So Much For Mercy

A Bulgarian women was convicted of murdering her sleeping son with a hoe. She was sent to prison for 15 years. After serving about 18 months of her sentence, authorities discovered she had end-stage terminal cancer which had spread throughout her body. They took pity on her and released her so she could die at home.

Whereupon she murdered her husband.

The 57-year-old was sentenced to 15 years in jail for killing her 29-year-old son with a garden hoe in April 2005 while he was sleeping.

Last month, authorities judged her to be in the final stages of cancer and let her go home, where she stabbed her husband in the throat with a knife.

"It was established she was in the last stage of cancer, she had it all over her body," said a spokeswoman for the Bourgas regional police.

"They presumed she was feeling bad and she would treat herself and rest. But nothing of the kind. She got aggressive and … she killed her husband."

She's threatened to kill her last surviving son if released again. I rather suspect she won't be. The police spokesman likened the entire situation to something you'd see on The Twilight Zone. I'd have gone with Alfred Hitchcock Presents, myself.

Frivolity

Thomas Sowell has a piece up at Real Clear Politics that is spot on. He discusses serious political discussion - and the lack thereof coming from all too many these days.

Even when serious issues are addressed, they can be addressed either seriously or frivolously. If you are content to see life and death issues of war and peace addressed with catch phrases like "chicken hawk" or to see a coalition of nations around the world fighting terrorism referred to as "unilateral" U.S. action because France does not go along, then you are content with frivolity.

You may deserve whatever you get if you vote frivolously in this year's election. But surely the next generation, which has no vote, deserves better.

Weak-kneed members of both parties have been calling for a timetable to be announced for withdrawal from Iraq. No other war in thousands of years of history has ever had such a timetable announced to their enemies. Even if we intended to get out by a given date, there is not the slightest reason to tell the terrorists that. It is frivolous politics at its worst.

There has never been any reason to doubt that American troops will be removed from Iraq. They were removed after the first Gulf War. Before that, they were removed from Grenada and from other Western Hemisphere countries throughout the 20th century. Millions of American troops were removed from Europe after World War II.

Why should there be the slightest doubt that they will be removed from Iraq? The only question is whether you can run a war on a timetable like a railroad and whether you need to announce your plans to your enemies.

All this rhetoric about a withdrawal timetable is based on trying to make political hay out of the fact that the Iraq war is unpopular. But all wars have been unpopular with Americans, as they should be.

Sowell points out that war is never popular with Americans. Despite all the rhetoric from cretinous thugs like Hugo Chavez, that is a very true statement. The American public may back a war enthusiastically for a very short while, but that support drains away quickly. It always has. Which our enemies understand even if too many of our own people do not. Read the whole thing and decide if you are serious or frivolous.

“Veils Take Power From Women”

Says author Salman Rushdie about the ruckus being raised by Islamists over the words of British MP Jack Straw. The whole issue blew up when Straw said that he requested Muslim women remove their veils before speaking to him.

The comment by Jack Straw, a former foreign secretary who now is leader of the House of Commons, has plunged Britain into a debate over Islamic integration.

"It's important these issues are raised and discussed, and I think it's perfectly sensible if you raise it in a measured and considered way, which he did," Blair said of Straw during an interview with British Broadcasting Corp. television outside his office. "I think we can have these discussions without people becoming hysterical either way about it."

Rushdie, whose book "The Satanic Verses," once led to death threats against him by Islamic clerics, told BBC radio that Straw "was expressing an important opinion, which is that veils suck, which they do. I think the veil is a way of taking power away from women."

Straw said in a newspaper column published Thursday that he believes the veils favored by some Muslim women inhibit communication and are a sign of division in society. At his constituency office, Straw said he asks that veiled women reveal their faces, adding that the women have always complied, and a female assistant is always present.

On Friday, British media quoted Straw as going further, saying that he would prefer that Muslim women not wear veils at all. "I just find it uncomfortable if I'm trying to have a conversation with someone whose face I can't see," Straw told the BBC.

Many Muslims in Straw's parliamentary district of Blackburn, in northwestern England, reacted with outrage.

The uproar also left many questioning whether Britain's multicultural ideals can withstand the strains of a cultural divide that is increasingly tormenting much of Europe.

The difficulty of the issue was obvious during the Blair interview when he was asked if he would prefer a Muslim woman he met took off her veil.

"I think in the end, it's a matter of them choosing what they want to do," Blair said.

"But I think the reason why Jack raised this is because these are issues that people do feel quite strongly about and they are trying to say how do we make sense of a different type of society in which we live, how do we make sure people integrate more, how do we make sure that people aren't sort of wanting to separate themselves out from the mainstream of society."

Blair said, "It's a difficult and tricky debate to enter into, as we can see over the past few days," but he praised the way Straw had handled it.

The veil is a political tool, not a religious requirement. It is, in fact, being used as an offensive weapon in the cultural war that is gripping Britain and Europe in general. You really have to admire Rushdie's outspokenness given his history with the Iranian extremists.

What to do about North Korea

David Frum write in the New York Times and suggests four steps that need to be taken to address the North Korean problem. He notes that the usual suspects are calling for the usual response: more negotiations. He rightly points out that this is the exact opposite of what we want to do right now. Opening negotiations will simply reward Kim Jong Il's derangement and bring even greater aggression later. It is also necessary to show Iran that there are distinct consequences, not rewards, for nuclear aggressiveness.

It is, alas, an iron law of modern diplomacy that the failure of any diplomatic process only proves the need for more of the process that has just failed. Thus those who have long supported negotiating with North Korea are now calling for the Bush administration to begin direct talks with the Kim Jong-il regime. Sorry, but all this would accomplish would be to reward an actual proliferator in order to preserve the illusion that the world still has a meaningful nonproliferation regime.

Some even suggest, in worried tones, that the North Korean test might provoke Japan to go nuclear, as if the worst possible consequence of nuclear weapons in the hands of one of America’s direst enemies would be the acquisition of nuclear weapons by one of America’s best friends.

A new approach is needed. America has three key strategic goals in the wake of the North Korean nuclear test. The first is to enhance the security of those American allies most directly threatened by North Korean nuclear weapons: Japan and South Korea.

The second is to exact a price from North Korea for its nuclear program severe enough to frighten Iran and any other rogue regimes considering following the North Korean path.

The last is to punish China. North Korea could not have completed its bomb if China, which provides the country an immense amount of food and energy aid, had strongly opposed it. Apparently, Beijing sees some potential gain in the uncertainty that North Korea’s status brings. If China can engage in such conduct cost-free, what will deter Russia from aiding the Iranian nuclear program, or Pakistan someday aiding a Saudi or Egyptian one?

To meet these three goals, the United States should adopt four swift policy responses:

• Step up the development and deployment of existing missile defense systems.

Go over and rest the rest of the four steps. I don't necessarily think they are all perfect, but they are at least a starting point for taking a completely different tack with the North Koreans. And with China as well. China has been enabling North Korea, they should pay a price for that behavior.

Hot Cross Buns

If you live in Madison, Wisconsin, some of the baked goods you buy from local bakeries may be hot. Not temperature-wise, mind you. Hot as in made with stolen goods.

The bakery reported thefts of ingredients such as oil, sugar, eggs and flour, and occasionally, the delivery truck.

Police said the suspected burglar took the products to area bakeries in the delivery truck during off-business hours, sold them, and then returned the truck.

The man, from Madison, was arrested Friday night without incident. Police said they caught him stealing bakery goods, while the truck was running outside.

The man was taken to the Dane County Jail and booked on a probation warrant. Police said they would send charges to the District Attorney's office early this week. They said they expect charges will include at least three counts of burglary and operating a motor vehicle without the owner's consent.

You know, if he had taken that much initiative with a legal profession, he could have been quite a success.

China Angry With Kim Jong Il?

It very well may be that North Korea has alienated the last friend it had in the whole world this time. South Korean diplomats are reporting that China appears to be leaning toward backing strong sanctions against the rogue state. Chinese diplomats are using unusually critical words to address the issue (we noted that yesterday, too). Meanwhile Kim proved he is totally insane by threatening to launch a nuclear-armed missile at the United States.

China's Foreign Ministry said North Korea's nuclear test would damage ties between the allies who sided against American-led U.N. forces in the Korean War.

"The nuclear test will undoubtedly exert a negative impact on our relations," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao told reporters.

But Liu added that China is "firmly against" a military strike against the North.

"Taking military action against North Korea would be unimaginable," he said.

China also has long opposed sanctions sought by countries such as the United States, which is pressing for potentially crippling new measures against Pyongyang.

A permanent U.N. Security Council member, China has a decisive say over how stern a punishment the international community can mete out to North Korea.

A South Korean envoy, returning to Seoul from Beijing, said Tuesday that China appeared to be leaning toward backing strong U.N. measures.

The North stepped up its threats aimed at Washington, saying it could fire a nuclear nuclear-tipped missile unless the United States acts to resolve its standoff with Pyongyang, the Yonhap news agency reported Tuesday from Beijing.

Even if Pyongyang is confirmed to have nuclear weapons, experts say it's unlikely the North has a bomb design small and light enough to be mounted atop a missile. Their long-range missile capability also remains in question, after a test rocket in July apparently fizzled out shortly after takeoff.

"We hope the situation will be resolved before an unfortunate incident of us firing a nuclear missile comes," Yonhap quoted an unidentified North Korean official as saying. "That depends on how the U.S. will act."

The official said the nuclear test was "an expression of our intention to face the United States across the negotiating table," reported Yonhap, which didn't say how or where it contacted the official, or why no name was given.

But Alexander Vershbow, the U.S. ambassador to South Korea, told reporters that the nuclear test would make the possibility of direct talks between Washington and Pyongyang more difficult, Yonhap reported.

The U.N. Security Council was weighing a U.S. proposal for potentially crippling sanctions. America has asked the council to adopt a measure that would aim to curb the North's nuclear and ballistic missile programs, prohibit all trade in military and luxury goods, and crack down on illegal financial dealings.

There have been worries that the reported nuclear test would prompt Japan to build its own bomb. But Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe told lawmakers Japan's anti-nuclear policy would remain unchanged.

"There will be no change in our non-nuclear arms principles," Abe said.

Japan's pacifist constitution bars the use of force to settle international disputes, and Japan has maintained a policy of not producing, possessing or using nuclear weapons.

Abe may be saying that now, but if North Korea continues this brinkmanship, he may be forced to start down that path. In fact, he probably will be force to do it fairly soon. But if China actually backs sanctions authorized under chapter 7 of the UN Charter, we'll know China is sick and tired of the mad midget of Pyongyang.

Experts Not Sure About North Korean Test

Experts are saying that the small yield of the North Korean nuclear test is a big surprise. They are at a bit of a loss to explain what exactly the North Korean explosion was. There is a possibility that it could have been conventional explosives, a low-yield by design (a proof of concept) or a partial explosion. The last would be a partial fizzle, but would still be considered a success. Everyone looking at this is confused.

A senior intelligence official called it a "sub-kiloton" explosion detonated inside a horizontal mountain tunnel and said its low yield caught analysts by surprise. "For an initial test, a yield of several kilotons has been historically observed," the official said.

A U.S. government official said the North Koreans, in a call to the Chinese shortly before the test was conducted, said it would be four kilotons. The official said it is possible the explosive yield was as low as 200 tons. France and South Korea both issued sub-kiloton estimates, and officials dismissed as inaccurate an early Russian estimate that the blast resulted from a five-to-15-kiloton explosion.

President Bush said early yesterday that U.S. experts were "working to confirm North Korea's claim." By the end of the day, intelligence officials were still piecing together data and waiting to review intercepted communications that might shed light on what exactly the North Koreans set out to accomplish in the test and how it was conducted.

If confirmed, North Korea's ascension into a growing nuclear club — joining the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China, India and Pakistan — would likely have a major impact on efforts to halt the spread of nuclear weapons. (Israel is widely believed to have nuclear weapons, although it apparently has never conducted a test.) It is the only country to walk away from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and then violate its central tenet — a commitment to refrain from building nuclear weapons.

Intelligence and administration officials said yesterday they believed North Korea had managed a nuclear test of some sort, but because of the secrecy of the Pyongyang regime and the lack of scientific data, some observers would not eliminate the possibility that the blast was created by conventional explosives.

The relatively small size of the explosion, along with North Korea's public statement that the test did not produce any radioactive leakage, led some to question how well the test had gone. Small amounts of leakage are normal during nuclear tests, though it can take several days for the ventilation to register. One U.S. official said radiation detectors in the region were being monitored for any signs in the air from the nuclear test.

Frankly, this is going to just complicate the situation at the UN. If there is no consensus what exploded, how are they going to reach a consensus on what to do about it.? I really can't believe Kim would be so dumb as to fake a nuclear explosion, so I am of the mind that it was either a proof of concept or a partial fizzle. If they can determine that there is some radioactive seepage, that will at least put that issue to rest. That may take a few days, however.