Monday Open Thread
- Five African Union peacekeepers die in Darfur strike. (link )
- Iran releases videotaped confession by British sailors being held for allegedly violating its waters. (link )
- Bomb at police station kills at least 13 in Kirkuk, Iraq. (link )
Looks like the beginning of a busy news week.
UPDATE by Mike P: This is Holy Week in the Christian Calendar [edit: as well as Passover -- pico]and, since religion has been the subject of a lot of discussion in the weekend Open Thread here as well as by Pico over at dKos, I wanted to share a link to a rather long Newsweek piece discussing whether God is real.
Submitted by pico on Mon, 2007-04-02 06:43
Tags:
Comments :
An interesting quote
by Howard Zinn that I saw in teacherken's dkos diary
:
Also, apparently people in Ukraine voted
overwhelmingly for a drag queen to represent their nation in some international contest, which had nationalists in the country furious:
I love the idea of ultra-nationalist anti-drag theatrical shows. What exactly do they do in that kind of show?
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
Tribune sold; Cubs up for sale
Link
qui tacet consentire
OR how baseball goes free market
What message are we sending the children.
I'm only half stupid
What do you all think of john McCain's stroll through
(the green zone) of Baghdad? I think it's really funny! Here he thinks he's proving his statement of a couple weeks ago where he said it was now safe to go out walking through the streets.
St. John rolls in, puts on a very large exposed bulletproof vest, is surrounded by 100 ground troops & rooftop snipers, 3 blackhawk helecopters and 2 apache helicopters
.
Yea, I guess he proved his point. What's that you say? The average Iraqi citizen doesn't have 100 troops, bullet proof vests & 5 helicopters to follow them when they go out for a grocery run? Well, maybe they should think about voting republican.
you know
that when you are someone like McCain, you are a huge target so of course you need a lot of protection in a somewhat hostile territory. That on it's own does not really prove anything one way or the other about Baghdad safety.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
"a lot of protection"?
When the president travels to a foreign country he usually doesn't have that kind of military hardware around. And he's obviously a bigger target than McCain. Clearly then Iraq is a might bit more dangerous than most foreign countries.
To put it another way there is a difference between body guards (secret service) and military troops. There's also a difference between a sniper and a mortar attack. Generally safe countries don't have mortar attacks immediately after foreign dignataries step foot ourtside of their armored compounds.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Maybe McCain thought Iraqi pickpockets
were a problem....
Ah... language.
You know, I tortured over that Iran headline for a lot longer than I should, and I'm still dissatisfied with it.
If I wrote videotaped confession it makes it seem like a perfectly neutral headline, and a statement of guilt from the sailors.
If I wrote videotaped "confession", it turns a headline into an editorial, even if I secretely believe this is the case. (there's something creepy to me about sailors being paraded in front of maps to show how wrong they were, and complimenting their hosts. If it turns out to be true, great for the Iranians, but am I allowed to be a little skeptical in the meantime?)
Maybe I should just change the headline to videotape and leave the confession thing out entirely. Although the confession part was the main reason for the story.
Arrrggghhh!! *rips out hair in frustration*
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
I vote for
videotape 'confessions' of captured sailors.
There is breaking news I guess, that no addtional videos of sailors 'confessions'
will be aired on TV. Iran says there are 'positive changes' in UK stance.
The underlying issue seems to be a power play over boundaires, that have been in dispute for decades.
I'm only half stupid
That's interesting - why "confessions"?
I'm not adverse to reporters delving into stories beyond the surface (in fact, I'd wish they'd do more investigating and less surface transmission), but do they have the evidence to make that kind of claim, apart from a general distrust of Iran's motives?
Not that such a distrust would be unwarranted, but is it justified from the point of view of good journalism? Is there a particular piece of evidence that could be used to to support casting the claims of a "confession" in doubt?
Even more interesting since, just last week, our headlines discussed a terrorist's confessions vis-à-vis 9/11, and there certainly were no quotation marks in those headlines, even though the article addressed the issue of torture.
Again, from a purely visceral point of view, I understand this. But in the Iran case, there's no particular evidence that might cast the confessions in doubt, whereas in the American case, there is.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
Your journalistic integrity is scrupulous
It's an American headline, so the 'confessions' are alleged to be not confessions at all, but Iranian propaganda.
You could say "Iran Airs Footage of Members Held in UK (Bloomberg)
UK:London Clash in War of Images (Radio Free Europe)
Here's an interesting headline: Iran Makes 55million from hostage crises as oil prices soar-The Scotsman
The confessions of terrorists ..... hmmmmm, that's a whole 'nuther subject. I assume that 'confessions' of terrorists, is giving the terrorists an implication of rights.
I'm only half stupid
Kevin Drum addresses income disparity.
Yes, we haven't beaten this dead horse in a while
. Notable quotes from the article:
"Even before Republicans' November defeat at the polls, some administration allies were warning that economic insecurity was eroding Republican support. A business coalition hired pollster David Winston to figure out why voters remained so dissatisfied with the economy. His focus groups of middle-income voters in Cincinnati and Pittsburgh found voters going deeper into debt to keep up with rising costs of health care and energy. Executive compensation "is getting to the point where it's obscene,"....if you read the entire article you'll notice the distinct lack of any Republicans who treat this as anything other than a messaging issue. It needs to be addressed because it's becoming a political liability"
Yup. The big boys make too much. The rest of us should get more.
Viva la revolucion!
Thanks
This and other thought-provoking posts linked in the blogroll and briefly summarized in my diary =) but your longer quote gets at the meat of the article.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
My Favorite "feel good" story of the Day
Democrats Seek to Restore the Constitution
The constitution that is the foundation of our government has been under assault during the Bush years. Both Senate and House Democrats are ready to create 'a conflict' with the President if necessary, on a whole host of issues, including encroachments on privacy and civil liberties allowed by the USA patriot act.
That's my headline. The headline in the washington post says, "Dems to Widen Conflict with Bush".
I'm only half stupid
Wonder what the headline is in the Wash. Times?
how about:
"Democrats put out welcome mat for al Qaeda"
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
Oh, and I forgot
to mention, Leon Panetta, friend of Clintons and wankery fame, says this could be "a risky" strategy for dems. Gee thanks Leon. With friends like you, who needs Republicans?
I'm only half stupid
grrrr
running around like a headless chicken at work. Hopefully will slow down soon so I can get in here.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Woohoo!
WTO rules against the US on online gambling!
I'd love to see this dumb law wiped off the books just on principle, not to mention I have about $600 frozen in Neteller by the U.S. government that I wouldn't mind access to.
(skymutt = moderately successful online poker player)
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
I am not a "successful" online poker
player by any means but I do enjoy it once in a while and the whole thing pissed me off as well. I used Neteller too! What a bunch of morons. I hope they do rewrite the law.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
I actually have made more than half my income
in 2005 and 2006 from online poker. I spent a lot of time at it though, perhaps 20-30 hours a week. After two years of playing that much, I was ready for a break and haven't played much the past five months. Before I took this break, I was frequently screaming at the computer after bad beats etc.... a good sign that I was more than a little burnt out. Right now I'm playing very infrequently-- once every couple weeks or so. Instead of having poker tables open while I work, I have political blogs :-) Actually, the interest I had in the mystery of if, when, and how Congress was going to bring that gambling law to a vote is probably the second most important event in bringing me to political blogs, the biggest reason being the 2006 elections.
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
Why don't you pick up one of those English
ATM/Visa's where it's only good for what you've wired into it. Then at least you can play "legally". I know several guys who do it that way and it hasn't been a problem.
I still have money online in poker accounts
I haven't tried to move any money since they shut neteller down several weeks back, though I have a backup Epassporte account. There's still ways to move money, but Neteller is by far more reliable and trustworthy than anything that's available now.
Basically, the law is pretty useless, but a nuisance. I haven't been playing because of burnout more than the law.
skymutt: accept no substitutes!
When are the rulers of this country going to figure out
that making vice crimes illegal isn't the way to steer the population away from that activity.
I'm with you, it should be legal & regulated, not illegal.
I kinda wish
I could do what you did because I do enjoy playing poker but I do not have the patience to consistently play the same way to win. My mood swings the way I play which is why it's not a good idea for me to do it too much. But then again I've never tried to do it professionally and seriously try to make money.
That congressional action pissed me off to no end though.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Okay, I admit this one surprised even me...
I may come off as a bit of a cynic and that's fine, I like to think I lower my expetations in relation to the actions of the knuckle dragging apes around me.
Apparently those expectations need to be dialed down yet again:
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/3/30/124713/828
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Beyond parody
What a joke.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
is this supposed to be
outrageous? :)
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Yeah, kinda...
...I mean sending out secret government reports to your friend from a online game just so you can blow off steam is outrageously poor judgment.
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Moe Lane at RedState on being a "partisan blogger"
Because, you know, actually criticizing the administration, or trying to get them to change said policy, is clearly not allowed.
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
Partisan towards...
It depends a lot on what you are partisan for or towards. Some "partisans" are pushing for certain principles. Some are pushing for certain geographical interests. Redstate has at least always been honest about the fact that they are republican shills. They will say and do literally anything to defend the current GOP big wigs.
That's their partisan angle so for them criticizing a wrong committed by the administration is often just not possible (unless it is so blatant, or they have no convenient lie to hide behind, that they simply can't ignore it).
I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, goes to the Middle East
with several other congresspersons (a bi-partisan group), meets with Israeli Prime Minister Olmert, goes on to talk to the leaders in Syria and dubya comes out and slams them not once, but twice. Once on Friday and once on Sunday.
Georges explaination was that it is strictly the Executive Branch that thrashes out Foreign Affairs and (dubya specifically mentioned "the Democrats") Nancy & Co were wrong to even go there and address the evil Syrian regime.
George tactfully did not disclose that a Republican group of Senators was there last week, and no one criticised them. That's too bad because that would make charges of hypocrisy much easier to point out.
So....Whadda ya think?
well
It's 100% true that congress has no right to engage in setting Foreign Policy which would then work out in the following manner:
It's ok for GOP congressmen to go and represent the President's view (and with the Executive Branch's blessing) by pressuring Syria to acceede to whatever demands, etc.
It's ok for Democrats to go and do exactly the same as GOP, but the problem is that in Pelosi's case she is not following the Executive policy and should not be involved. Depending on the content of what Democrats say in various foreign states, it could be treasonous (like going to Cuba for example without Government support).
Therefore it's not hypocritical to criticize one party's reps and not the other - it all depends on what interests they were representing. And Pelosi has no right to change our foreign policy on her own - that's the Executive Branch's (and State Dept) prerogative. What an arrogant woman she is.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Hmmm. While you make a good argument
towards not making the Presidents complaints of Nancy & Co a hypocritical setting, I don't agree with you.
Our Elected representatives have every right to speak their own minds when talking with others, even with others from foreign countries.
Dubya ain't king quite yet.
Truck bomb levels Kirkuk police station
qui tacet consentire
This is the govt we are supporting in Iraq.
Iranian friendly Shiites. If we pull out the Maliki is toast and his popularity is already declining.
What are we doing there? Protecting Sunni's from Shiite's. Saudi Arabia is pissed.
Your tax dollars at work.
Is Iraq safe enough for Paris Hilton to ride her bicycle through Anbar province in a bikini? Is that how safe Iraq is?
I'm only half stupid
You know the stink Instupundit, Drudge et all
made about Michael Ware's terrible behaviour at the John McCain press conference in Baghdad yesterday? you know, the one where an "un-named official" (where have we heard THAT one before) said that "Ware was laughing and mocking their comments," adding: "I've never witnessed such disrespect."
Raw Story has the video of the press conference
. See for yourself what Drudge Report, The Washington Times, Power Line's John Hinderaker and Instupundit, Michelle Malkin's Hot Air, Lorie Byrd of Wizbang, and NewsBusters, a weblog run by the conservative Media Research Center have all claimed was Ware's unconcionable behavior. I liked Hindraker's quote best:
"Having publicly committed himself to the proposition that everything that happens in Iraq is a disaster, having publicly ridiculed those who pointed to optimistic developments, how can anyone trust that Ware's future reporting is giving us anything like the straight story from Iraq?"
It's especially good when you see for yourself that all the above complainers are shown to be LIARS! Don't trust 'em any farther than you can throw their writer.
waiting for a retraction and an apology
still waiting.
One unnamed source. Not cool. They did that with the Obama is a muslem story!
I'm only half stupid
Drudge is just a smear merchant
And he won't even correct his mistake.
And the rightosphere will just go right on repeating the lies.
qui tacet consentire
If they play the clip of Ware
today on CNN, where the pretty lady asks him more questions, they will hardly be able to say that Ware is spouting some kind of surrender monkey dem talking points. Ware's assessment for Susan Malvo was brutal. Iraq is a mess, If we leave it's a mess. There no place to run or hide. US dollars support the Iraq govt. If we cut off funds the whole region will be Shiite dominated with the Saudi's going to battle to protect their Sunni brothers from genocide. I think Michael Ware has had being polite on the news up to here. I'd like to see Drudge post that video.
I'm only half stupid
In that respect, I agree with Ware.
I want to help Iraq become a nation, a melting pot of it's people. I'm more than willing to do that by money, advice, loans, technology. I don't want to do that with our GI's. Not one more dead US GI. When they don't have the US to shoot at anymore, some of them will stop shooting for a short time, some will just switch to shooting other Iraqi's. Those will be short lived moments, though. Because without America holding them back, the other factions will go wild on them. In due course, the majority of the population that isn't guerrilla will band together if only to save themselves. We can't stop the bloodbath that's coming. To a certain extent, it's our fault. Not all our fault though. 30 years of Saddam's repression certainly gives murderers a leg up.
Last comment of the day.
Crooks & Liars linked to this site, Down with Tyranny
, where they were discussing folks leaving the bush43 Administration. One such soul is Vic Gold, who spills the beans to the Washington Post. Actually all the beans are coming in his soon-to-be-published (this month) book, Invasion of the Party Snatchers: How the Holy-Rollers and the Neo-Cons Destroyed the GOP. Quotes:
"For all the Rove-built facade of his being a 'strong' chief executive, George W. Bush has been, by comparison to even hapless Jimmy Carter, the weakest, most out of touch president in modern times," Gold writes. "Think Dan Quayle in cowboy boots." Gold is even more withering in his observations of Cheney. "A vice president in control is bad enough. Worse yet is a vice president out of control." For Gold, Cheney brings to mind the adage of Swiss writer Madame de Stael, who wrote, "Men do not change, they unmask themselves." Cheney has a deep streak of paranoia and megalomania, Gold suggests -- but he says he did not see it at first. He was hiding who he really was," Gold says. "He was waiting for an opportunity." In many ways, Gold's tale of disillusionment is a familiar one. There are plenty of veterans of Reagan and Bush 41 around town who believe Bush and Cheney trashed the institutions and party they helped build from the wreckage of the Goldwater campaign.
Bush's father's reply when he was informed-- by Gold-- about the book was more gracious: "You always called them like you saw them," the former president told him."
The characterization of what Lynne Cheney said upon learning about the book are much less kind. Another Kool Aide Lynne?
I saw this and posted
it in comments, twice.....!
It is worth a third, fourth and fifth look. This is huge. Team Bush is steamin mad
about their own kind turning on them, and even worse, writing books!
At least Vic can call em Holy Rollers and not be called to task as being politically incorrect. The White House is filled with unqualified holy rollers.
They truly think the rest of "us" are satan's spawn. The reason we are not winning in Iraq, is because folks aren't praying hard enough, and the secular godless left whom they despise, is defeating America because they haven't come to Jesus.
( Also See testimony: Lurita Doan.)
I'm only half stupid
George Tenet's Expose is Next
according to Washington Whispers........omg! That is extreme. That will be "the end" depending on how far he goes.
Cheney screwed Tenet and the CIA by hijacking intelligence operations to go through his office.
No wonder everyone on LifeBoat Bush is jumping overboard!
I'm only half stupid
Why CIA let itself be the fall guy
I have been wondering why CIA does not defend itself.
Bush Admi keeps blaming the CIA for wrong intel info--when it is really the smokestack duplicate intelligence under Cheney is the problem.
They have been trying to fix the CIA--but what should really be done is exposed and disband the duplicate intelligence under Cheney.
Fear mongering paranoia
is always an easy sell. They scared the hell out of everyone.
What I always found disturbing (it's hard to keep up with all this) is that George Tenet was asked to Produce an NIE report, a National Intelligence Report, for Iraq in two weeks. His report was rushed and he was pressured to help support Dick Cheney's side. Normally an NIE takes at least a year. And parts of this were declassified to support the administrations position.
Look at the list of those who are now so ashamed that they bought into the hysteria, Cheney's "it will be for the greater good". George Tenet, Collin Powell, and so many others. The ones who were forced to resign at least still have their dignity. The rest are all writing books to absolve their feelings of guilt...... and put mucho pressure on the White House which has become insanely isolated and radicalized.
Big fight Robert Gates v Dick Cheney. Noting that Gates opted out of a contract allowing Halliburton to build yet another more modern faciity in Guantanamo.
I'm only half stupid
I do blame George Tenant, he knew the intel that
the bush43 Administration was using to justify going to war was bogus, and he let them fly with it.
Now, I also see that Tenant saw a) post 9/11 & b) a brand spanking new administration who also had created their own intelligence network through Feith & the NPAC team that was guaranteed to dredge up cooked intel.
That doesn't let Tenant off the hook for supporting dubya's desire to invade the Middle East. He should have known were this was going to go. Tenant supported the administration, even going so far as to fall on his own sword later, but he did a grave dis-service to the American people and Nation. Who was Tenants boss? Some say dubya, I say it was We The People.