| |
Saturday, November 19, 2005
Zarqawi LiesCaught in a storm of anger by his normal sympathizers over the suicide bombing attack of a wedding party in Jordan, Zarqawi tries the big lie: "People of Jordan, we did not undertake to blow up any wedding parties," Abu Musab al-Zarqawi insisted.
"For those Muslims who were killed, we ask God to show them mercy, for they were not targets. We did not and will not think for one moment to target them," he said on an Internet audiotape.Of course, his claim is rather undercut by the woman who tried to blow herself up: CALM, composed and showing no sign of remorse, a 35-year-old Iraqi woman recounted on Jordanian television last night how she and her husband planned a double suicide bomb attack on a wedding reception in the Radisson SAS Hotel in Amman last Wednesday.
Sajida Mubarak al-Rishawi’s husband succeeded in blowing himself up and killing at least 23 guests, including the bride’s father and father-in-law. But she survived, and was arrested yesterday after al-Qaeda — apparently unaware that she was still alive — issued a statement boasting that four bombers, including a husband-and-wife team, had carried out the bombings.
“I came to Jordan with my husband on November 5, 2005, and we were both travelling on fake Iraqi passports,” al-Rishawi said in a dramatic one-minute interview filmed at the Jordanian intelligence service’s headquarters.
“We came to Jordan to carry out a mission in hotels . . . We rented a flat. My husband had two explosives belts with him, so he took mine out and started teaching me how to use it, how to wear it and how to pull the detonator.”
Last Wednesday evening “we stopped a taxi, and drove to the hotel. I went to one corner and he went to another. Inside there was a wedding party, with lots of men, women and children. My husband detonated his belt successfully.
Friday, November 18, 2005
Searchlight Duped by Intelligence Estimate He Didn't ReadWe've always known that Harry "Searchlight" Reid wasn't exactly a towering intellect, but this is pretty dumb even for him: Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.), who is leading a spurious Democratic campaign that alleges President Bush misled the country into war, admitted last week that he did not read the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs that Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet prepared in 2002 at the request of Senate Democrats specifically so Congress would have up-to-date intelligence as it debated whether to authorize the Iraq war.
Vonnegut Lauds TerroristsWhat a maroon! Vonnegut, 83, has been a strong opponent of Mr Bush and the US-led war in Iraq, but until now has stopped short of defending terrorism.
But in discussing his views with The Weekend Australian, Vonnegut said it was "sweet and honourable" to die for what you believe in, and rejected the idea that terrorists were motivated by twisted religious beliefs.
"They are dying for their own self-respect," he said. "It's a terrible thing to deprive someone of their self-respect. It's like your culture is nothing, your race is nothing, you're nothing."
Asked if he thought of terrorists as soldiers, Vonnegut, a decorated World War II veteran, said: "I regard them as very brave people, yes."
He equated the actions of suicide bombers with US president Harry Truman's 1945 decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima.
On the Iraq war, he said: "What George Bush and his gang did not realise was that people fight back."
Vonnegut suggested suicide bombers must feel an "amazing high". He said: "You would know death is going to be painless, so the anticipation - it must be an amazing high."Vonnegut is horribly overrated as a writer. He wrote wry books with very short sentences, and was lauded beyond measure for writing an antiwar book in the 1960s (gee, that was courageous). And his admiration for suicide bombers may be related to his own suicide attempt in 1984 and his mother's more successful effort in 1944.
Most Remarkable Sports Feats of the 20th CenturySomehow Roger Bannister's four minute mile topped the list, which can readily be explained by the fact that it was the subject of an ESPN movie a month or so ago. But what about this: US baseball legend Babe Ruth's 60 home runs in 1960 was 10th....Considering that Ruth had been dead for 12 years by then, his was surely a more remarkable achievement? Okay, so it's from an Australian paper that got the list from Forbes Magazine but somehow thought that Ruth hit 60 in '60. Actually it was Maris who hit 61 in '61. Forbes has the year right (1927) but this is wrong: He was the league home run leader a record 12 times, and no one has ever matched his career slugging average of .690, or his nearly inconceivable slugging average of .847 in the 1920 season.Ruth's slugging average for 1920 is still the AL record, but it's not the major league record. Barry Bonds slugged .863 in 2001.
This Is One of People's Sexiest Men Alive? Sheesh, there's hope for me yet!
Here's a Terrific Idea That I'm Going to StealAtlas Shrugs (which is a blog I happened on today while surfing stories about the OSM launch) makes a terrific point about how the media constantly emphasize the number of US dead, but they don't tell us the other side of the story: Every single day, they club us like baby seals. These men and women fighting the war on radical jihad and these harpies never note the number of deaths due to islamic terror, never so much as inquire. NUMBER OF DEAD! What is that number?
WE NEED A DAILY TALLY OF MURDERS AT THE HANDS OF RADICAL JIHADI ISLAMOFASCIST TERRORISTS. NOT JUST THE NUMBER OF DEADLY HOMICIDE ATTACKS, THE NUMBER OF DEAD AND INJURED. CAN SOMEONE HELP ME DETERMINE THIS NUMBER?That is a superb idea, so I thought I'd start surfing around looking for the answers. First I Googled "Suicide Bombing in Iraq". Over three and a half million results were found. Here goes. I will keep adding to this as I discover new events: 3/27 and 3/28/03: A car bomb exploded Tuesday west of Baghdad, killing at least four people a day after three dozen people died in a wave of homicide bombings in the Iraqi capital. U.S. officials said one of Baghdad's three deputy mayors was killed in a hit-and-run shooting. Total dead for the incidents described: 40 8/19/03: A truck bomb outside UN headquarters in Baghdad kills 22 people. Total dead for the incidents described: 22 8/23/03: Eighty-five Iraqis were killed and 229 others injured on Friday in the earlier huge car bombing in Najaf, Iraq. Total dead for the incident described: 85 12/14/03At least 18 people have been killed and 29 others wounded in a car bomb explosion at an Iraqi police station in a town west of Baghdad. A police lieutenant says 16 police officers are dead, as well as two civilians, including a seven-year-old girl. Total dead for the incident described: 18 2/1/04A double suicide attack outside Kurdish party offices kill 105 in Irbil. Total dead for the incident described: 105 2/10/04: A suicide bomb outside a police station in Iskandariya kills 55 people. Total dead for the incident described: 55 2/23/04: A suspected suicide bomber detonated a car bomb Monday morning at a police station in the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk, killing at least eight Iraqi national police officers and wounding about 35 others, U.S. military officials said. Total dead for the incident described: 8 3/2/04: Co-ordinated attacks outside mosques in Karbala and Baghdad kill more than 170 people and wound dozens more. Total dead for the incident described: 170 7/28/04: A car bomb that exploded outside a police recruiting center in central Baqouba on Wednesday killed 68 Iraqis and turned the city's busy streets into a bloody tangle of twisted metal and bodies. Total dead for the incident described: 14 1/21/05Fourteen people were killed and 40 wounded, including seven children, when a car bomb exploded outside a Shia mosque in Baghdad after Friday prayers this morning, Iraqi hospital officials said. Total dead for the incident described: 14 2/28/05: BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- In the deadliest single insurgent attack of the Iraq war, a suicide car bombing killed 125 people Monday in Hilla where police recruits were waiting to get physicals, Iraqi government and health officials said. Total dead for the incident described: 125 3/16/05A suicide car bomb exploded in the Iraqi capital yesterday, killing one child and wounding at least four people, officials said. The bomber also died in the blast. Total dead for the incident described: 1 (who cares about the bomber?) 5/4/05: A notorious militant group warned of more to come as it claimed responsibility for a devastating suicide bombing Wednesday in the Kurdish city of Erbil that was aimed at police recruits. The blast Wednesday morning killed about 60 people.... Total dead for the incident described: 60 5/12/05: Another suicide car bomb exploded in Baghdad this morning, killing at least 17 people and wounding more than 80 others near a busy market in the east of the city. Total dead for the incident described: 17 7/13/05Iraqis react at the site of a car bomb explosion in Baghdad, Iraq. A suicide car bomb exploded where Iraqis gathered around US military patrol vehicle as U.S. troops were handing out sweets, killing one US soldier and at least 24 Iraqis, many of them children.Total Iraqi dead for the incident described: 24 9/24/05: Insurgents pressing a campaign of violence in Iraq ahead of next month's constitutional referendum have killed five more people today (Friday) in a suicide bombing at a Baghdad bus terminal. Authorities say at least eight other people were hurt in the blast on a city bus. 9/30/05: A string of bombs killed 35 children and wounded scores of others as U.S. troops handed out candy Thursday at a government-sponsored celebration to inaugurate a sewage plant. It was the largest death toll of children in any insurgent attack since the start of the Iraq conflict. The bombings in Baghdad's (search) western al-Amel neighborhood — at least two of which were in cars — came amid a series of savage attacks that killed at least 51 people and wounded 230 nationwide. At least one U.S. soldier was among the dead and 13 were wounded. Total Iraqi dead for the incident described: 50 11/10/05: BAGHDAD, Iraq, Nov. 10 - A man wearing a belt of explosives walked into a restaurant bustling with breakfast customers here on Thursday and blew himself up, killing at least 29 people and wounding 30, many of them police officers, the authorities said. Total dead for the incident described: 29 11/18/05: Suicide bombers killed at least 90 worshipers Friday inside two Shiite Muslim mosques northeast of the capital near the Iranian border, and a pair of car bombs outside a Baghdad hotel that houses foreign journalists destroyed a nearby apartment building and left several more people dead. The back-to-back Baghdad blasts killed at least six and wounded more than 41, police said. At least two children were among the dead, police said. Total dead for the incidents described: 96 11/19/05: An ambush on a joint U.S.-Iraqi patrol northwest of Baghdad left 15 civilians, eight insurgents and a U.S. Marine dead from a roadside bomb and the firefight that followed, a U.S. military statement said Sunday.Total Iraqi dead for the incident described: 15 Running count of those murdered by Michael Moore's Minutemen: 1007 Obviously this is a long way from being complete or comprehensive. Please feel free to leave info in the comments or email me with other stories of Iraqi deaths at the hands of the insurgency. Links to articles giving specifics would be greatly appreciated. Note: I am only counting Iraqis killed by the terrorists. The US death toll is well-known.
New to the Blogroll: US Central CommandI am pleased to put a link to the US Central Command on the blogroll at the left. CentCom is the US Military group in command of forces from the Horn of Africa to Central Asia, which means it's responsible for both Iraq and Afghanistan. CentCom has photos, stories of heroism, and 5-10 news releases a day. If you want to get the story straight from the military and unfiltered by the antiwar media, CentCom is the place to go. And because I can never resist a good story about heroes, here's the tale of the Marine who wouldn't quit fighting. On the last night of his life, Lance Cpl. Aaron Austin joined a prayer session with other Marines hunkered down in a bullet-riddled neighborhood in Fallouja, Iraq.
Austin, a 21-year-old machine-gunner, asked God for protection not for himself but for his fellow Marines of Echo Company of the 2nd Battalion, 1st Regiment, 1st Marine Division, based at Camp Pendleton.
The next morning, insurgents attacked from three directions, firing thousands of rounds from AK-47s and other firearms and hurling dozens of grenades.
With the Marines in danger of being overrun, Austin exposed himself to enemy fire in order to throw a grenade at their position 20 meters away. The grenade helped repel the attack, but Austin was mortally wounded.
For those who knew Austin, his action was no surprise. Today, in a simple ceremony at the Texas Panhandle War Memorial in Amarillo, Austin's parents will receive the Silver Star, awarded posthumously to their son.
Some Liberals Still Trying to Rescue Christmas in CambodiaUnfortunately, they don't seem to have done the homework. Do you also, Dear Reader, remember all the challenges to Kerry's claim? As I remember it, there were three basic challenges:
1. None of Kerry's shipmates would confirm his tale
2. The United States was not in Cambodia
3. Kerry's campaign later conceded that his memory was "faulty" on this account
Today we learn that one of these three 'facts' is actually incorrect. Documents from the Nixon White House released yesterday show that in fact, there were U.S. forces in Cambodia, that President Nixon knew it, that the president issued a carte blanche concerning Cambodia, and finally that he engaged in a deliberate effort to cover up the activites of the U.S. in Cambodia.First, obviously when the Kerry campaign acknowledged Kerry's "faulty memory", the challenge was over. The second item on the list is simply a canard; it was well-known that the United States was in Cambodia by mid-1970 and that Nixon had lied about that issue. And anyway, as our buddy RiverRat notes in the comments, Nixon was not the president as of Christmas 1968 anyway. The key item in that list is the first one. Remember, all but one (Stephen Gardner) of Kerry's crews supported Kerry's run for president. Douglas Brinkley, who talked to all those shipmates, did not include Kerry's Christmas in Cambodia tale. Was the Kerry campaign retracting his statements about Cambodia becuase they couldn't be independently verified? One can imagine the dilemma that his Cambodia assertions would present to the 2004 campaign, and the calculus used to make a decision: on the one hand, without some outside verification, opponents could have easily turned the entire election into a fight over whether or not Kerry's statements were true, a fight the Kerry camp would have lost. On the other hand, a retraction would have a much smaller political cost, and do less damage to the campaign. The Kerry camp seemed to have initially used exactly this caculus in dealing with the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, until it became clear that a policy of ignoring the attacks was going to backfire. It is not difficult to imagine why others would be reluctant to speak up about official U.S. secrets.This is pretty easy. The Kerry campaign acknowledge Kerry's "faulty memory" because they were caught. The members of Kerry's Swift Boat crews, while supporting his run for president, were unwilling to lie for him.
About That Pro-War Democrat, John MurthaTurns out that he wasn't all that gung-ho to begin with (from September 2002): Today, the powerful backroom dealmaker finds himself in an even more politically lonely position: questioning a war-powers resolution that even most Democratic leaders seem reluctant to oppose. ''All of us want to get rid of Saddam,'' Murtha says. But he believes that the younger Bush ''went about it the wrong way.''Hat Tip: Junkyard Blog
The Idiots and the I-WordMort Kondracke notes that the idiots on the left may have actually gotten the Democrats ready to impeach President Bush if they had the majority in Congress. Newspapers also have quoted Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.) as saying that "this administration has committed more impeachable offenses than any other government in history" and Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) as saying that "lying to the Congress about a large public purpose such as Iraq" fit the constitutional test of "high crimes and misdemeanors" better than lying about sex, the offense that led Republicans to impeach former President Bill Clinton.Of course, we all know that this is payback; that the agita for Bush's impeachment arises from Bill Clinton's impeachment. And Michelle Malkin reminds us that Hinchey's the dolt who claimed that Karl Rove was behind the Ra thergate memos. So far, Democrats are at the edge of overplaying their hand. They are riding a wave of popular distrust with Bush's war policy, and they're doing everything possible to boost it. This week, as Senate Minority leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was interpreting the Senate as having cast a "vote of no confidence" in Bush's war policy, his spokesman, Jim Manley, declared that "the contrast between Democrats and Republicans could not be clearer.
"On the same day that Senate Democrats outlined a path for success in Iraq, Republicans launched another round of misleading smears in order to improve their fortunes," he said. Manley told me he had heard no discussion among Democratic Senators about impeaching Bush. But the level of contempt for Bush among Democrats certainly rivals that among Republicans for Clinton. If they think they have a "smoking gun," I doubt Democrats can restrain themselves.Yep. They're like little boys doing the "I have to take a pee-pee" dance.
Thursday, November 17, 2005
Survivor UpdateJamie continues his descent into madness, trying to figure out who voted for Cindy. It must have been Gary! He's clearly getting on everybody's nerves. The reward challenge this week is that old Mayan sport of tying two people together with a rope and making them walk through a mud bog while going over and under obstacles. Once to the other end, they have to bring back a jar filled with corn. The teams are supposedly chosen randomly, but Gary, Judd, Danni and Steph somehow end up together. That's just a little too convenient for the producers. Jamie and Rafe take the lead early, but when it becomes Cindy and Lydia's turn, it is obvious that the latter is having a tough time making it through the course. Both sets of players on each team must make it through the course twice. About the main entertainment value is watching Steph and Danni get covered with mud, and watching their butts as they slide under the obstacles. Predictably given Lydia's problems the first time through, Gary, Judd, Danni and Steph win the reward. In something of a flashback, Jamie urges the women to continue the task even thought they've lost. Didn't he do the same thing earlier in the season with that cart ride challenge? It's a helicopter trip to a wealthy man's home, complete with a pool, showers, and lots of Folger's coffee in a very unsubtle product placement. The showers turn out to be outdoors, so we get to watch them scrubbing the mud from their bodies. Unfortunately, Judd is the only one who nudes up. Gary asks whether Judd and Steph are happy with their alliance, and talks about about how it should be the best players left at the end. Of course this is rather nonsensical; if I were playing I'd rather be with the crappiest players at this point in the game. He also says that if Lydia or Cindy are among the final two, they'll win the vote, which strikes me as unlikely. Lydia? Come on, she just got lucky and was on the right team. And Cindy's done nothing to indicate she deserves a million. They all sleep together which strikes me as a little odd. The next morning the owner of the house stops by with a gift. It turns out to be videotapes from home. We see Judd's daughter and wife, and get a hint of his home. I'm suspicious of Judd, ever since "ancient ruins" earlier in the show. Seems like a pretty nice house for a young doorman. Back to camp, where Cindy gets some of that Folger's coffee. The immunity challenge is rather oddball, where you have a belt with a ring on it. The ring goes through a rope which is tied around a series of obstacles. As with last week's challenge, this seems to presen extra difficulty to the taller players like Gary and Danni. The four who move on to the second stage are Cindy, Steph, Rafe and Jamie; at this point it looks like none of them will need immunity anyway. Cindy and Rafe end up in a close race for the necklace and Rafe wins. He worries that his success in the individual immunities may be making him a threat--two firsts and a second so far. But once they get back to camp, Jamie's paranoia begins to show once again, and Rafe, Steph and Lydia appear to be considering voting him off. My rule on this is that generally the person you expect to leave after the immunity challenge is over is the one who's going and today there's little doubt that's Gary. But for once the interlude between the immunity challenge and tribal council means something, as Gary gets the first two votes (Jamie and Judd), but then Jamie gets the rest. He exclaims, "Now that's the way to vote somebody off--blindside them!" Jeff comments that is very good advice, which of course is going to make everybody nervous coming up. I do think Gary or Danni is cooked next week, unless the folks get more adventurous and decide to take out Judd or Steph, the two biggest threats to win individual immunity. Rafe, Cindy and Lydia seems safest to me, because nobody's worried about them, although at this point you've gotta wonder about Rafe.
It Works In Politics As Well As Soap OperasSelective amnesia, that is. The latest evidence that George Bush is a war criminal has apparently come this week with the acknowledgment that the US military used white phosphorus (WP) on enemy positions in Fallujah. This is deemed an outrage, something decent countries never do, yet more proof that the Bush-Cheney cabal is sedulously destroying the very foundations of American civilisation.
The discovery that American soldiers refer to WP cavalierly as “shake and bake” seems to have come as an additional shock to the easily agitated sensibilities of the critics. Can you believe men can be so callous as to refer to something so horrible in such a jocular fashion? They must be Nazis.
In fact, WP is not a chemical weapon, not even banned by any treaty to which the US is signatory. It has been used by the armed forces in all countries in wars for decades. Indeed, if you look up the roll of US Congressional Medal of Honour winners, you will discover that quite a few received this highest military decoration precisely because they used “shake and bake” to such successful effect.For further confirmation that the white phosphorus story is being blown out of proportion, check out Scott Burgess. Thanks to reader Lokki for the pointer.
The Democrats' Newest TacticMr Right discovers that they've filed a lawsuit to prevent the Republicans from using their own words against them. Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) said, "It is about time we put a stop to this ridiculously unfair practice of bringing up people's past statements and actions and using them as weapons against them! The Bush Administration and their co-conspirators, the Swift Boat Veterans, right-wing talk radio, right-wing bloggers, all did this to me repeatedly last year and it cost me the election!:)
Murtha Waves the White FlagGOP & the City has the details.
Margaret, Margaret, MargaretShe's always carried the water for the Democrats, but with the current column Margaret Carlson takes it a bit too far. President George W. Bush pushed back hard against his critics in a Veterans Day speech at the Tobyhanna Army Depot in Pennsylvania.
Bush reprised the address at Elmendorf Air Force Base in Alaska on Nov. 14, three days later, just as Senate Republicans were gearing up to attach an amendment critical of the Iraq war to a defense bill.
Neither speech got him much. What Bush did in both instances was engage in deception to defend himself against charges of deception.
There's been no Senate investigation exonerating the administration on prewar intelligence. The Senate investigators specifically kicked the question of the who and the why of intelligence failures down the road as too politically radioactive. As best as I can understand the liberal take on the Senate Intelligence Committee report, it's that the administration kept sending back the intelligence briefings until they got what they wanted. Not that they told the CIA what they wanted to hear; just that they did a little shuffling of the papers and said, no, that's not it. But nobody can read the Intelligence Committee's report and come away from it thinking that the administration's critics are right. Joe Wilson gets a thorough drubbing from the panel, as I pointed out here. What Bush's latest effort reflects is the exhaustion and fear of a White House staff that would let the president go public with so feeble and transparent a case. With one top aide indicted and the leak investigation continuing, staffers are no longer willing to work behind the scenes to smear, deride, and muzzle critics, even family friend Brent Scowcroft. So Bush has to do his own dirty work, personally, in broad daylight.This is how deluded Carlson is; the president defending himself against scurrilous lies is doing "dirty work". In Margaret's world, Joe Wilson is no doubt an honest teller of truth to power.
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
Comment Promoted to the Front PageThis is terrific: the following is a letter sent to Republican weasels today. Senator, Re: The American Surrender Resolution of 2005 I am named for an uncle who gave his life in the Pacific in 1942 for the freedom of this nation and its principles. My father lost a lung to bunker oil in the waters of the Pacific in 1943 for this nation and its principles. I carry shrapnel from two combat wounds and wear a Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat “V”, Navy Commendation Medal with Combat “V”, and two Purple Hearts acquired while defending this nation’s principles on the rivers of Vietnam in 1968 and ‘69. I believe this grants me moral authority to say what follows. I finally became a committed Republican in 1972 when a Democratic Congress voted to defund support of our allies in South Vietnam. That act of moral cowardice and treachery to our founding principles led to the death of millions in the killing fields of Southeast Asia. Your vote yesterday in favor of what I’m calling the “American Surrender Resolution of 2005” is a travesty unparalleled in post-Vietnam American history. Your cowardice in face of an electorate deliberately misled by Democrats and a traitorous National Media is beneath contempt. It will lead directly to the death of now uncountable Americans and Iraqis and their graves will lie directly at your feet. Senator, you are a moral coward and the worst type of political panderer. This vote provides direct aid and comfort to our avowed enemies. Thus Senator, you have no right so serve in elective office. I will work tirelessly to assure you are removed from office at the earliest possible date. I will spare no treasure or waking moment in this quest and anticipate the moment I can spit on your political grave. I do commend with all honors the 13 Republican senators who stood up against the me-too cowardly Republican leadership: Bunning, Burr, Chambliss, Coburn, DeMint, Graham, Inhofe, Isakson, Kyl, McCain, Sessions, Thune, and Vitter. You should look to them for the courage you obviously lack. Disrespectfully, G. Thomas Mortensen USA S/V Anticipation Puerto Vallarta, Mexico (Brainster again here): Tom's also known as River Rat, and if there's a man who spent more time dissecting John Fraude Kerry last year than I did, it's he, and he did it to better effect. When the definitive story of the 2004 election is written there should be a paragraph about Kitty and me (we still broke Christmas in Cambodia to the world), but there should be a chapter or more on Tom and others who did incredible research for the Swiftees. The good news here is that the Republican base stood up in unison to this idiotic proposal and the House and Senate will never reach agreement on a bill remotely like the Warner Amendment. But I absolutely get the sense that Tom is right on the big picture, that cut-and-run is sounding like an attractive option to too many Republicans who are not thinking about how we would be condemning the Iraqis and the rest of the Arab world to decades more of the madness and hopelessness, just as we condemned the South Vietnamese by failing to support them after we had pulled out our combat forces.
The (Good) Gang of ThirteenHere's the list of 13 Senators who voted against the idiotic Republican leadership yesterday on the Warner Amendment: Bunning, Burr, Chambliss, Coburn, DeMint, Graham, Inhofe, Isakson, Kyl, McCain, Sessions, Thune, and Vitter. Nice to see both my home state senators went against this nonsense, as well as the guy we spotlighted last year with our "Thursdays 'R' for Thune" posts at Kerry Haters.
Hilarious Column of the DayThis is one of the goofier columns I've had the chance to peruse for awhile. "We can't be breeding right now," says Les Knight. "It's obvious that the intentional creation of another [human being] by anyone anywhere can't be justified today."
Knight is the founder of the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement, an informal network of people dedicated to phasing out the human race in the interest of the health of the Earth. Knight, whose convictions led him to get a vasectomy in the 1970s, when he was 25, believes that the human race is inherently dangerous to the planet and inevitably creates an unsustainable situation.
"As long as there's one breeding couple," he says cheerfully, "we're in danger of being right back here again. Wherever humans live, not much else lives. It isn't that we're evil and want to kill everything -- it's just how we live."Okay, that's pretty funny, but the topper is this: Knight's position might sound extreme at first blush, but there's an undeniable logic to it: Human activities -- from development to travel, from farming to just turning on the lights at night -- are damaging the biosphere. More people means more damage. So if fewer people means less destruction, wouldn't no people at all be the best solution for the planet?Solution to what? I understand the "logic" here; I was a leftist and an environmentalist in my younger days. Humans are screwing up the planet, so therefore let's get rid of the humans. Radical environmentalists actually think that way; it's called "deep environmentalism". Really it's just the nihilism of youth expressing itself in a new manner. But think about it logically. If you decide that there are too many humans, then it becomes a very slippery slope. We need fewer humans, but if fewer humans is the goal, then when does it end? Doesn't it make sense to get rid of all of them? But then what happens? In a cosmic moment another dominant species will evolve. So we need to, at a minimum get rid of all the primates. But what's to prevent, say, dogs or other animals from rising up and becoming consumerist? So let's get rid of all the animals and insects. And then the world will be perfect. Except... what about the plants? Isn't there a possibility that given enough time, the trees will start wanting to shop at the mall? So let's get rid of all life or even possibility of life. And then earth will truly be a paradise.
Maybe We'd Better Drop Comparisons to Caligula's HorseThat said, I agree completely with Molten Thought in this particular post.
John Hawkins Interviews Tammy BruceTammy Bruce, radio personality, author, and Open Source Media editorial board member is interviewed by Right Wing News honcho John Hawkins. John Hawkins: In the book, you said: "The feminist establishment wanted people to be like stupid, submissive, noisy parrots." You pretty much confirmed that just now. Conservatives can be individuals; the left can’t. Why can’t you be an individual on the left?
Tammy Bruce: Well, it is as the left has done and has shown us historically; it is a basis of an existence of collectivism. That is what all of the energy is put into. It requires massive numbers of people to march lock-step within a certain framework for a certain goal.
...The reason that becomes important is because if you were to really think about the nature of what the left is saying, if you were to question it, feel safe questioning it, you would find that there’s no, “there,” there. So the left is always in danger.
...I would always ask why, I would always challenge the status quo -- and let’s just say I did not make friends of left wing leadership. There were no answers to my questions about...why a certain thing would happen and one of the transitions for me was when my mentor at NOW noted that...it was important that every now and then we rub salt into the wound. It would help us continue to be needed. And that’s when I realized that people had co-opted the issues that were important to me and were invested in maintaining problems in society so that the elite could maintain their power and money and control.Usual superb job by John, highly recommended. John Ruberry has more on Ms Bruce.
Glass HousesRodger Jacobs seems to have a bee in his bonnet about Open Source Media, or, as he wittily calls it, Open Sores Media. But I had to laugh a bit at some of his criticism of OSM. For example, here he catches a blogger in a few typos and grammatical errors and concludes with the exhortation: For crying out loud, can’t you use bloggers who can at least proof read their sh*t?Of course, proofread is one word. DOH! And yes, Rodger, I'm sure you can find dozens of places where I've left out a letter or a comma or used the singular form of a verb for a plural subject. He also criticizes Open Source Media CEO Roger L. Simon here. And what about his series of Moses Wine detective novels? Out of print, except for electronic versions — well, you can order a printed version but it takes up to three weeks and an additional $1.99 fee.Well, the funny thing about that is that Rodger has a link to his own book, Long Time Money and Lots of Cocaine, where you can buy an electronic version for $8.53, or you can get a printed version for an additional $8.48 fee.
Oil Industry Execs Lied, Nobody DiedThe Left side will be going nuts over this article. A White House document shows that executives from big oil companies met with Vice President Cheney's energy task force in 2001 -- something long suspected by environmentalists but denied as recently as last week by industry officials testifying before Congress.
The document, obtained this week by The Washington Post, shows that officials from Exxon Mobil Corp., Conoco (before its merger with Phillips), Shell Oil Co. and BP America Inc. met in the White House complex with the Cheney aides who were developing a national energy policy, parts of which became law and parts of which are still being debated.
In a joint hearing last week of the Senate Energy and Commerce committees, the chief executives of Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Corp. and ConocoPhillips said their firms did not participate in the 2001 task force. The president of Shell Oil said his company did not participate "to my knowledge," and the chief of BP America Inc. said he did not know.If they lied under oath they should be prosecuted. That said, I've never understood the liberals' fascination with this energy task force. Apparently they feel that when discussing energy policy, the administration should be talking to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and Laurie David, not the people involved in energy production.
Pajamas Media Becomes Open Source MediaI had seen the initials OSM mentioned a few times yesterday; my guess was One Stop Media. Here's the homepage. Scott Ott pulls a gag on the name, but comes up with a terrific idea: Bloggers Charles Johnson and Roger Simon officially launched the “citizen journalist” Open Source Media blog by nailing a pair of pajamas to the front door of The New York Times.
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
Questions AnsweredAn apparently liberal commenter named Phil, who owns this blog (earthy language warning) left a question in the comments and I thought it was worth pulling out to the front page: In his speech on Friday and again last night Bush said that, in his opinion, people who questioned his use (or misuse) of intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq war were "deeply irresponsible."
Perhaps if he had a better grip on reality he would understand, as you do, that 57% of Americans believe that he misused the Iraq intelligence for the purposes of justifying his decision to go to war.
I'm aware of your contention that Bush is not desperate, but what is it if not desperation that causes a president to accuse the 57% of Americans who disagree with him of being "deeply irresponsible?"
Do you agree with the president's characterization of 57% of your fellow countrymen as irresponsible? Do you believe that it is appropriate for a president to characterize the clear majority of Americans who disagree with him in this way?Alright, so we have to start with a little fact-checking. What did the president actually say? There are two speeches mentioned here. During the Veterans' Day speech, President Bush said: While it's perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began. (Applause.) Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war. These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments related to Iraq's weapons programs.There's an important point here, that Phil does not see because of his hatred for Bush. And it is that those people who are now claiming they were misled by this administration are the ones attempting to rewrite the history of how that war began. Pure and simple. There were no doubt some Democrats in the Senate who wanted to give Saddam more time, but there were others who were not expressing the doubts they now voice. At Elmendorf, yesterday, he said: Reasonable people can disagree about the conduct of the war, but it is irresponsible for Democrats to now claim that we misled them and the American people. Leaders in my administration and members of the United States Congress from both political parties looked at the same intelligence on Iraq, and reached the same conclusion: Saddam Hussein was a threat.And: Some of our elected leaders have opposed this war all along. I disagreed with them, but I respect their willingness to take a consistent stand. Yet some Democrats who voted to authorize the use of force are now rewriting the past. They are playing politics with this issue and they are sending mixed signals to our troops and the enemy. And that's irresponsible.So I think any notion that the president was talking criticizing 57% of the people as irresponsible is pretty much out the window. He's talking about "Some Democrats and anti-war critics... Democrats... and some Democrats who voted to authorize the use of force. But even if we stipulate that President Bush was disagreeing with 57% of the American people and calling them irresponsible, it doesn't really bother me. The truth is not determined by a poll. Liberals love to rag on the fact that (say) 60% of the American people think Saddam was behind 9-11; aren't they disagreeing with 60% of the American people when they say (correctly, by the way) that he was not? It's interesting the way these liberals think that polls should determine the facts. If you polled Americans and asked them how many home runs Hank Aaron hit in his career, and 57% said it was 730, would that matter? Of course not, because Hammerin' Hank belted out 755 in his career. Anybody that claims the administration lied about, manipulated, influenced or otherwise shaded intelligence is just plain wrong; read the Senate Intelligence Committee's report (PDF file). More on this topic from Crazy Politico, including a nice bit of Hagel the Bagel bashing.
Here's a Credible AccusationAgainst the evil Americans: Two Iraqi businessmen, who were imprisoned by U.S. forces in Iraq, claimed Monday that American soldiers threw them into a cage of lions in a Baghdad palace, as part of a terrifying interrogation in 2003.
“They took me behind the cage, they were screaming at me, scaring me and beating me a lot,” Thahe Mohammed Sabbar said in an interview. “One of the soldiers would open the door, and two soldiers would push me in. The lions came running toward me and they pulled me out and shut the door. I completely lost consciousness.”ACLU lead counsel Lucas Guttentag said the lion cage was not mentioned in the initial legal filing because lawyers considered that part of the charges of mock executions, which would later be detailed. He said media reports in summer 2003 documented that American soldiers had access to the lions.Andrew Sullivan hasn't got his reaction up yet, but we can imagine it will be along the lines of the following: 
Here's Some Convincing EvidenceEric Alterman, writing in the HuffPo about a piece in the NY Times regarding the Hollywood nitwits helps out with a cite for an anecdote that Rob Reiner mentions: "To me, the death of people at somebody's hands over the stupidity of this man is astounding!" he shouted at me. "When I hear that on the weekend of the Super Bowl an Iraqi expatriate was explaining to him the difference between Kurds and Sunnis and Shiites, it makes me want to cry. I want to cry!" (Reiner said he recalled hearing this anecdote on cable news or talk radio, though I wasn't able to find any reference to it subsequently.)Alterman notes: UPDATE: This just in: The Packer quote in the Times is:
Bush is a man who has never shown much curiosity about the world. When he met with Makiya and two other Iraqis in January, I was told by someone not present, the exiles spent a good portion of the time explaining to the president that there are two kinds of Arabs in Iraq, Sunnis and Shiites. The very notion of an Iraqi opposition appeared to be new to him. War has turned Bush into a foreign-policy president, but democratizing an Arab country will require a subtlety and sophistication that have been less in evidence than the resolve to fight.
From Dreaming Of Democracy, By GEORGE PACKER (NYT) 7730 words, Published: March 2, 2003Now, get that "evidence". Packer was told by someone not present, that this happened. Wow, that's quite an authoritative sourcing. Packer wasn't there, but he heard about it from somebody who wasn't there, who heard about it from... where? We're not told that. Indeed we're not given any information about the source other than that he wasn't there.
Pajamas Media Rollout TomorrowI've delayed making this announcement for awhile, partially because I'd hoped that I'd be profiled on the PM website, and partially because I felt a little silly promoting a brand name that is due to be changed, effective tomorrow. But I have joined up with the soon-to-be-renamed Pajamas Media. To be honest with you, I don't have a clue as to what that really means other than some ads on the right sidebar and a nice chunk of cash in return for same. My main hope is that I'll be able to get a little more exposure from some of the other, soon-to-be-renamed Pajamas Media bloggers. My main reason for joining is my enormous respect for some of the folks involved with the soon-to-be-renamed PM.
Democrats Used to Tell The TruthOn Saddam Hussein. Terrific video. Hat Tip: Chris from Lucky Dawg
Thanksgiving Turkey Cindy Sheehan's going back to Crawford. Cindy Sheehan, the Iraq war critic whose campsite along a Crawford roadside drew opponents and supporters by the hundreds in August, will try to recapture the public's attention and plans to break new local laws she inspired when she returns next week for Thanksgiving.
After President Bush and Sheehan left on Aug. 31, McLennan County Commissioners Court voted to ban parking on 23 miles of roadway near Bush's Prairie Chapel Ranch and prevent people from camping, eating, or placing portable bathrooms in ditches along all county roads.
Sheehan, the California mother of 24-year-old Army Spc. Casey Sheehan, who died during his first week in the Iraq war, plans to break at least one of the new laws Nov. 22, shortly after she arrives on the turf that made her famous.See also our buddy the Leather Penguin. I loved his post, but the comment by Beautiful Atrocities made me laugh out loud.
And If She'd Been Born A Horse and Much Earlier, She'd Have Been in the Civil WarThe Chief Brief has moron Mapes engaging in a little "What if?" game. Also, check out the Comic Book Guy's interview with Ms Mapes.
Moron MapesJim Pinkerton does a good job of deconstructing Mapes: But if CBS has learned a lesson, at least for the time being, Mapes, and her remaining facilitators in the MSM, have not. Now she is out with a book, for which she reportedly received a $250,000 advance -- an enormous sum that seems more like a gift to Mapes from the publisher, as opposed to a shrewd investment -- entitled Truth and Duty: The Press, the President, and the Privilege of Power. In addition, Vanity Fair showcased an excerpt in its December issue.But I disagree with this part of the article: Since the White House had not challenged the authenticity of those devastating "memos" when it had the chance, it's quite possible that the bloggers saved the President from disaster and defeat in last year's presidential election.In fact, had the story gone unchallenged, President Bush would not have been hurt, because nobody cares what he did 30 years ago. We know him now, and that's a whole lot more important to the voters. And before I get accused of blind partisanship, let me point out that this also applies to Hillary and to John Kerry. Any Republican who thinks that Hillary will be vulnerable because of her cattle futures trading and Whitewater, or that Kerry will fail because of the Swiftees in 2008, is deluding themselves. That stuff only matters when the candidate is trying to introduce themselves to the country.
Germany Tries GoreconomicsAl Gore famously remarked during the 2000 election that he would not raise taxes, unless something unforeseen, like a recession, occured. The Germans have decided to try Gore's method: Accordingly, the new German Government has decided to impose one of the biggest tax increases in postwar history and to target the extra taxes on the weakest and most sensitive parts of the economy: consumption, which will suffer a three percentage point increase in VAT, and housing, which will lose tax incentives for first-time buyers. In addition, to fend off accusations that the new consumption taxes will bear unfairly on poorer consumers, the Government will hit the rich as well, increasing the top rate of income tax from 42 per cent to 45 per cent.
It seems that Angela Merkel’s idea of a compromise between the Christian Democrats, whose most unpopular idea was the VAT increase, and the Social Democrats, who were berated for demanding higher income tax, was to combine the most unpopular measures from both parties’ manifestos, while dropping all the rest.
Speaking to one of Germany’s most prominent economists a few days ago, I noted a decline of consumer spending in response to higher taxes is not just a theoretical possibility but a well-established empirical reality — demonstrated by widespread evidence from a large number of countries.
“Maybe,” he replied, “but the Germans are different. When taxes are raised in Germany, I can guarantee that consumers will become more confident and will spend more. You see, we Germans are today more worried about the deficits of our Government than about the incomes we receive.”Let's see, you have less money to spend in a time of economic uncertainty, so you're going to increase your spending? You know how this goes; it is not axiomatic that increasing taxes worsens a depression or tempers a recovery. The Germans could get lucky like Bill Clinton did in 1993 and discover that the negative effects of a tax increase are outweighed by economic growth that was coming anyhow thanks to currency devaluation and low interest rates. Hat Tip: Captain's Quarters
The Times Sticks Up for DemocratsI know, I know, what a shock! Mr. Bush says everyone had the same intelligence he had - Mr. Clinton and his advisers, foreign governments, and members of Congress - and that all of them reached the same conclusions. The only part that is true is that Mr. Bush was working off the same intelligence Mr. Clinton had. But that is scary, not reassuring. The reports about Saddam Hussein's weapons were old, some more than 10 years old. Nothing was fresher than about five years, except reports that later proved to be fanciful.Hmmmm, could there possibly be a reason that nothing was fresher than about five years? What might that be? Is it that Saddam had not allowed inspectors into his country? It's hard to imagine what Mr. Bush means when he says everyone reached the same conclusion. There was indeed a widespread belief that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons. But Mr. Clinton looked at the data and concluded that inspections and pressure were working - a view we now know was accurate. France, Russia and Germany said war was not justified. Even Britain admitted later that there had been no new evidence about Iraq, just new politics.It is hard to imagine what Mr Bush means? Here's a clue: Maybe he means that everybody believed Iraq had chemical and biological weapons? France, Russia and Germany said war was not justified because all of them were getting bribed by Saddam. And you know that it wasn't just "new politics" that had changed since the Clinton Administration:  Look, we are all guilty of looking at information and seeing the stuff that confirms our judgment and ignoring the evidence that does not. The New York Times does it in this very article, dismissing the Niger yellowcake story, despite the fact that the CIA did indeed believe it at the time. See also Tim Hoy's excellent post on this subject. Update: The White House itself does a full-on fisking. Now that's more like it!
Monday, November 14, 2005
Sounds Okay to MeGE and Boeing are refusing to sell airplane parts to Iran. The head of Iran's national airline has accused US firms Boeing and General Electric of going beyond sanctions imposed against Tehran by Washington and withholding parts crucial to passenger safety.
"When sanctions were imposed on the airlines, parts related to flight safety were excluded. But both GE and Boeing are not selling us these parts," Iran Air's director Saeed Hesami was quoted as saying in Monday's Jomhuri Islami newspaper.
The official, writing in an open letter to Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Transport Minister Mohammad Rahmati, complained that five of Iran Air's Airbus A300-310's were now grounded as a result of the US firms' "violation of international treaties".
NFL Week 10Well, I think you can stick a fork in the Eagles; after a devastating loss like that, with McNabb injured and TO suspended, two games behind Dallas and New York and even one behind Washington. Surprise teams: Carolina and Seattle quietly have put together 7-2 records. Chicago has won five in a row. Oddball stat of the week: Green Bay is 2-7 despite outscoring their opponents by 17 points this season.
Steyn on the Death of EuropeThe master takes on Eurabia: Europe's present biculturalism makes disaster a certainty. One way to avoid it would be to go genuinely multicultural, to broaden the Continent's sources of immigration beyond the Muslim world. But a talented ambitious Chinese or Indian or Chilean has zero reason to emigrate to France, unless he is consumed by a perverse fantasy of living in a segregated society that artificially constrains his economic opportunities yet imposes confiscatory taxation on him in order to support an ancien regime of indolent geriatrics.
France faces tough choices and, unlike Baghdad, in Paris you can't even talk about them honestly. As Jean-Claude Dassier, director-general of the French news station LCI, told a broadcasters' conference in Amsterdam, he has been playing down the riots on the following grounds: "Politics in France is heading to the Right and I don't want Right-wing politicians back in second or even first place because we showed burning cars on television."
Oh, well. You can understand why the Quai d'Orsay is relaxed about Iran becoming the second Muslim nuclear power. As things stand, France is on course to be the third. You heard it here first. You probably won't hear it on Mr Dassier's station at all.
Terrific Results at Operation Soldier EventOur buddy John at Operation Soldier sent us this recap of the Fresno Falcons Operation Soldier event this weekend: The Fresno Falcons, the ECHL affiliate of the NHL San Jose Sharks and Operation Soldier, partnered for a “Salute to the Troops” tribute, for games played on Friday, November 11th and Saturday, November 12th. The event was a resounding success for all involved.
On hand during the Falcon’s game on Friday the 11th, vs. the Utah Grizzlies, was the 45 member, 509th Military Band, which played a very touching rendition of the National Anthem. Several people in attendance contacted Operation Soldier, and said that it was the most moving and inspirational playing of the National Anthem, they had ever heard.
On Saturday the 12th, the large crowd was brought to their feet, when the veterans gathered at center ice for the first puck drop. The patriotic crowd showed their praise and appreciation for the veterans with a standing ovation.
When Fresno Police Officer and Army Staff Sergeant Michael Toews, who was recently wounded in combat in near Baghdad, Iraq on October 1st, 2005 dropped the ceremonial first puck chants of “USA, USA” could be heard from the crowd. It was truly a moment that made everybody appreciative of what America’s Armed Forces are all about.
Following the game on Saturday the 12th, vs. the San Diego Gulls, in which the Falcons won, in a thrilling Sudden Death Overtime Shootout, 4-3, a Jersey Auction of the special jerseys that the Falcon players wore during both games was held. Jersey picture here.
Approximately 500 fans remained at the Save Mart Center, after the game was over. Players from the Falcons met on the ice as bidding for the jerseys was fast and fierce. Several jerseys collected over $1500 dollars apiece, with a grand tentative grand total over $23,000 dollars. Partial proceeds from the jersey auction will go to Operation Soldier, to help continue the funding of its Patriot Down Foundation.
Operation Soldier would like to extend a huge heartfelt thank you to the Fresno Falcon’s organization, and its players. Several players personally thanked the veterans for their service and it was a great sight to see the players, saluting the veterans and showing their thanks. The Fresno Falcons are a class organization from top to bottom and are a wonderful organization to work with. Thank You!
Operation Soldier would also like to personally thank all that attended both games and made the weekends festivities a resounding success. A special sincere thank you goes to all that stayed after Saturday’s game and participated in the jersey auction.
Stay tuned for more Operation Soldier updates, as we anticipate more exciting news in the coming days! For more information about Operation Soldier, please visit us on the web at:
http://www.operationsoldier.com/Terrific job by John and all the folks at Operation Soldier!
Carnival of the Clueless Is UpRick Moran's got more links than Mr T.
An Easy PredictionWe won't see exhortations to expose the leaker at the heart of this story: If The Washington Post is circling the wagons in preparation for a confidential sourcing fight with federal investigators, it certainly isn't showing it. Both reporter Dana Priest and Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr., tell E&P that no plans have been formulated to respond to a possible inquest by either Congress or the Justice Department about a Nov. 2 Priest story on secret overseas prisons.
Just Call Me IndyHat Tip: Kitty
Hindrocket Puts It All In PerspectiveThings seem bad? Why? Since that triumphant moment, the conventional wisdom is that nothing has gone right for the Republicans. But what, exactly, has happened to cause such a reversal in the party's fortunes? Has the economy collapsed? Not at all. It is humming along as strongly as ever, putting ever more distance between America's prosperity and that of Europe and Japan. Have the terrorists attacked the American homeland, exposing a weakness in our domestic security? No. Astonishingly, we have now gone more than four years without a successful attack on American soil, even though newspaper headlines reveal, on an almost daily basis, the bloodthirstiness of our enemies. Have there been setbacks in foreign policy that could explain how a party that was triumphant just 12 months ago should now be in full retreat? No. We continue to make progress in both Iraq and Afghanistan. On a number of fronts, liberty has taken root in the vital Middle East. And no foreign power even imagines that it could rival the United States in influence.The biggest part of the problem is that the media are dead set against the president, so that any poll that shows his popularity declining is headlined, while polls showing his popularity going back up are buried on page A-23.
Sunday, November 13, 2005
The Stupidity of Going For TwoI can see it late in the game, but too many teams use it inappropriately, as illustrated in todays Miami-New England game. Miami was leading 7-6 when New England scored a touchdown to go up 12-7. Rather than take the automatic point to go up 13-7, they tried for two and failed. Sure enough, New England scores on a field goal, to go up 15-7, which, again would have been 16-7 if the Patriots had just taken the automatic PAT. Miami responds with a field goal of their own, cutting the margin to five. So when they follow that up with a touchdown, they are forced into going for the two-pointer, because there is no real difference in the NFL between a two and a one-point lead late in the game in the NFL, while there is a big one between two and three points. Regardless of the merits of the strategy, the play failed. Ironically, that set up the final two-point conversion attempt. The Patriots scored another touchdown, putting them up by five points. Since there is not a lot of difference between being up by five or six points late in the game, but there is a big difference being up by seven points, the Pats went for two. And failed again.
GlobaloneyHere's an amusing lede: The Earth's weather patterns have begun to change dramatically... drastic decline in food production... most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters... fundamental changes in the world's weather... economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale... The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope...
Oh, sorry... I was just reading an article from Newsweek - from 1975. Entitled "The Cooling World," it warned of the dire consequences of "Global Cooling" - unless political action was brought about immediately.
The Return of the Silky PonyThe WaPo gives him a slot on its op-ed page to blather about how he was wrong. Of course, you know how that goes; he only admits he was wrong in an effort at bashing President Bush: I was wrong.
Almost three years ago we went into Iraq to remove what we were told -- and what many of us believed and argued -- was a threat to America. But in fact we now know that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction when our forces invaded Iraq in 2003. The intelligence was deeply flawed and, in some cases, manipulated to fit a political agenda.
It was a mistake to vote for this war in 2002. I take responsibility for that mistake. It has been hard to say these words because those who didn't make a mistake -- the men and women of our armed forces and their families -- have performed heroically and paid a dear priceSilky, you're still wrong. You're just pandering to the idiot chorus on the Left in the hope that will get you the nomination in 2008.
Warren PieceSteyn takes on the notion of Warren Beatty running for governor: In 2003, you'll recall, the Los Angeles Times assigned a special team to look into Arnold's sexual background. If they do Warren in the same way, it'll be the biggest hiring bonanza in U.S. journalism for a century. Usually, when his magnificent track record of famous conquests is brought up, Beatty indignantly points out that he's had sex with a lot of very obscure women, too. This is true. He has dallied not just with Natalie Wood, but also with her less celebrated sister, Lana Wood.
|
|
