claims that by permitting Iran to undertake some nuclear activities it can convince the mullahs to shelve their plan to develop nuclear weapons.
[.....]

In a televised interview Sunday, Iran’s nuclear chief Ali Akhbar Salehi insisted that Iran has the right to enrich uranium to 90 percent. In other words, he said that Iran is building nuclear bombs.

And thanks to the US and its interim nuclear deal with Iran, the Iranian economy is on the mend.
[.......]

Rather than accept that its efforts have failed, the Obama administration is redefining what success means.

As Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz noted, in recent months US officials claimed the goal of the nuclear talks was to ensure that Iran would remain years away from acquiring nuclear weapons. In recent remarks, Secretary of State John Kerry said that the US would suffice with a situation in which Iran is but six months away from acquiring nuclear weapons.

In other words, the US has now defined failure as success.

Then there is Syria.

Last September, the US claimed it made history when, together with Russia it convinced dictator Bashar Assad to surrender his chemical weapons arsenal. Six months later, not only is Syria well behind schedule for abiding by the agreement, it is reportedly continuing to use chemical weapons against opposition forces and civilians. The most recent attack reportedly occurred on April 12 when residents of Kafr Zita were attacked with chlorine gas.

The growing worldwide contempt for US power and authority would be bad enough in and of itself. The newfound confidence of aggressors imperils international security and threatens the lives of hundreds of millions of people.

What makes the situation worse is the US response to what is happening. The Obama administration is responding to the ever-multiplying crises by pretending that there is nothing to worry about and insisting that failures are successes.

And the problem is not limited to Obama and his advisers or even to the political Left. Their delusional view that the US will suffer no consequences for its consistent record of failure and defeat is shared by a growing chorus of conservatives.

Some, like the anti-Semitic conservative pundit Patrick Buchanan, laud Putin as a cultural hero. [......]
.

Leaders like Sen. Ted Cruz who call for a US foreign policy based on standing by allies and opposing foes in order to ensure US leadership and US national security are being drowned out in a chorus of “Who cares?” Six years into Obama’s presidency, the US public as a whole is largely opposed to taking any action on behalf of Ukraine or the Baltic states, regardless of what inaction, or worse, feckless action means for the US’s ability to protect its interests and national security.

And the generation coming of age today is similarly uninterested in US global leadership.

During the Cold War and in the immediate aftermath of the September 11 attacks, the predominant view among American university students studying international affairs was that US world leadership is essential to ensure global stability and US national interests and values.

Today this is no longer the case.

Much of the Obama administration’s shuttle diplomacy in recent years has involved sending senior officials, including Obama, on overseas trips with the goal of reassuring jittery allies that they can continue to trust US security guarantees.

These protestations convince fewer and fewer people today.

It is because of this that US allies like Japan, South Korea and Saudi Arabia, that lack nuclear weapons, are considering their options on the nuclear front.

It is because of this that Israeli officials are openly stating for the first time that the US cannot be depended on to either secure Israel’s eastern frontier in the event that an accord is reached with the Palestinians, or to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

It is because of this that the world is more likely than it has been since 1939 to experience a world war of catastrophic proportions.

There is a direct correlation between the US elite’s preoccupation with social issues running the narrow and solipsistic gamut from gay marriage to transgender bathrooms to a phony war against women, and America’s inability to recognize the growing threats to the global order or understand why Americans should care about the world at all.

And there is a similarly direct correlation between the growing aggression of US foes and Obama’s decision to slash defense spending while allowing the US nuclear arsenal to become all but obsolete.

America’s spurned allies will take the actions they need to take to protect themselves. Some will persevere, others will likely be overrun.

But with Americans across the ideological spectrum pretending that failure is success and defeat is victory, while turning their backs on the growing storm, how will America protect itself?

Read the rest - The disappearance of US will

 

Donetsk Jewish community calls alleged registration letter a smear

by Rodan ( 2 Comments › )
Filed under Judaism, Orthodox Christianity, Russia, Special Report at April 17th, 2014 - 2:43 pm

Once again the anti-Russian haters in the GOP have egg on their faces. The idiots at Hot Air and several other blogs ran with a  story claiming Pro-Russian militias in the Eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk  handed out letters telling Jews to register. As usual with the Russia/Ukrainian situation, this story turned out to be false. The Jewish community of Donetsk said the letters were a hoax and done to smear the Pro-Russian militias.

Today, the Western press caught up with the Ukrainian rumor mill: apparently, the People’s Republic of Donetsk had ordered all Jews over the age of 16 to pay a fee of $50 U.S. and register with the new “authorities,” or face loss of citizenship or expulsion. This was laid out in officious-looking fliers pasted on the local synagogue. One local snapped a photo of the fliers and sent it to a friend in Israel, who then took it to the Israeli press and, voila, an international scandal: American Twitter is abuzz with it, Drudge is hawking it, and, today in Geneva, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry slammed the fliers as “grotesque.”

The Donetsk Jewish community dismissed this as “a provocation,” which it clearly is. “It’s an obvious provocation designed to get this exact response, going all the way up to Kerry,” says Fyodr Lukyanov, editor of Russia in Global Affairs. “I have no doubt that there is a sizeable community of anti-Semites on both sides of the barricades, but for one of them to do something this stupid—this is done to compromise the pro-Russian groups in the east.”

Rather than fact check, Allahpundit let his anti-Russian bigotry get the better of him. Meanwhile he and most of the Conservative media are silent about the real Nazis in the IMF/EU puppet regime in Kiev. It is a shame a Liberal website like New Republic publishes the truth, while a conservative outlet like Hot Air lie.

Here is the statement by the Donetsk Jewish community on these fake letters in Russian.

 

File this under: Things that make you go… Oh Shit…

by Guest Post ( 216 Comments › )
Filed under Islam, Russia, Taliban, Terrorism at April 16th, 2014 - 1:00 pm

Guest Blogger: File this under: Things that make you go… Oh Shit…


Warning: this is 100 percent pure worst possible case imaginably speculation.

Now that Malaysia Flight MH370 is fading from everyone’s (except those who have family on that aircraft) mind. It is time to look at possible crazy tin-foil hat conspiracy theories that involve other current events. First, let’s look at the rumors coming out of Britain/Russia regarding MH370.

MH370 ‘hijacked and in Afghanistan’: Russian intelligence source claims all passengers and crew are alive but held hostage

A Russian newspaper has claimed that Flight MH370 was hijacked by “unknown terrorists” and flown to Afghanistan, where the crew and passengers are now being held hostage.

The extraordinary comments, attributed to a Russian intelligence source, appeared in the Moskovsky Komsomolets newspaper.

The source told the paper: “Flight MH370 Malaysia Airlines missing on March 8 with 239 passengers was hijacked.

“Pilots are not guilty; the plane was hijacked by unknown terrorists.

“We know that the name of the terrorist who gave instructions to pilots is “Hitch.”

“The plane is in Afghanistan not far from Kandahar near the border with Pakistan.”

This claim is the latest in a growing number of conspiracy theories over what could have happened to the missing jet. Here is our round up of the top 13 conspiracy theories so far.

According to The Daily Star, Moskovsky Komsomolets also claims the passengers have been divided into seven groups and are living in mud huts with almost no food.

Twenty Asian passengers were said to have been smuggled into a bunker in Pakistan

So, according to this rumor, a well financed, large and extremely well organized and disciplined terrorist organization now has possession of a Boeing 777-200ER commercial passenger aircraft with a range of 5,235 to 9,380 nautical miles (9,695 to 17,372 km). Moreover, the terrorist organization in question has the sophisticated knowledge and tactical ability to fly said aircraft through multiple layers of controlled airspace.

Let us depart for a moment from this terrorist organization to cast our gaze on another well financed, large and extremely well organized and disciplined terrorist organization.

Video: Did we miss the al-Qaeda convention?

Did the US recently miss a golden opportunity to take out a large number of al-Qaeda leaders, including the top lieutenant of Ayman al-Zawahiri and chief of the network’s most virulent subsidiary in Yemen? AQAP recently held a large meeting somewhere in south Yemen despite US drone warfare targeting the network in that region, and published the video on jihadi websites to emphasize their success. In the tape, AQAP leader Nasir al-Wuhayshi pledged to the terrorist leaders gathered there that he wants to attack the US soon:

A new video shows what looks like the largest and most dangerous gathering of al Qaeda in years. And the CIA and the Pentagon either didn’t know about it or couldn’t get a drone there in time to strike.

U.S. officials won’t comment on that, but every frame of the video is now being analyzed by the United States.

In the middle of the clip, the man known as al Qaeda’s crown prince, Nasir al-Wuhayshi, appears brazenly out in the open, greeting followers in Yemen. Al-Wuhayshi, the No. 2 leader of al Qaeda globally and the head of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, has said he wants to attack the United States. But in the video, he looks unconcerned that he could be hit by an American drone.

The video started appearing on jihadist websites recently, drawing the attention of U.S. officials and global terrorism experts. U.S. officials say they believe it’s authentic.

“This is quite an extraordinary video,” Paul Cruickshank, CNN terrorism analyst, said.

Did the US know about this ahead of time? If they did, they must have either had difficulty arranging the logistics of an attack — or perhaps had other assets in place for other reasons. It can’t be that we didn’t understand the value of the target, though. The Wall Street Journal recalls that Wuhayshi was one of the reasons the US closed a slew of embassies last summer:

Concerns last summer about a plot, discovered in part through intercepts of communications between Mr. Wuhayshi and al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, prompted the U.S. to temporarily close its embassy in Yemen and 18 other countries.

U.S. officials have been particularly concerned about the threat posed by the Yemen-based affiliate’s creative bomb-maker, Ibrahim al-Asiri, who built the device used in the botched 2009 effort to bring down a Detroit-bound airliner among other plots.

Raise your hand if you see anything disturbing about this event? No? here, let me straighten my tin-foil hat and sharpen my conspiracy theory pencil, while I point something out.

U.S. officials have been particularly concerned about the threat posed by the Yemen-based affiliate’s creative bomb-maker, Ibrahim al-Asiri, who built the device used in the botched 2009 effort to bring down a Detroit-bound airliner among other plots.

If at once you fail to succeed, try try again… So, according to this rumor, a well financed, large and extremely well organized and disciplined terrorist organization now has possession of a Boeing 777-200ER commercial passenger aircraft with a range of 5,235 to 9,380 nautical miles (9,695 to 17,372 km). Moreover, the terrorist organization in question has the sophisticated knowledge and tactical ability to fly said aircraft through multiple layers of controlled airspace. Try try again…

Video Shows Large Meeting of Al-Qaeda Leaders Openly Meeting In Yemen, Vow To “Eliminate The Cross … The Bearer of The Cross Is America”…

The video shows al-Wuhayshi addressing more than 100 fighters somewhere within Yemen, Cruickshank said, a restive nation on the southwestern portion of the Arabian Peninsula. The al Qaeda leader, he said, is “taking a big risk in doing this.”

But he doesn’t mince words about his mission.

In a speech to the group, al-Wuhayshi makes it clear that he’s going after the United States, saying “We must eliminate the cross. … The bearer of the cross is America!”

So, tin-foil hat conspiracy theory time has arrived. A terrorist organization capable of bringing together 100 or more of the worlds most dangerous and prominent terrorists organizes and pulls off a clandestine meeting that none of the worlds intelligence agencies know about until after the fact. This shortly after a Malaysian 777-200ER disappears, presumable crashing into the ocean somewhere, though no wreckage of it has to date been found. Russian newspapers (clearly to distract from Putin’s actions in the Ukraine) make the assertion that the passenger are all alive and being held hostage near the Pakistan Afghanistan border. Suggesting that the Malaysian 777-200ER is still intact and fully functional.

Nope, nothing to see here, move along…

(Cross Posted @ The Wilderness of Mirrors)

Items beloning to Napoleon stolen from Australian Museum

by Rodan ( 122 Comments › )
Filed under Australia, Europe, History at April 15th, 2014 - 2:45 pm

People still hold a grudge against Napoleon Bonaparte, but this story really had me rolling. An Australian museum had a lock of Napoleon’s hair  and other items from his days as French Emperor. Thieves broke in and stole these items.

Sydney (AFP) – A lock of Napoleon Bonaparte’s hair and other “priceless” artefacts linked to the French emperor have been stolen from a museum in Australia, police said Tuesday.

 Burglars broke into the building on Victoria state’s Mornington Peninsula, south of Melbourne, in what was believed to be a targeted robbery.

“The offender(s) have jemmied open cabinets inside and stolen numerous priceless antiques,” a police statement said.

“The stolen items included a ring and (a glass frame) containing Napoleon’s hair, a ribbon inscribed by Napoleon in 1815 and a snuff box.”

The thieves removed outside blinds and entered through a bathroom of the historic Briars Park homestead in Mount Martha last Thursday night.

People still hold grudges it seems!

In all seriousness, this was clearly done to sell the items on the black market.

 

The Russian Moon

by coldwarrior ( 167 Comments › )
Filed under America, Open thread, Russia, Science, Space Exploration at April 11th, 2014 - 7:14 pm

It was inevitable, I suppose. While America drowns in debt and avoids teaching the hard classes in school the Russians are going to colonize the moon.

 

Russian Federal Space Agency is elaborating Moon exploration program

© Collage: Voice of Russia

The Russian Federal Space Agency (Roscosmos) has created a team of specialists, which will elaborate the Moon program. The scientists plan to launch three spacecraft – two landing and one orbital – to the Moon to the end of this decade.

Roscosmos is about to begin creation of a carrier rocket that will be launched from the Vostochny Cosmodrome. The agency is also elaborating a carrier rocket of extra-heavy class for flights to the Moon, Denis Lyskov, Deputy Director of Roscosmos, told journalists.

“Within the program of the Vostochny Cosmodrome, we create a modern carrier rocket that will suit a manned spacecraft,” Lyskov said. The spacecraft will weigh 14 tons for lower orbit and 20 tons for lunar missions.

“It requires a carrier rocket of extra-heavy class with carrying capacity of 80 tons to perform flights to the Moon. The program of such carrier rocket is being elaborated. The government has ordered to elaborate the program so that it could make a particular decision on it,” Lyskov said.

Lev Zelenuy, vice-president of the Russian Academy of Sciences, says that Roscosmos plans to build a lunar base on the Moon to the end of 2030.

The Russian Academy of Sciences, which elaborated a program for Solar system exploration till 2025, marked the exploration of the Moon as the primary task. During the first stage, which is to begin in 2015, Roscosmos will launch two satellites – “The Moon-Resource” and “The Moon-Globe”. One of them will explore the south pole of the Moon, where Roscosmos plans to land Russian lunar lander with Indian mini-rover. During the second stage, which is to begin in 2020, Roscosmos plans to land two new Moon research vehicles – “Lunokhod-3” and “Lunokhod-4”. Scientists think that the new Moon research vehicles will be able to operate in Polar Regions of the Moon for five years and move away from the landing site for a distance of 30 kilometers.
Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2014_04_09/Russian-Federal-Space-Agency-is-elaborating-Moon-exploration-program-5997/

Is Vlad keen on a trip? Putin eyes up cosmonaut uniform as his deputy premier sets out plans to colonise space and declares ‘We are coming to the Moon FOREVER’

  • Kremlin announced the 26-year plan in state-run newspaper this morning

  • Deputy PM says moon is only realistic source of minerals and resources

  • First mission to launch in 2016 and ‘base will be up and running by 2040′