Posts
20 hours ago
Tuesday, 16 June 2009
Captain America, a.k.a. Steve Rogers is coming back to life in a comic near you
Captain America, a.k.a. Steve Rogers is coming back to life in a comic near you
Updated Monday, June 15th 2009, 1:13 PM
Captain America returns after being killed.
Captain America no. 1.
Captain America is making a miraculous recovery.
Two years after Marvel Comics knocked off its famous star-spangled superhero, he's gonna be back and better than ever.
"The original Captain America is finally coming back," Marvel Comics editor in chief Joe Quesada told the Daily News. "We've been patiently planning for this moment for 21/2 years."
Captain America will return next month in a five-comic book series, "Captain America Reborn."
The dramatic return is coming not a moment too soon for fans of the superhero and his alter ego, Steve Rogers.
Marvel writer Ed Brubaker was stunned at the global reaction when Captain America was gunned down on the steps of a courthouse.
Read the whole thing at :
Captain America, a.k.a. Steve Rogers is coming back to life in a comic near youDoubleTapper: Al Qaeda to attack US from Mexico with Bio weapons
Al Qaeda to attack US from Mexico with Bio weapons
U.S. counterterrorism officials have finally authenticated this video (I posted it back in the beginning of April) by an al Qaeda recruiter threatening to smuggle anthrax into the United States via tunnels under the Mexico border.
The video makes clear that al Qaeda is looking to exploit weaknesses in U.S. border security and also is willing to ally itself with white militia groups or other anti-government entities interested in carrying out an attack inside the United States, according to counterterrorism officials interviewed by The Washington Times.
The video first aired by the Arabic news network Al Jazeera in February and later posted to several Web sites, including here, shows Kuwaiti dissident Abdullah al-Nafisi, a veteran recruiter for al Qaeda with close ties to the Taliban, telling a room full of supporters in Bahrain that al Qaeda is casing the U.S. border with Mexico to assess how to send terrorists and weapons into the U.S. "Four pounds of anthrax -- in a suitcase this big -- carried by a fighter through tunnels from Mexico into the U.S. are guaranteed to kill 330,000 Americans within a single hour if it is properly spread in population centers there," the recruiter said. "What a horrifying idea; 9/11 will be small change in comparison. Am I right? There is no need for airplanes, conspiracies, timings and so on. One person, with the courage to carry 4 pounds of anthrax, will go to the White House lawn, and will spread this 'confetti' all over them, and then we'll do these cries of joy. It will turn into a real celebration."
Rear All at :
DoubleTapper: Al Qaeda to attack US from Mexico with Bio weaponsIsrael Matzav: Europeans disappointed Netanyahu didn't offer to start swimming, refuse to upgrade relations
Europeans disappointed Netanyahu didn't offer to start swimming, refuse to upgrade relations
Many months ago, Israel and the European Union agreed to upgrade their relations, but the agreement is being held up by the Europeans until they are satisfied that Israel will pursue Read All at :
Israel Matzav: Europeans disappointed Netanyahu didn't offer to start swimming, refuse to upgrade relations
Israel Matzav: The end of 'engagement' with Iran?
The end of 'engagement' with Iran? 
In Sunday's Los Angeles Times, Paul Richter suggests that the Iranian election results will lead to pressure on the Obama administration to bring its efforts at 'engagement' with Iran to a rapid conclusion:
Israel Matzav: The end of 'engagement' with Iran?Congress and pro-Israel conservatives, already strongly critical of Ahmadinejad, will undoubtedly press Obama to put a tight deadline on his overture to Iran. They are expected to urge him to move on to tougher measures, such as economic sanctions or military action, to try to compel Tehran to give up its nuclear ambitions.
Read All at :
Israel Matzav: The most cowardly, immoral non-reaction ever
The most cowardly, immoral non-reaction ever
I'd like to quote from Michael Ledeen's comments on Iran at Pajamas Media (Hat Tip: Instapundit). Although it's seemingly not a topic for a blog about Israel, I am reporting on it because I believe that anyone who is not affected by the reports (and especially the videos) coming out of Iran has lost all sense of decency, empathy and humanity. Yes, that apparently includes the Obama administration in Washington.Read All at :
Israel Matzav: The most cowardly, immoral non-reaction ever
Israel Matzav: Is the American Jewish leadership finally waking up to Obama's anti-Israel views?
Is the American Jewish leadership finally waking up to Obama's anti-Israel views?
They were silent and worse during the 2008 election campaign. Could it be that America's 'Jewish leaders' are finally waking up to the evil intentions of the Obama administration regarding the State of Israel? Well, Malcolm Hoenlein of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations is about as 'establishment' as you can get, and he is plainly concerned with what's going on in Washington. Israel Matzav: Is the American Jewish leadership finally waking up to Obama's anti-Israel views?Jewish leaders “are expressing concern about what was said [in Obama’s Cairo speech],” Hoenlein says. “I’ve heard it from some of his strongest supporters. It’s expected from his detractors. Even people close to him have said to us that there were parts of the speech that bothered them.”
Read All at :
Israel Matzav: Obama recognizes 'important step forward' but no comment on request for guarantee
Obama recognizes 'important step forward' but no comment on request for guarantee
President Obama has recognized Prime Minister Netanyahu's Sunday night speech as an 'important step forward,' but did not make any comment regarding Netanyahu's demand that the United States guarantee that the 'Palestinian' Read All at :
Israel Matzav: Obama recognizes 'important step forward' but no comment on request for guarantee
Israel Matzav: Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech
Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech
For those who are interested, a full English-language transcript of Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech on Sunday night may be found here (Hat Tip: Memeorandum).
Here's the full speech in Hebrew with simultaneous translation. Let's go to the videotape.
Here's the full speech in Hebrew with simultaneous translation. Let's go to the videotape.
See All at :
Israel Matzav: Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech
THE POINT OF THE CONFLICT
The Point of the Conflict
Should I find the time sometime soon, perhaps I'll try to sum up the issues Netanyahu raised in his speech yesterday, the responses to them, and the significance of them all. Here, however, a quick comment about the Jewish State requirement.
The entire Israel-Palestine conflict stems from the tragic reality of two peoples with legitimate claims to one small land. For the Jews, it's their ancestral homeland. For the Palestinians, it's the land they lived in when they first began developing a national identity. Since neither side is going to relinquish their claim, the only resolution to the conflict will be when both accept that the claims of the other are legitimate, and both accept partition.
If Israel is not allowed to define itself as the homeland of the Jews, what's the purpose of the entire effort? French, Angolan or Argentinian claims to the homeland of the Palestinians would be baseless and illegitimate; the reason the Israeli's claim is legitimate is that they're Jews.
The entire Israel-Palestine conflict stems from the tragic reality of two peoples with legitimate claims to one small land. For the Jews, it's their ancestral homeland. For the Palestinians, it's the land they lived in when they first began developing a national identity. Since neither side is going to relinquish their claim, the only resolution to the conflict will be when both accept that the claims of the other are legitimate, and both accept partition.
If Israel is not allowed to define itself as the homeland of the Jews, what's the purpose of the entire effort? French, Angolan or Argentinian claims to the homeland of the Palestinians would be baseless and illegitimate; the reason the Israeli's claim is legitimate is that they're Jews.
taken from : Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations
ERRING CAN HAVE A HEAVY PRICE
Erring Can Have A Heavy Price
Jeffrey Goldberg responds sardonically to Roger Cohen's apology about Iran. Goldberg is right, of course, but I'm more interested in Roger Cohen.
Cohen has invested considerable effort over the past two months or so to convince his readers at the New York Times that Iran is far more benign than those nasty NeoCons and Israelis are making it out to be. This gave him quite some prominence in the blogosphere, as he became a hero for some, and was regarded by others as a Useful Idiot.
He now admits - though of course he doesn't say so - that he was more of a Useful Idiot. Yet he does this so quickly into the dramatic events in Iran that most of us will probably give him a brownie point or two for integrity: he's publicly recanting, after all. Which is all well and fine but for two problems.
First, he acknowledges that if the Iranian regime is thwarting the will of the Iranian people, there isn't any way the American administration can coddle up to the regime, even in the name of engaging with open fists etc. That would be a betrayal of the Iranian people. So he advocates that President Obama’s outreach must now await a decent interval. Umm, no. Not if that now publicly recognized nasty Mullah regime is hurtling towards nuclear weapons you can't wait. Surely Cohen must now acknowledge that if they're truly nasty, they may be truly nasty? If they're willing to spit in the face of their own people, perhaps they'll be careless with the wellbeing of the same people on their way to some insane program of regional dominance backed with nuclear power?
Second, Cohen needs to own up to the possibility that there are other people out there who can't afford to be wrong, because if they are it will mean more than a public recantation in a newspaper column: it will mean the deaths of innocent people. As a matter of fact, there are lots of such people, for whom the themes he routinely pontificates on are not matters of opinion but of life and death. When they get it wrong, they're dead and can't recant, or bear responsibility for the deaths of others who can't hear their recantations.
I'm one of them, though only in a minor way, diluted among many. When we assured ourselves, in the 1980s and 1990s, that if only we'd be nice to the Palestinians there would be peace, we truly believed it, and earnestly voted for it. By the time we realized we'd been wrong, it was too late, and more than 6,000 people died, most of them Palestinians but more than a thousand Israelis. Publicly admitting our mistakes didn't bring any of them back.
If Roger Cohen is really in a contrite mood these days, perhaps he should dwell for a serious moment on the human price of being wrong, before he writes his next column.
Cohen has invested considerable effort over the past two months or so to convince his readers at the New York Times that Iran is far more benign than those nasty NeoCons and Israelis are making it out to be. This gave him quite some prominence in the blogosphere, as he became a hero for some, and was regarded by others as a Useful Idiot.
He now admits - though of course he doesn't say so - that he was more of a Useful Idiot. Yet he does this so quickly into the dramatic events in Iran that most of us will probably give him a brownie point or two for integrity: he's publicly recanting, after all. Which is all well and fine but for two problems.
First, he acknowledges that if the Iranian regime is thwarting the will of the Iranian people, there isn't any way the American administration can coddle up to the regime, even in the name of engaging with open fists etc. That would be a betrayal of the Iranian people. So he advocates that President Obama’s outreach must now await a decent interval. Umm, no. Not if that now publicly recognized nasty Mullah regime is hurtling towards nuclear weapons you can't wait. Surely Cohen must now acknowledge that if they're truly nasty, they may be truly nasty? If they're willing to spit in the face of their own people, perhaps they'll be careless with the wellbeing of the same people on their way to some insane program of regional dominance backed with nuclear power?
Second, Cohen needs to own up to the possibility that there are other people out there who can't afford to be wrong, because if they are it will mean more than a public recantation in a newspaper column: it will mean the deaths of innocent people. As a matter of fact, there are lots of such people, for whom the themes he routinely pontificates on are not matters of opinion but of life and death. When they get it wrong, they're dead and can't recant, or bear responsibility for the deaths of others who can't hear their recantations.
I'm one of them, though only in a minor way, diluted among many. When we assured ourselves, in the 1980s and 1990s, that if only we'd be nice to the Palestinians there would be peace, we truly believed it, and earnestly voted for it. By the time we realized we'd been wrong, it was too late, and more than 6,000 people died, most of them Palestinians but more than a thousand Israelis. Publicly admitting our mistakes didn't bring any of them back.
If Roger Cohen is really in a contrite mood these days, perhaps he should dwell for a serious moment on the human price of being wrong, before he writes his next column.
taken from :Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations
BRACING REALITY CHECK
Bracing Reality Check
I continue not to have the faintest idea what's really happening in the country of Iran, beyond the writ of the reporters from Teheran. I wish the democrats the best, if that's who they are, though Ann Appelbaum links to a reminder that if they are, Moussavi is an unlikely standard bearer, what with his participation in the mass murder of 30,000 Iranians 20 years ago.
Two weeks ago, however, the Economist had a fascinating column on what the Chinese Communist Party learnt from the Tiananmen Square events and massacre of twenty years ago. Executive summary: they realized they needed to change in order never to lose power, and did so in a systematic and hugely successful way.
This is probably bad for mankind, given how the Chinese don't care in the slightest about human rights in their broad, Enlightened Western meaning (more and more of the West doesn't care much, either, but that's a different subject), and the Chinese certainly seem on their way to being extraordinarliy influential on mankind in coming generations. Actually, another article in the Economist told how the authoritarian powers of the world are already setting up aid projects meant to counter the West.
So maybe we'll soon see a benign, democratic Iran. And very likely we won't. Perhaps not ever.
Two weeks ago, however, the Economist had a fascinating column on what the Chinese Communist Party learnt from the Tiananmen Square events and massacre of twenty years ago. Executive summary: they realized they needed to change in order never to lose power, and did so in a systematic and hugely successful way.
This is probably bad for mankind, given how the Chinese don't care in the slightest about human rights in their broad, Enlightened Western meaning (more and more of the West doesn't care much, either, but that's a different subject), and the Chinese certainly seem on their way to being extraordinarliy influential on mankind in coming generations. Actually, another article in the Economist told how the authoritarian powers of the world are already setting up aid projects meant to counter the West.
So maybe we'll soon see a benign, democratic Iran. And very likely we won't. Perhaps not ever.
taken from :Yaacov Lozowick's Ruminations
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
