Grand Prix press release for Lotus and Angelo Lazaris promised a lot but didn’t deliver on the day, McLaren took it all the way.

Meanwhile, Alfa has and upcoming new release, the Mi.To. It is a cross between a mini and an Alfa 147, somewhat cheaper than their normally high price, and is relying on the youth market to top up it’s falling sales figures.

If you are dreaming about an Alfa, try not to. You will be spending a lot of time on the side of the road, although your Alfa dealer will lend you a car while yours is being fixed. It is not uncommom for you to have a loan car for 3 months.

Available here is 1.9 Tdi, 1.4 TP, also a new 184kw for it’s GTA. That’s pretty funny when you consider a Kia Carnival has 184kw of power.

Yesterday I had a special treat, and drove a Lamborghini Gallardo. Absolutely amazing torque. A great shame there wasn’t a track near, so I could floor it. Very smooth gearing, but still drove like a sports car. A slightly bumpy ride on our roads.

Also, in the last of week 1 have been able to give an Impreza WRX a nice workout. I have decided the car is more myth than legend, and very over rated. The suspension is too hard, and gives a rough ride. Nice power, but lacking in other areas. I was able to blow the clutch by the third burnout. Bye bye Impreza!

They have a totally new model coming soon, new shape, new everything. Hopefully that will pick up the slack in the backward body styling, suspension and clutch.

Toyota’s new V8 Cruiser Tray, released some months back, has a waiting list of round 5 or 6 months. Happens every time a new model is released, but this is definitely worth waiting for. I don’t think there is another 4×4 that stacks up to it.

I often see stickers on Patrol’s that say “Pajero” Recovery Vehicle, which is quite funny. I think a Cruiser recovers everything!

Considering everything that has happened in the last week or so, cars made for a good topic. They can’t talk.


Resurrected by Demons in Disguise

This thing has got way out of control. Please don’t point the finger at Layla, we were all conned.
I was absolutely horrified when I saw Redacted. (I could not believe people could do those things), I dissolved completely.
I had no idea the video clip was not real footage. When I found out it was a movie with actors, I grabbed the lifeline.
Soul in Torment posted “Angel may be going through a “grief rejection crisis”. Soul in Torment is correct.
What I didn’t know, at the time of posting, was that the movie portrayed real life attrocities committed in Iraq, in a very clear and concise manner.
Who ever originally sent that video clip out. did so to divide and conquer, to make us look like idiots. Just so they would be able to say “Layla Anwar has to resort to movies to make Iraq look terrible”.
Well “whoever” you are, it backfired. Now we all know the real truth of “reality” based TV”.


Winter Soldiers Sound Off

Hi, Lookers,

You should have a good look at this .

Some of your servicemen have integrity, all be it after the fact.

An Iraqi was once selling soda out of a motorcycle to soldiers in a waiting convoy,” says Moon. “In the side-car was his seven-to-eight-year-old child. When the man refused to go away, the MP on patrol put him to the ground with a gun to his head and started stripping his vehicle and searching it.

They then took the child, picked it up into the air, and threw it full force onto the ground. I didn’t see the child get up.”An Iraqi was once selling soda out of a motorcycle to soldiers in a waiting convoy,” says Moon. “In the side-car was his seven-to-eight-year-old child.

When the man refused to go away, the MP on patrol put him to the ground with a gun to his head and started stripping his vehicle and searching it. They then took the child, picked it up into the air, and threw it full force onto the ground. I didn’t see the child get up.”

This is one of heaps. I listened to the broadcast of Winter Soldier. It was awful. How can I be pro USA? Absolutely impossible.


Well, look what I have come accross, an article written by former UN weapons inspector, Hans Blix. I would like to think BushCo is honest enough to admit their mistakes. As a leader, Bush says, “you can never admit to a mistake”. Bush has also stated, “I’m driven with a mission from God. …God would tell me, ‘George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq…’ And I did.”

Maybe God will see fit to talk to each and every one of us, in this direct manner, or is he only pro American?

Quoted directly from Hans’s article named: A War of Utter Folly.

By then, Unmovic inspectors had carried out some 700 inspections at 500 sites without finding prohibited weapons. The contract that George Bush held up before Congress to show that Iraq was purchasing uranium oxide was proved to be a forgery. The allied powers were on thin ice, but they preferred to replace question marks with exclamation marks.

They could not succeed in eliminating WMDs because they did not exist. Nor could they succeed in the declared aim to eliminate al-Qaida operators, because they were not in Iraq. They came later, attracted by the occupants. A third declared aim was to bring democracy to Iraq, hopefully becoming an example for the region. Let us hope for the future; but five years of occupation has clearly brought more anarchy than democracy.

The following is clearly the most terrifying of all ,in Hans Blix’s statement:

In the 2004 presidential election campaign, Bush ridiculed any idea that the US would need to ask for a “permission slip” before taking military action against a “growing threat”. True, the 2003 Iraq invasion is not the only case in which armed force has been used in disregard of the charter. However, from the most powerful member of the UN it is a dangerous signal. If preventive war is accepted for one, it is accepted for all.

That is probably the most frightening thing of all. They need no permission, they are accountable to no-one, they ignore the United Nations, and they don’t hold to the Geneva Convention.

The worst forms of tyranny, or certainly the most successful ones, are not those we rail against but those that so insinuate themselves into the imagery of our consciousness, and the fabric of our lives, as not to be perceived as tyranny: Michael Parenti .


In some respects, the thing is a very transparent dialectic: war for peace; killing to protect life; destruction of freedoms to safeguard freedom; glorying in killing as a means to prevent killing; turning those who are killed into the enemy; naming the enemy as apt for killing; naming an innominate enemy as a threat while threatening and killing to create more enemies to manifest the sense of threat. And so it goes.

Legion Thu 20 Mar 08 (05:03pm) Blogocracy.

Still Peacocks

After yesterdays post, I thought I may have been slightly harsh on those concerned, after all they are flesh and blood.

Unfortunately, this flesh and blood being takes things personally, and I decided I was no “Hitler’s Angel”.

The response to the youtube US Marine dog shooting video I posted yesterday, was so very immature and thoughtless.

The response was:

“If you’re an animal lover,shouldn’t you be disparaging PETA Angel? After all,they do try to help animals”.

A simple “that was awful” or “he shouldn’t have done that” would have sufficed, just to show a spark of humanity in this insane world.

That’s what I mean about arrogance, the inability to take any criticism what so ever on behalf of their military.

Puffed Up Peacocks

I have been visiting some American blogs lately. It has been an interesting experience, with an awfully rude awakening for me. My US cousins, who all have differing opinions on Iraq, tell me that a lot of Americans are ashamed of what their administration has done to Iraq. They also tell me some, including a couple of them, have exactly the opposite opinion.

I am usually a moderate blogger, don’t make too much noise, and keep a low profile. I read a lot, but usually don’t comment. But, in this instance, I will tell you exactly what I think.

The particular blogger I am referring to seems like a nice guy.
I don’t always agree with him, which is fair enough, it’s his blog, and he has the right to say anything he wants. He is quite humble, which makes me appreciate his opinions all the more.

On the other hand, some (not all) of his commenters are the most arrogant, self opinionated, pompous puffed up little Peacocks I have come accross in blogger land.

They cannot stand criticism of the USA in Iraq, in any shape or form, and that is where arrogance comes into opinions. The arrogance does not do any favours for their cause, in fact it detracts from the validity of their statements.

A particular blogger also accused me of airing a Fake Video of Dog Abuse. That is being investigated, according to Pentagon News. Well, just for him this one is definitely not fake. There is also another little snippet at the bottom.

Low and behold, it’s not just animals. At least the other soliders in the above video had the temerity to express their disgust at the shooter. In this one, they cheer when they kill a wounded Iraqi on the ground.

Soldiers in war are disgusting, which ever side they are on.


More Torture Stories Leaking Out

I found this article, while roaming today. I was disturbed to see America is still up to these dirty tricks. After the world was made aware of David Hicks, the US was condemned for not only using ‘soft torture’, but avoiding her own Bill of Rights by using another country to implement the methods. I believe Cuba is one of several.

Despite US Efforts at Concealment, More Torture Stories Leaking Out.
(Sorry, my links aren’t working)

While I realise that there are other countries out there that use similar methods, or worse, the US has set such high moral standards on other issues, you really don’t think it is possible for them to do these things. They are ‘better’ than that. The question is, are they?

I also found the history of CIA Soft Torture, which makes for fascinating reading, but ugly dreams.

The Birth of Soft TortureCIA interrogation techniques—a history.By Rebecca LemovUpdated Wednesday, Nov. 16, 2005, at 5:07 PM ET

In 1949, Cardinal Jószef Mindszenty appeared before the world’s cameras to mumble his confession to treasonous crimes against the Hungarian church and state. For resisting communism, the World War II hero had been subjected for 39 days to sleep deprivation and humiliation, alternating with long hours of interrogation, by Russian-trained Hungarian police. His staged confession riveted the Central Intelligence Agency, which theorized in a security memorandum that Soviet-trained experts were controlling Mindszenty by “some unknown force.” If the Communists had interrogation weapons that were evidently more subtle and effective than brute physical torture, the CIA decided, then it needed such weapons, too.
Months later, the agency began a program to explore “avenues to the control of human behavior,” as John Marks discusses in his book The Search for the Manchurian Candidate. During the next decade and a half, CIA experts honed the use of “chemical and biological materials capable of producing human behavioral and physiological changes” according to a retrospective CIA catalog written in 1963. And thus soft torture in the United States was born.

In short order, CIA experts attempted to induce Mindszenty-like effects. An interrogation team consisting of a psychiatrist, a lie-detector expert, and a hypnotist went to work using combinations of the depressant Sodium Amytal and certain stimulants. Tests on four suspected double agents in Tokyo in July 1950 and on 25 North Korean prisoners of war three months later yielded more noteworthy results. (Relevant CIA documents do not specify exactly what, but reports later claimed that the special interrogation teams could hold a subject in a “controlled state” for a long period.) Meanwhile, the CIA opened the door to pre-emptive psychosurgery: In a doctor’s office in Washington, D.C., one unfortunate man, his name deleted from documents, was lobotomized against his will during an interrogation. By the mid-to-late 1950s, experiments using “black techniques,” as the agency called them, moved to prisons, hospitals, and other field-testing sites with funding and encouragement from the CIA’s Science and Technology Directorate*.
One of the most extreme 1950s experiments that the CIA sponsored was conducted at a McGill University hospital, where the world-renowned psychiatrist Dr. Ewen Cameron had been pioneering a technique he called “psychic driving.” Dr. Cameron was widely considered the most able psychiatrist in Canada—his honors included the presidency of the World Psychiatric Association—and his patients were referred to him from all over. A disaffected housewife, a rebellious youth, a struggling starlet, and the wife of a Canadian member of Parliament were a few of the more than 100 patients who became uninformed, nonconsenting experimental subjects. Many were diagnosed as schizophrenic (a diagnosis since contested in many of the cases).
Cameron’s goal was to wipe out the stable “self,” eliminating deep-seated psychological problems in order to rebuild it. He grandiosely hoped to transform human existence by opening a new gateway to the understanding of consciousness. The CIA wanted to know what his experiments suggested about interrogating people with the help of sensory deprivation, environmental manipulation, and psychic disorientation.
Cameron’s technique was to expose a patient to tape-recorded messages or sounds that were played back or repeated for long periods. The goal was a condition Cameron dubbed “penetration”: The patient experienced an escalating state of distress that often caused him or her to reveal long-buried past experiences or disturbing events. At that point, the doctor would offer “healing” suggestions. Frequently, his patients didn’t want to listen and would attack their analyst or try to leave the room. In the 1956 American Journal of Psychiatry, Cameron explained that he broke down their resistance by continually repeating his message using “pillow and ceiling microphones” and different voices; by imposing periods of prolonged sleep; and by giving patients drugs like Sodium Amytal, Desoxyn, and LSD-25, which “disorganized” thought patterns.
To further disorganize his patients, Cameron isolated them in a sensory deprivation chamber. In a dark room, a patient would sit in silence with his eyes covered with goggles, prevented “from touching his body—thus interfering with his self image.” Finally “attempts were made to cut down on his expressive output”—he was restrained or bandaged so he could not scream. Cameron combined these tactics with extended periods of forced listening to taped messages for up to 20 hours per day, for 10 or 15 days at a stretch.
In 1958 and 1959, Cameron went further. With new CIA money behind him, he tried to completely “depattern” 53 patients by combining psychic driving with electroshock therapy and a long-term, drug-induced coma. At the most intensive stage of the treatment, many subjects were no longer able to perform even basic functions. They needed training to eat, use the toilet, or speak. Once the doctor allowed the drugs to wear off and ceased shock treatments, patients slowly relearned how to take care of themselves—and their pretreatment symptoms were said to have disappeared.
So had much of their personalities. Patients emerged from Cameron’s ward walking differently, talking differently, acting differently. Wives were more docile, daughters less inclined to histrionics, sons better-behaved. Most had no memory of their treatment or of their previous lives. Sometimes, they forgot they had children. At first, they were grateful to their doctor for his help. Several Cameron patients, however, later said they had severe recurrences of their pretreatment problems and traumatic memories of the treatment itself and together sued the doctor as well as the U.S. and Canadian governments. Their case was quietly settled out of court.
By the late 1950s and early 1960s, CIA experts thought they understood the techniques necessary for “breaking” a person. Under a strict regime of behavioral conditioning, “the possibility of resistance over a very long period may be vanishingly small,” several researchers concluded in an analysis used in the CIA’s 1963 manual Counterintelligence Interrogation. At the agency, pressure increased to field-test coercive interrogation tools. The task, as CIA second-in-command Richard Helms urged, was to test the agency’s techniques on “normal” people. At times, this imperative made the agency reckless. As part of the now notorious MK-ULTRA program—”one of the seamiest episodes in American intelligence,” according to journalist Seymour Hersh—the CIA set up a safe house in San Francisco where its agents could observe the effects of various drug combinations on human behavior. They were in search of a “truth serum” and thought LSD might be it. Prostitutes were hired to bring unwitting johns back to the house, where the women slipped acid and other strong psychoactive substances into the men’s drinks. From behind a one-way mirror, investigators watched, notebooks and martinis in hand. Sometimes the men took the drugs and managed to carry on. Sometimes they babbled or cried. An internal CIA review condemned these high jinks in 1963, but Congress didn’t investigate them until 1977, after a post-Watergate crisis of confidence in the agency.
At least officially, the CIA ended its behavioral science program in the mid-1960s, before scientists and operatives achieved total control over a subject. “All experiments beyond a certain point always failed,” an operative veteran of the program said, “because the subject jerked himself back for some reason or the subject got amnesiac or catatonic.” In other words, you could create a vegetable or a zombie, but not a robot who would obey you against his will. Still, the CIA had gained reliable information about how to derange and disorient a person who was reluctant to cooperate. An enemy could quickly be made into a confused and desperate human being.
Since 9/11, as government documents and news reports have made clear, the CIA’s experimental approach to coercive interrogation has been revived. Last week, as the Washington Post revealed the existence of secret CIA-run prisons—”black sites”—in Eastern Europe, Vice President Dick Cheney continued to campaign to ensure that the agency will not be prevented from using “cruel, inhumane, and degrading” methods to elicit intelligence from detainees. The operatives of the 1940s would approve.
Correction, Nov. 18, 2005: The article originally referred to the CIA’s Technology and Science Directorate. The correct title is the Science and Technology Directorate.

« Older entries