All the issues are right in here. I don't have the answers though. Read it all.
A British jihadist
Saturday, July 30, 2005
Here's another op-ed piece by someone who doesn't mind putting my life and yours at risk so that he doesn't get offended.
You Can't Fight Terrorism With Racism
He goes on to list a bunch of white people who have committed crimes or terrorist acts either as lone individuals or groups that operate only in one specific part of the world, which by the way is not our own. Call me irrational, but I don't believe I need to feel threatened in a New York or Washington subway by an Irishman or a serial-killer from Kansa - not much precedent of random violence there. Hoemless people of all races yes, rowdy minority teens yelling and cursing as they file out from school, yes. Anyone who might be a Muslim male - yes. And since we know the poverty is the root cause of terrorism and all "the man" is rich it must be a non-White Muslim - right?
Wake up! Dark skinned men of the same religion are killing thousands of people everywhere in the world under the same banner and he wants elderly japanese women searched so that he doesn't feel singled out.
Only an idiot in today's world doesn't do a once over of every young Arab or black man on the subway. That means other Arab and black men should be doing it too - they probably can tell who looks out of place better than I, a white man would.
Think of it in the same way that gays and Jews joke about how they can "tell" if someone is gay or Jewish by just looking at them, even though they really can't. It's a human coping mechanism and it's there for a reason.
I'm probably coming off as racist, but I get very upset when someone thinks their comfort is worth more than my life.
Maybe we should apply this kind of logic to advertisers. We should force Jheri Curl to spend 85% of their dollars outside the African-American media and the local Jewish funeral home to advertise in Christinaity Today. Isn't what they're dong profiling their customers?
I don't care that this doesn't make any sense - just a little diarrhea of the keyboard this morning....hey it's my blog.
You Can't Fight Terrorism With Racism
He goes on to list a bunch of white people who have committed crimes or terrorist acts either as lone individuals or groups that operate only in one specific part of the world, which by the way is not our own. Call me irrational, but I don't believe I need to feel threatened in a New York or Washington subway by an Irishman or a serial-killer from Kansa - not much precedent of random violence there. Hoemless people of all races yes, rowdy minority teens yelling and cursing as they file out from school, yes. Anyone who might be a Muslim male - yes. And since we know the poverty is the root cause of terrorism and all "the man" is rich it must be a non-White Muslim - right?
Wake up! Dark skinned men of the same religion are killing thousands of people everywhere in the world under the same banner and he wants elderly japanese women searched so that he doesn't feel singled out.
Only an idiot in today's world doesn't do a once over of every young Arab or black man on the subway. That means other Arab and black men should be doing it too - they probably can tell who looks out of place better than I, a white man would.
Think of it in the same way that gays and Jews joke about how they can "tell" if someone is gay or Jewish by just looking at them, even though they really can't. It's a human coping mechanism and it's there for a reason.
I'm probably coming off as racist, but I get very upset when someone thinks their comfort is worth more than my life.
Maybe we should apply this kind of logic to advertisers. We should force Jheri Curl to spend 85% of their dollars outside the African-American media and the local Jewish funeral home to advertise in Christinaity Today. Isn't what they're dong profiling their customers?
I don't care that this doesn't make any sense - just a little diarrhea of the keyboard this morning....hey it's my blog.
From the NY Times Editors - The Roots of Prisoner Abuse
This week, the White House blocked a Senate vote on a measure sponsored by a half-dozen Republicans, including Senator John McCain, that would prohibit cruel, degrading or inhumane treatment of prisoners. Besides being outrageous on its face, that action served as a reminder of how the Bush administration ducks for cover behind the men and women in uniform when challenged on military policy, but ignores their advice when it seems inconvenient.
I'm always intrigued when the Times claims that the Bush Administration does something so unjust on its face that it would be considered evil if the Times actually believed that the concept of evil existed.
In fact, one of the Republican Senators that the Times finds so morally courageous, Lindsey Graham, said recently “psychological and physical stress are appropriate techniques as long as they stay within the boundaries of international norms and humane treatment."
The problem is that defenders of the Guantanamo prisoners think it's cruel and degrading to have male prisoners interviewed by females, have someone touch the Koran by mistake, etc. They don't think there is such a thing as a stress technique that's appropriate.
In other words, criticize the Administration for not wanting to give additional powers to Congress, but don't claim that they are the only ones that support (you know they want to say it) torturing prisoners.
This week, the White House blocked a Senate vote on a measure sponsored by a half-dozen Republicans, including Senator John McCain, that would prohibit cruel, degrading or inhumane treatment of prisoners. Besides being outrageous on its face, that action served as a reminder of how the Bush administration ducks for cover behind the men and women in uniform when challenged on military policy, but ignores their advice when it seems inconvenient.
I'm always intrigued when the Times claims that the Bush Administration does something so unjust on its face that it would be considered evil if the Times actually believed that the concept of evil existed.
In fact, one of the Republican Senators that the Times finds so morally courageous, Lindsey Graham, said recently “psychological and physical stress are appropriate techniques as long as they stay within the boundaries of international norms and humane treatment."
The problem is that defenders of the Guantanamo prisoners think it's cruel and degrading to have male prisoners interviewed by females, have someone touch the Koran by mistake, etc. They don't think there is such a thing as a stress technique that's appropriate.
In other words, criticize the Administration for not wanting to give additional powers to Congress, but don't claim that they are the only ones that support (you know they want to say it) torturing prisoners.
Thursday, July 28, 2005
This is absolutely comical. On the same day that Bob Herbert produces a rant like Oil and Blood, his employer prints and Editorial called Energy Shortage.
From Mr. Herbert:
You can run through all the wildly varying rationales for this war: the weapons of mass destruction (that were never found), the need to remove the unmitigated evil of Saddam (whom we had once cozied up to), the connection to Al Qaeda (which was bogus), and one of President Bush's favorites, the need to fight the terrorists "over there" so we won't have to fight them here at home.
All the rationales have to genuflect before "The Prize," which was the title of Mr. Yergin's Pulitzer-Prize-winning book.
It's the oil, stupid.
Iraq was supposed to be a first step. Iran was also in the neoconservatives' sights. The neocons envisaged U.S. control of the region (and its oil), to be followed inevitably by the realization of their ultimate dream, a global American empire. Of course it sounds like madness, which is why we should have been paying closer attention from the beginning.
Ftom the NY Times editorial board:
The energy bill that has been six years in the making and is nearing the president's desk is not the unrelieved disaster some environmentalists make it out to be. But to say, as President Bush undoubtedly will, that it will swiftly move this country to a cleaner, more secure energy future is nonsense. The bill, approved by a House-Senate conference early Tuesday morning, does not take the bold steps necessary to reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil, and it also fails to address the looming problem of global warming.
I guess the Editors don't consider the invasion of Iraq as a bold step to reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil as Mr. Herbert does. It's been over two years now..where's my 50 cent per gallon oil Mr. Herbert??
From Mr. Herbert:
You can run through all the wildly varying rationales for this war: the weapons of mass destruction (that were never found), the need to remove the unmitigated evil of Saddam (whom we had once cozied up to), the connection to Al Qaeda (which was bogus), and one of President Bush's favorites, the need to fight the terrorists "over there" so we won't have to fight them here at home.
All the rationales have to genuflect before "The Prize," which was the title of Mr. Yergin's Pulitzer-Prize-winning book.
It's the oil, stupid.
Iraq was supposed to be a first step. Iran was also in the neoconservatives' sights. The neocons envisaged U.S. control of the region (and its oil), to be followed inevitably by the realization of their ultimate dream, a global American empire. Of course it sounds like madness, which is why we should have been paying closer attention from the beginning.
Ftom the NY Times editorial board:
The energy bill that has been six years in the making and is nearing the president's desk is not the unrelieved disaster some environmentalists make it out to be. But to say, as President Bush undoubtedly will, that it will swiftly move this country to a cleaner, more secure energy future is nonsense. The bill, approved by a House-Senate conference early Tuesday morning, does not take the bold steps necessary to reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil, and it also fails to address the looming problem of global warming.
I guess the Editors don't consider the invasion of Iraq as a bold step to reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil as Mr. Herbert does. It's been over two years now..where's my 50 cent per gallon oil Mr. Herbert??
I just have to lift this straight from Zarq.
Our President is once again fulfilling his campaign promise to restore dignity and honor to the White House. Additional link to Quicktime clips can be found at One Good Move.
There seems to be some debate as to which finger the President so prominently displayed.
Our President is once again fulfilling his campaign promise to restore dignity and honor to the White House. Additional link to Quicktime clips can be found at One Good Move.
There seems to be some debate as to which finger the President so prominently displayed.
I don't know what's more terrifying - that a judge thinks that someone who was looking to commit mass murder and detroy a major part of America's transportation infrastructure should get only 22 years in prison, or that the same judge thinks he's morally superior for treating this person kindly.
Judge Gets in Swipe at Bush Administration
The sentence itself was fairly straightforward: An Algerian man received 22 years for plotting to bomb the Los Angeles airport on the eve of the millennium. It was what the judge said in imposing the term that raised eyebrows.
U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour said the successful prosecution of Ahmed Ressam should serve not only as a warning to terrorists, but as a statement to the Bush administration about its terrorism-fighting tactics.
"We did not need to use a secret military tribunal, detain the defendant indefinitely as an enemy combatant or deny the defendant the right to counsel," he said Wednesday. "The message to the world from today's sentencing is that our courts have not abandoned our commitment to the ideals that set our nation apart."
If this was a case of mental instability I might understand, but this enemy of the state received less of a sentence than Bernie Ebbers of Worldcom!
That'll teach 'em!
UPDATE: Now that's more like it - Prominent Cleric From Yemen Is Sentenced to 75 Years
A Yemeni cleric was sentenced in New York today to 75 years in federal prison for conspiracy to support Al Qaeda and Hamas and other charges.
And he was just convicted of consipiring with terrorists - not trying to blow things up himself.
Judge Gets in Swipe at Bush Administration
The sentence itself was fairly straightforward: An Algerian man received 22 years for plotting to bomb the Los Angeles airport on the eve of the millennium. It was what the judge said in imposing the term that raised eyebrows.
U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour said the successful prosecution of Ahmed Ressam should serve not only as a warning to terrorists, but as a statement to the Bush administration about its terrorism-fighting tactics.
"We did not need to use a secret military tribunal, detain the defendant indefinitely as an enemy combatant or deny the defendant the right to counsel," he said Wednesday. "The message to the world from today's sentencing is that our courts have not abandoned our commitment to the ideals that set our nation apart."
If this was a case of mental instability I might understand, but this enemy of the state received less of a sentence than Bernie Ebbers of Worldcom!
That'll teach 'em!
UPDATE: Now that's more like it - Prominent Cleric From Yemen Is Sentenced to 75 Years
A Yemeni cleric was sentenced in New York today to 75 years in federal prison for conspiracy to support Al Qaeda and Hamas and other charges.
And he was just convicted of consipiring with terrorists - not trying to blow things up himself.
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
Back in May, I wrote a post which suggested that a Palestinian-American letter writer to the NY Times was the same as a German-Palestinian protester (of whom I posted a picture chaining herself to something in order to be arrested to protest Israeli policy in the Occupied Territories). Below is a comment I received from the author of the letter to the editor.
That person in the picture above is not me. It is actually a person with the same first and last name. She is German-Palestinian, 2 years older than me, and lives in the West Bank. I on the other hand, am Palestinian-American (if you'd like to check my passport), 2 years younger than the person in the picture, and lived in Gaza. I never chained myself to anything, nor did I spend any time in any jail. There is a difference. Check your facts.
I had assumed that there couldn't be two politically active Western-based Palestinian women with what I thought was a unique name who had both visited the Occupied Territories and made an appearance in the media recently.
The only solace I have is that the post was not critical of the persons involved per se as much as it was meant to suggest that the Times prints letters from political activists before it prints letter from the common man. I still believe that to be the case.
Again, apologies to both Ms. Khayals for the mistake.
That person in the picture above is not me. It is actually a person with the same first and last name. She is German-Palestinian, 2 years older than me, and lives in the West Bank. I on the other hand, am Palestinian-American (if you'd like to check my passport), 2 years younger than the person in the picture, and lived in Gaza. I never chained myself to anything, nor did I spend any time in any jail. There is a difference. Check your facts.
I had assumed that there couldn't be two politically active Western-based Palestinian women with what I thought was a unique name who had both visited the Occupied Territories and made an appearance in the media recently.
The only solace I have is that the post was not critical of the persons involved per se as much as it was meant to suggest that the Times prints letters from political activists before it prints letter from the common man. I still believe that to be the case.
Again, apologies to both Ms. Khayals for the mistake.
Tuesday, July 26, 2005
This is one of the first arguments I've read that shows that Israel doesn't deserve to be targeted by terrorists not becuase Israel has a right to exist so much as that they've killed a lot fewer Muslims than the U.S. or Russia.
Tread more carefully
Unless, of course, Israel is a uniquely special case. That is a hard argument to make. No official figure exists because, shamefully, they have never been counted, but more than 100,000 Iraqis are said to have been killed during and since the 2003 invasion. Russia's war on Chechnya has cost up to 200,000 civilian lives, one in five of the entire population. Since the intifada began five years ago, 3,600 Palestinians have been killed. No one is making excuses for that; every one of those lives lost is a catastrophe. But in a world full of brutalities and mass slaughter, by what logic is Israel reviled as the uniquely heinous culprit, the one state whose civilians are fair game?
Tread more carefully
Unless, of course, Israel is a uniquely special case. That is a hard argument to make. No official figure exists because, shamefully, they have never been counted, but more than 100,000 Iraqis are said to have been killed during and since the 2003 invasion. Russia's war on Chechnya has cost up to 200,000 civilian lives, one in five of the entire population. Since the intifada began five years ago, 3,600 Palestinians have been killed. No one is making excuses for that; every one of those lives lost is a catastrophe. But in a world full of brutalities and mass slaughter, by what logic is Israel reviled as the uniquely heinous culprit, the one state whose civilians are fair game?
Five Egyptian men with maps of the New York City subway system and video of New York landmarks have been arrested by the Joint Terrorism Task Force in Newark, N.J., ABC News has learned.
Authorities Arrest Men with NYC Maps, Video
OK, seriously, if having a few maps and a video of New York City landmarks is enough to have you arrested for being a potential terrorist, there's probably a few hundred million potential terrorists out there including myself. I think I have a Frommer's guidebook somewhere too.
That being said, if these people are in this country illegally, I say send them home no questions asked.
And since we're talking about New Jersey, that wild and crazy state:
Bill Pushed to Stop Drivers From Smoking
Ashtrays have been disappearing in cars like fins on Cadillacs, and so could smoking while driving in New Jersey, under a measure introduced in the Legislature....
Assemblyman John McKeon, a tobacco opponent whose father died of emphysema, sponsored the legislation. He cites a AAA-sponsored study on driver distractions in which the automobile association found that of 32,000 accidents linked to distraction, 1 percent were related to smoking.
Perhaps the next suggestion will be to ban children from crying in a moving vehicle. I can say with confidence, as the father of two pre-schoolers, that this is a pretty big distraction. That and the billboard for the new Twin Peaks restaurant.
Authorities Arrest Men with NYC Maps, Video
OK, seriously, if having a few maps and a video of New York City landmarks is enough to have you arrested for being a potential terrorist, there's probably a few hundred million potential terrorists out there including myself. I think I have a Frommer's guidebook somewhere too.
That being said, if these people are in this country illegally, I say send them home no questions asked.
And since we're talking about New Jersey, that wild and crazy state:
Bill Pushed to Stop Drivers From Smoking
Ashtrays have been disappearing in cars like fins on Cadillacs, and so could smoking while driving in New Jersey, under a measure introduced in the Legislature....
Assemblyman John McKeon, a tobacco opponent whose father died of emphysema, sponsored the legislation. He cites a AAA-sponsored study on driver distractions in which the automobile association found that of 32,000 accidents linked to distraction, 1 percent were related to smoking.
Perhaps the next suggestion will be to ban children from crying in a moving vehicle. I can say with confidence, as the father of two pre-schoolers, that this is a pretty big distraction. That and the billboard for the new Twin Peaks restaurant.
Monday, July 25, 2005
I'm sure he was just being a nice guy and he doesn't read Arabic, but it's worth showing. Ricky Martin Seeks End to Arab Stereotypes.
In his first visit to the Middle East, Ricky Martin declared he will try to change negative perceptions of Arab youth in the West.
"I promise I will become a spokesperson, if you allow me to, a spokesperson on your behalf. I will defend you and try to get rid of any stereotypes," the 33-year-old singer told youngsters from 16 mainly Arab countries at a youth conference on Monday...
Martin, whose hits include "She Bangs,""Shake Your Bon-Bon" and "Livin' La Vida Loca," posed for photos with fans, at one point draping over his shoulders a traditional Arab kaffiyeh headscarf with the slogan "Jerusalem Is Ours" written in Arabic on it.
In his first visit to the Middle East, Ricky Martin declared he will try to change negative perceptions of Arab youth in the West.
"I promise I will become a spokesperson, if you allow me to, a spokesperson on your behalf. I will defend you and try to get rid of any stereotypes," the 33-year-old singer told youngsters from 16 mainly Arab countries at a youth conference on Monday...
Martin, whose hits include "She Bangs,""Shake Your Bon-Bon" and "Livin' La Vida Loca," posed for photos with fans, at one point draping over his shoulders a traditional Arab kaffiyeh headscarf with the slogan "Jerusalem Is Ours" written in Arabic on it.
Sunday, July 24, 2005
Obnoxiuos with a capital "O".
Lt. gov. crashed Marine's funeral, kin say
The family of a Marine who was killed in Iraq is furious with Lt. Gov. Catherine Baker Knoll for showing up uninvited at his funeral this week, handing out her business card and then saying "our government" is against the war.
Hero
CHB (See here for explanation)
Lt. gov. crashed Marine's funeral, kin say
The family of a Marine who was killed in Iraq is furious with Lt. Gov. Catherine Baker Knoll for showing up uninvited at his funeral this week, handing out her business card and then saying "our government" is against the war.
Hero
CHB (See here for explanation)
Osama Saeed, spokesman for the Muslim Association of Britain writes an editorial in the UK Guardian - Back to you, Mr Blair - It is wrong to put the onus on British Muslims to defeat terror
Never mind the idea that Great Britain has brought the terror on itself by supporting atrocities and causing great pain to Muslims around the world. Becuase we all know that no Muslims in history ever did anything bad to non-Muslims.
It's this kind of statement that gets my goat.
You can regard these [terrorist] acts as part of Islam, or as an irrational reaction to injustice taking place in the world. If it's the former you have to explain why this started only 12 years ago and not 1,400. To us it is evident that it is the latter, so we're batting the ball back in your court, Mr Blair.
12 YEARS AGO?!?!?! What about the previous 30 years of Islamic terrorism including attacks across Europe? What about the assassination of Anwar Sadat for making peace with Israel? Are we to believe that the murder of innocents by Arbas in order to spread Islam is a new phenomenon? Please. Don't insult our intelligent.
Mr. Saeed, if you won't deal with the problem, the Christians, Jews and freedom-loving Muslims will, and as I can already tell, you won't be happy with the results.
Never mind the idea that Great Britain has brought the terror on itself by supporting atrocities and causing great pain to Muslims around the world. Becuase we all know that no Muslims in history ever did anything bad to non-Muslims.
It's this kind of statement that gets my goat.
You can regard these [terrorist] acts as part of Islam, or as an irrational reaction to injustice taking place in the world. If it's the former you have to explain why this started only 12 years ago and not 1,400. To us it is evident that it is the latter, so we're batting the ball back in your court, Mr Blair.
12 YEARS AGO?!?!?! What about the previous 30 years of Islamic terrorism including attacks across Europe? What about the assassination of Anwar Sadat for making peace with Israel? Are we to believe that the murder of innocents by Arbas in order to spread Islam is a new phenomenon? Please. Don't insult our intelligent.
Mr. Saeed, if you won't deal with the problem, the Christians, Jews and freedom-loving Muslims will, and as I can already tell, you won't be happy with the results.
Classic Mark Steyn. Most of it posted below. Too much good stuff to try to edit it myself.
...For four years, Democrats drove around with bumper stickers mocking ever more stridently the "selected President." Yet, pace Justice Stevens, the Dems' faith in the selection process -- in judges as the true parliament of this great Republic -- restored itself within weeks, at least when it comes to selecting gay marriage, abortion, affirmative action, etc. In the words of leading Democratic thinker Nancy Pelosi, "It is a decision of the Supreme Court -- so this is almost as if God has spoken." She was talking about "eminent domain" not Bush vs. Gore, but you can't have it both ways: It can't be the Word of God one day and merely "Bush's daddy's pals" the next.
The Democrats never recovered from the 2000 election. They became obsessed with the "illegitimate" Bush, and carried on obsessing no matter what lively distractions intervened: In time the Twin Towers tumbled, the Taliban crumbled, they're only here today, but hung chads are here to stay. Michael Moore couldn't make a movie about 9/11 and Iraq without a 20-minute chad-dangling opening. Even the chad-free election of 2004 -- the "sequel," as Richard Cohen coyly puts it -- only momentarily dented the party's imperviousness to reality: If you can't get Bush, get Tom Delay, or Karl Rove, or John Bolton, or some other guy nobody's heard of.
Now it's Roberts' turn. Barely had the president finished announcing the nomination when the Dems rushed Sen. Chuck Schumer on air, hunched and five-o'clock-shadowed and looking like a bus-&-truck one-man Nixon revue. Schumer's line was that, as a judge, Roberts had too thin a paper trail. His message seemed to be: Look, we Dems have the finest oppo-research boys in the business and, if we can't get any dirt on this guy, that must mean it's buried real deep and is real bad; the very fact that we can't get anything on him is in itself suspicious. Etc., etc.
Give it up, guys. Here's the John Roberts case that matters: As the Los Angeles Times put it, Roberts "said police did not violate the constitutional rights of a 12-year-old girl who was arrested, handcuffed and detained for eating a French fry inside a train station." We know what the flailing Times is clutching at here: Look, folks, this right-wing nut favors handcuffing schoolgirls for eating French fries.
No, he doesn't. As he wrote in his opinion, "The question before us, however, is not whether these policies were a bad idea, but whether they violated the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution" -- i.e., it may be bad legislation poorly implemented, but it's not his job to make the law. If you don't like public-transit policy on French fries, elect new councilors who'll change it. That's how free societies function.
The Democrats drew exactly the wrong lesson from their chad fever. If the case teaches anything, it's the importance of winning at the ballot box, which you do by promoting clear ideas confidently stated. The Dems prefer to leave it to the Divine Right of Judges. You might too if you believed in gay marriage and partial-birth abortion, but, simply as a matter of practical politics, it's disastrous for the party. Poor sad Richard Cohen, unabletomoveon.org after five years, is a fine emblem for the Democrats: Ask not for whom the chad hangs, it hangs for thee.
...For four years, Democrats drove around with bumper stickers mocking ever more stridently the "selected President." Yet, pace Justice Stevens, the Dems' faith in the selection process -- in judges as the true parliament of this great Republic -- restored itself within weeks, at least when it comes to selecting gay marriage, abortion, affirmative action, etc. In the words of leading Democratic thinker Nancy Pelosi, "It is a decision of the Supreme Court -- so this is almost as if God has spoken." She was talking about "eminent domain" not Bush vs. Gore, but you can't have it both ways: It can't be the Word of God one day and merely "Bush's daddy's pals" the next.
The Democrats never recovered from the 2000 election. They became obsessed with the "illegitimate" Bush, and carried on obsessing no matter what lively distractions intervened: In time the Twin Towers tumbled, the Taliban crumbled, they're only here today, but hung chads are here to stay. Michael Moore couldn't make a movie about 9/11 and Iraq without a 20-minute chad-dangling opening. Even the chad-free election of 2004 -- the "sequel," as Richard Cohen coyly puts it -- only momentarily dented the party's imperviousness to reality: If you can't get Bush, get Tom Delay, or Karl Rove, or John Bolton, or some other guy nobody's heard of.
Now it's Roberts' turn. Barely had the president finished announcing the nomination when the Dems rushed Sen. Chuck Schumer on air, hunched and five-o'clock-shadowed and looking like a bus-&-truck one-man Nixon revue. Schumer's line was that, as a judge, Roberts had too thin a paper trail. His message seemed to be: Look, we Dems have the finest oppo-research boys in the business and, if we can't get any dirt on this guy, that must mean it's buried real deep and is real bad; the very fact that we can't get anything on him is in itself suspicious. Etc., etc.
Give it up, guys. Here's the John Roberts case that matters: As the Los Angeles Times put it, Roberts "said police did not violate the constitutional rights of a 12-year-old girl who was arrested, handcuffed and detained for eating a French fry inside a train station." We know what the flailing Times is clutching at here: Look, folks, this right-wing nut favors handcuffing schoolgirls for eating French fries.
No, he doesn't. As he wrote in his opinion, "The question before us, however, is not whether these policies were a bad idea, but whether they violated the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution" -- i.e., it may be bad legislation poorly implemented, but it's not his job to make the law. If you don't like public-transit policy on French fries, elect new councilors who'll change it. That's how free societies function.
The Democrats drew exactly the wrong lesson from their chad fever. If the case teaches anything, it's the importance of winning at the ballot box, which you do by promoting clear ideas confidently stated. The Dems prefer to leave it to the Divine Right of Judges. You might too if you believed in gay marriage and partial-birth abortion, but, simply as a matter of practical politics, it's disastrous for the party. Poor sad Richard Cohen, unabletomoveon.org after five years, is a fine emblem for the Democrats: Ask not for whom the chad hangs, it hangs for thee.
Friday, July 22, 2005
Great photo of Israeli soldiers and protestors praying together sent to me by e-mail from the American Jewish Committee.
More personal thoughts on terrorism that I posted at my bro-in-law's LiveJournal page.
More radical thoughts from the right...
The problem is that we as a society can't agree on the disease. Is it poverty and corruption in the third world for which we in the West are to blame? I don't think that anyone believes that if we gave governments in the third world $10000 dollars per capita as reparations for intruding on their culture and removed Coca-Cola from global store shelves that terrorism would end.
Is it the US military presence and "terrorism" in Iraq and Afghanistan and other Muslim countries? The World Trade Center was attacked years before our involvement in either Iraq or Afghanistan. Twice. We saved countless thousands of Muslims in Bosnia from ethnic cleansing by bombing Christian cities. We have given tens of billions of our hard-earned dollars in foreign aid and petrodollars to Egypt and Arab countries. As many on the left remind us, we actually helped Osama and the Muslim mujahadeen defeat the Soviets. Didn't help.
Is it the Israeli occupation? They unilaterally decided to leave Lebanon and terror remained even at the border which the UN has sanctioned as permanenet and legitimate. The Israelis are leaving Gaza next month and terror is increasing and doazens of rockets are fired over Gaza into Israel proper as the pullout date approaches.
I used to feel more strongly that giving Muslims political freedom and democracy was the answer (the neocon response), but Britain is a pretty free society and there are those who grew up there that apparently think it's A-OK to blow up their countrymen - never mind the reason.
The only thing I am left with is the disease of the mind caused by those who would preach death and hate to the ignorant. I say that anyone who preaches, advocates or excuses the destruction of their fellow countrymen or local democratic institutions needs to be deported immediately.
By the way, this includes people that think it's witty to fictionalize the how wonderful life would be after the assassination of a sitting President of the United States. I don't want them living in the same society as I do. We're at war against people who want just that and it's not funny. Criticism of any of our leaders, even personal, is fine. Demanding impeachment is fine. Flag burning doesn't threaten anybody. There is no excuse for promoting the view that your government deserves to be violently overthrown to promote your political or religious views. None. Fire in a crowded theater and all that...
Rant over :-)
P.S. More multiple bombings in Egypt. More Muslims die in global terrorsit attacks than non-Muslims. One thing that's hard for us Westerners to remember - it's not just about us - we tend to be very self-centered navel gazers. Once the world wakes up and finally agrees on what needs to be done with these people, and we lose our fear of backlash, this nightmare will be over.
As a linked post on Instapundit says this morning:
I didn't know Egypt had troops in Iraq. Otherwise, why would the terrorists target them?
More radical thoughts from the right...
The problem is that we as a society can't agree on the disease. Is it poverty and corruption in the third world for which we in the West are to blame? I don't think that anyone believes that if we gave governments in the third world $10000 dollars per capita as reparations for intruding on their culture and removed Coca-Cola from global store shelves that terrorism would end.
Is it the US military presence and "terrorism" in Iraq and Afghanistan and other Muslim countries? The World Trade Center was attacked years before our involvement in either Iraq or Afghanistan. Twice. We saved countless thousands of Muslims in Bosnia from ethnic cleansing by bombing Christian cities. We have given tens of billions of our hard-earned dollars in foreign aid and petrodollars to Egypt and Arab countries. As many on the left remind us, we actually helped Osama and the Muslim mujahadeen defeat the Soviets. Didn't help.
Is it the Israeli occupation? They unilaterally decided to leave Lebanon and terror remained even at the border which the UN has sanctioned as permanenet and legitimate. The Israelis are leaving Gaza next month and terror is increasing and doazens of rockets are fired over Gaza into Israel proper as the pullout date approaches.
I used to feel more strongly that giving Muslims political freedom and democracy was the answer (the neocon response), but Britain is a pretty free society and there are those who grew up there that apparently think it's A-OK to blow up their countrymen - never mind the reason.
The only thing I am left with is the disease of the mind caused by those who would preach death and hate to the ignorant. I say that anyone who preaches, advocates or excuses the destruction of their fellow countrymen or local democratic institutions needs to be deported immediately.
By the way, this includes people that think it's witty to fictionalize the how wonderful life would be after the assassination of a sitting President of the United States. I don't want them living in the same society as I do. We're at war against people who want just that and it's not funny. Criticism of any of our leaders, even personal, is fine. Demanding impeachment is fine. Flag burning doesn't threaten anybody. There is no excuse for promoting the view that your government deserves to be violently overthrown to promote your political or religious views. None. Fire in a crowded theater and all that...
Rant over :-)
P.S. More multiple bombings in Egypt. More Muslims die in global terrorsit attacks than non-Muslims. One thing that's hard for us Westerners to remember - it's not just about us - we tend to be very self-centered navel gazers. Once the world wakes up and finally agrees on what needs to be done with these people, and we lose our fear of backlash, this nightmare will be over.
As a linked post on Instapundit says this morning:
I didn't know Egypt had troops in Iraq. Otherwise, why would the terrorists target them?
The Washington Post style section lets us know that anyone who would dress conservatively in the White House is worthy of scorn.
An Image A Little Too Carefully Coordinated
There they were -- John, Jane, Josie and Jack -- standing with the president and before the entire country. The nominee was in a sober suit with the expected white shirt and red tie. His wife and children stood before the cameras, groomed and glossy in pastel hues -- like a trio of Easter eggs, a handful of Jelly Bellies, three little Necco wafers. There was tow-headed Jack -- having freed himself from the controlling grip of his mother -- enjoying a moment in the spotlight dressed in a seersucker suit with short pants and saddle shoes. His sister, Josie, was half-hidden behind her mother's skirt. Her blond pageboy glistened. And she was wearing a yellow dress with a crisp white collar, lace-trimmed anklets and black patent-leather Mary Janes....
Everyone looks freshly scrubbed and adorable, just like they have stepped from a Currier & Ives landscape - she said with a sneer.
Oh, the humanity!
Perhaps the style editor would prefer the fugly look.
An Image A Little Too Carefully Coordinated
There they were -- John, Jane, Josie and Jack -- standing with the president and before the entire country. The nominee was in a sober suit with the expected white shirt and red tie. His wife and children stood before the cameras, groomed and glossy in pastel hues -- like a trio of Easter eggs, a handful of Jelly Bellies, three little Necco wafers. There was tow-headed Jack -- having freed himself from the controlling grip of his mother -- enjoying a moment in the spotlight dressed in a seersucker suit with short pants and saddle shoes. His sister, Josie, was half-hidden behind her mother's skirt. Her blond pageboy glistened. And she was wearing a yellow dress with a crisp white collar, lace-trimmed anklets and black patent-leather Mary Janes....
Everyone looks freshly scrubbed and adorable, just like they have stepped from a Currier & Ives landscape - she said with a sneer.
Oh, the humanity!
Perhaps the style editor would prefer the fugly look.
This opinion piece in the LA Times takes Bush hatred to a whole new level. I personally would much rather have a president who spends a little too much time exercising and setting a good example for millions as opposed to getting hummers from white house interns and debating what to give them as thank you gifts.
The (over)exercise of power
There's no denying that the results are impressive. Bush can bench press 185 pounds five times, and, before a recent knee injury, he ran three miles at a 6-minute, 45-second pace. That's better than I could manage when I played two sports in high school. And I wasn't holding the most powerful office on Earth. Which is sort of my point: Does the leader of the free world need to attain that level of physical achievement?....
Bush's insistence that the entire populace follow his example, and that his staff join him on a Long March — er, Long Run — carries about it the faint whiff of a cult of personality. It also shows how out of touch he is. It's nice for Bush that he can take an hour or two out of every day to run, bike or pump iron. Unfortunately, most of us have more demanding jobs than he does.
Jerk. Where did he find the time to right a worthless op-ed piece?
The (over)exercise of power
There's no denying that the results are impressive. Bush can bench press 185 pounds five times, and, before a recent knee injury, he ran three miles at a 6-minute, 45-second pace. That's better than I could manage when I played two sports in high school. And I wasn't holding the most powerful office on Earth. Which is sort of my point: Does the leader of the free world need to attain that level of physical achievement?....
Bush's insistence that the entire populace follow his example, and that his staff join him on a Long March — er, Long Run — carries about it the faint whiff of a cult of personality. It also shows how out of touch he is. It's nice for Bush that he can take an hour or two out of every day to run, bike or pump iron. Unfortunately, most of us have more demanding jobs than he does.
Jerk. Where did he find the time to right a worthless op-ed piece?
Thursday, July 21, 2005
This has got to be the biggest joke yet in the Valerie Plame kerfuffle.
A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked "(S)" for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials.
Plame -- who is referred to by her married name, Valerie Wilson, in the memo -- is mentioned in the second paragraph of the three-page document, which was written on June 10, 2003, by an analyst in the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), according to a source who described the memo to The Washington Post.
The paragraph identifying her as the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV was clearly marked to show that it contained classified material at the "secret" level, two sources said. The CIA classifies as "secret" the names of officers whose identities are covert, according to former senior agency officials.
Anyone reading that paragraph should have been aware that it contained secret information, though that designation was not specifically attached to Plame's name and did not describe her status as covert, the sources said.
[Ed. note] The paragraph in question also mentioned that Richard "Dick" Cheney is currently a Vice President of the United States. It is still unclear who "outed" Mr. Cheney as the second most powerful person in the Executive Branch. An investigation is expected shortly.
Puh-lease.
A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked "(S)" for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials.
Plame -- who is referred to by her married name, Valerie Wilson, in the memo -- is mentioned in the second paragraph of the three-page document, which was written on June 10, 2003, by an analyst in the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), according to a source who described the memo to The Washington Post.
The paragraph identifying her as the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV was clearly marked to show that it contained classified material at the "secret" level, two sources said. The CIA classifies as "secret" the names of officers whose identities are covert, according to former senior agency officials.
Anyone reading that paragraph should have been aware that it contained secret information, though that designation was not specifically attached to Plame's name and did not describe her status as covert, the sources said.
[Ed. note] The paragraph in question also mentioned that Richard "Dick" Cheney is currently a Vice President of the United States. It is still unclear who "outed" Mr. Cheney as the second most powerful person in the Executive Branch. An investigation is expected shortly.
Puh-lease.
Check out the cool images of the Moon at Google. Make sure you click on the closest, most detailed view for a special surprise!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)