Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Rodney Alan Garrison II
Rodney Alan Garrison, II "Alan" was born January 30, 2007 at 4:58 pm at Baptist Hospital in Jackson. He weighed 8 pounds and 8 ounces and was 21.5" long. Mom Alan and Frank are doing well!!!
More pictures can be found here:
http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=4302448&a=31742375
Rodney Alan Garrison II
Rodney Alan Garrison, II "Alan" was born January 30, 2007 at 4:58 pm at Baptist Hospital in Jackson. He weighed 8 pounds and 8 ounces and was 21.5" long. Mom Alan and Frank are doing well!!!
More pictures can be found here:
http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=4302448&a=31742375
Monday, August 28, 2006
Must be MP3 Monday
Here is a cut from the new M. Ward album, a cover of Daniel Johnston's "To Go Home," a rollicking, thrusting (uh huh huh huh) rocker just full of energy. Download it here. You can download the full album on the excellent music site emusic.com.
Muzzle of Bees, one of my favorite MP3 blogs is hosting a new Wilco tune, "There's a Light". Download it here. It's a live cut, but the sound is pretty good.
Also, rbally is an excellent mp3 blog which is heavy on the Wilco.
Muzzle of Bees, one of my favorite MP3 blogs is hosting a new Wilco tune, "There's a Light". Download it here. It's a live cut, but the sound is pretty good.
Also, rbally is an excellent mp3 blog which is heavy on the Wilco.
Friday, August 18, 2006
Ahem, Reality, please report to the White House
Mr. President said Wednesday that if we left Iraq it would be cutting and running.
He also said, without a hint of irony whatsoever:
"Leaving before we complete our mission would create a terrorist state in the heart of the Middle East, a country with huge oil reserves that the terrorist network would be willing to use to extract economic pain from those of us who believe in freedom"
Ahem.
He's referring to Iraq I presume, not Afghanistan. So we're clear: Before our unilateral, unprovoked invasion, Iraq was NOT a terrorist state in the heart of the Middle East. Iraq was a lot of bad things (just like Sudan, et. al), but it was not harboring, assisting or fostering terrorists. I get it, it's part of the great neocon strategy. CREATING a terrorist state where there was none before helps us to fight the terrorists. After all, we can only fight them if we create them.
I get it now.....
He also said, without a hint of irony whatsoever:
"Leaving before we complete our mission would create a terrorist state in the heart of the Middle East, a country with huge oil reserves that the terrorist network would be willing to use to extract economic pain from those of us who believe in freedom"
Ahem.
He's referring to Iraq I presume, not Afghanistan. So we're clear: Before our unilateral, unprovoked invasion, Iraq was NOT a terrorist state in the heart of the Middle East. Iraq was a lot of bad things (just like Sudan, et. al), but it was not harboring, assisting or fostering terrorists. I get it, it's part of the great neocon strategy. CREATING a terrorist state where there was none before helps us to fight the terrorists. After all, we can only fight them if we create them.
I get it now.....
Geez. Have we triggered an all-out DISASTER or what?
This story in the Guardian is really disconcerting:
"Turkey and Iran have dispatched tanks, artillery and thousands of troops to their frontiers with Iraq during the past few weeks in what appears to be a coordinated effort to disrupt the activities of Kurdish rebel bases."
I think the Kurds are allies with Israel. We're allied with Israel, obviously. So, it's Iran and Turkey and the Shia in Iraq v. Kurds/Israel/U.S.
"Frustrated by the reluctance of the US and the government in Baghdad to crack down on the PKK bases inside Iraq, Turkish generals have hinted they are considering a large-scale military operation across the border. They are said to be sharing intelligence about Kurdish rebel movements with their Iranian counterparts.
"We would not hesitate to take every kind of measures when our security is at stake," Abdullah Gul, the Turkish foreign minister, said last week."
Thanks, Mr. President.
"Turkey and Iran have dispatched tanks, artillery and thousands of troops to their frontiers with Iraq during the past few weeks in what appears to be a coordinated effort to disrupt the activities of Kurdish rebel bases."
I think the Kurds are allies with Israel. We're allied with Israel, obviously. So, it's Iran and Turkey and the Shia in Iraq v. Kurds/Israel/U.S.
"Frustrated by the reluctance of the US and the government in Baghdad to crack down on the PKK bases inside Iraq, Turkish generals have hinted they are considering a large-scale military operation across the border. They are said to be sharing intelligence about Kurdish rebel movements with their Iranian counterparts.
"We would not hesitate to take every kind of measures when our security is at stake," Abdullah Gul, the Turkish foreign minister, said last week."
Thanks, Mr. President.
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
Iraq Disconnect
By all means go read Josh's entire post on this point, it is excellent and gives voice to what I think a majority of Americans sort of know instinctively.
But when revieing the "War on Terror" or Islamofascism or whatever they're calling it these days, ponder this:
Is there anyone in the country who can say honestly, in their heart of hearts, that when that moment of fear hit them after the recent reports out of London, they said to themselves, "God, I'm glad we're in Iraq"?
Anyone?
But when revieing the "War on Terror" or Islamofascism or whatever they're calling it these days, ponder this:
Is there anyone in the country who can say honestly, in their heart of hearts, that when that moment of fear hit them after the recent reports out of London, they said to themselves, "God, I'm glad we're in Iraq"?
Anyone?
Friday, August 11, 2006
33%?
So approval for the job Bush is doing as President is at 33%. If you turn on the news or listen to the "experts," you're often led to believe that a) opposing the President is politically dangerous and/or b) that if you oppose the war in Iraq (both its existence and execution), then you're part of the "extremist" left, the "wacko" crowd who emboldens or supports the Islamic terrorists behind the most recent foiled (by the British) terror plot.
Well, leaving aside for a second the falsity of that statement (and how often people who have been wrong so many times on matters of foreign policy are allowed to espouse it uncritically in the press), wouldn't any rational person conclude that with the 33% number and the 60% number (from the CNN poll) who oppose the war are clearly the majority now?
So everyone understands, repeat after me:
The recent terror plot, a plan orchestrated by British subjects of Pakistani origin, foiled by British intelligence agencies working in conjunction with law enforcement and US intelligence gathering (all of which was legal and none of which was done in Iraq), has absolutely nothing at all to do with Iraq.
Next, since we have 130k+ troops, other personnel, other intelligence resources, unimaginable $ resources and other tools bogged down in Iraq, the United States is LESS equipped to address, detect, investigate and foil a terrorist plot like the one described above.
Ergo, if you SUPPORT the mission in Iraq, thereby depleting our ability to deal with real threats from terrorists, you necessarily OPPOSE or undermine the effort to foil terrorist plots that pose a real threat to American lives and treasure.
Sooooo....
If you support the Iraq war, you enable those terrorists to continue with their plans to attack America. If you oppose the Iraq war and want the US government to direct its attention to real threats like the one recently foiled, then you wish to stop those terrorists in their quests to attack America.
LATE EDIT:
Saw this:
Muslim tipoff 'led to arrests'
LONDON, England (CNN) -- A British intelligence official has told CNN that the original information about a plot to down commercial jetliners in mid-Atlantic with explosives came from a tip from the Muslim community in Britain. The official said the tip resulted from a person who had been concerned about the activities of an acquaintance after the July 7 terror attacks in London.
One other point re: the above. Bush's unilateral, unprovoked invasion of a majority Muslim nation has unquestionably given rise to Anti-American hatred around the world. To the extent the invasion makes it less likely that good people like the tipster above will act to help us thwart attacks, the Iraq debacle has made us less safe.
Well, leaving aside for a second the falsity of that statement (and how often people who have been wrong so many times on matters of foreign policy are allowed to espouse it uncritically in the press), wouldn't any rational person conclude that with the 33% number and the 60% number (from the CNN poll) who oppose the war are clearly the majority now?
So everyone understands, repeat after me:
The recent terror plot, a plan orchestrated by British subjects of Pakistani origin, foiled by British intelligence agencies working in conjunction with law enforcement and US intelligence gathering (all of which was legal and none of which was done in Iraq), has absolutely nothing at all to do with Iraq.
Next, since we have 130k+ troops, other personnel, other intelligence resources, unimaginable $ resources and other tools bogged down in Iraq, the United States is LESS equipped to address, detect, investigate and foil a terrorist plot like the one described above.
Ergo, if you SUPPORT the mission in Iraq, thereby depleting our ability to deal with real threats from terrorists, you necessarily OPPOSE or undermine the effort to foil terrorist plots that pose a real threat to American lives and treasure.
Sooooo....
If you support the Iraq war, you enable those terrorists to continue with their plans to attack America. If you oppose the Iraq war and want the US government to direct its attention to real threats like the one recently foiled, then you wish to stop those terrorists in their quests to attack America.
LATE EDIT:
Saw this:
Muslim tipoff 'led to arrests'
LONDON, England (CNN) -- A British intelligence official has told CNN that the original information about a plot to down commercial jetliners in mid-Atlantic with explosives came from a tip from the Muslim community in Britain. The official said the tip resulted from a person who had been concerned about the activities of an acquaintance after the July 7 terror attacks in London.
One other point re: the above. Bush's unilateral, unprovoked invasion of a majority Muslim nation has unquestionably given rise to Anti-American hatred around the world. To the extent the invasion makes it less likely that good people like the tipster above will act to help us thwart attacks, the Iraq debacle has made us less safe.
A reason for optimism?
I saw this post on Kevin Drum's Washington Monthly blog. He argues that the foiling of the English terrorist plot is not, as the mainstream media would have you believe, a cause for alarm but, rather, a cause for hope. This was by all accounts a huge plan, but one that was disrupted (well in advance of execution) using traditional law-enforcement mechanisms and international cooperation. Now in the US we've done what we usually do, overreact, hype up the danger, with endless pieces on the cable news outlets with captions like "Are we as safe as we think we are?" or "Are your children about to be exploded?", and go overboard in our response (NO liquids on planes EVER!!! -- even though we've known this was a possible tactic since at least 1995, when Clinton foiled an attack to explode planes over the Pacific) without ever really digging into the specifics.
Under this backdrop, Kevin Drum makes the following observation:
British and American counterterrorism agencies have been tracking 50 al-Qaeda (or al-Qaeda-ish) terrorists for over a year. They were under intensive surveillance the entire time and never had any chance of pulling off their plans. What's more, the investigation has probably provided us with hundreds or thousands of additional leads to keep tabs on.
I wonder: what lesson will al-Qaeda draw from this? Osama bin Laden may be a religious fanatic, but he's not stupid, and my guess is that he'll conclude that in a post-9/11 security environment it's simply impossible to keep a plot this big a secret. There are too many entry points and too many ways for a single mistake to derail the whole thing.
Bin Laden may be fond of big statements, but I wonder if this failure will convince him and his compatriots to think smaller? Is our future now more likely to be full of lots of little attacks rather than the occasional big one?
These are excellent points. I wonder whether our alarmist media will think to ask them.
Under this backdrop, Kevin Drum makes the following observation:
British and American counterterrorism agencies have been tracking 50 al-Qaeda (or al-Qaeda-ish) terrorists for over a year. They were under intensive surveillance the entire time and never had any chance of pulling off their plans. What's more, the investigation has probably provided us with hundreds or thousands of additional leads to keep tabs on.
I wonder: what lesson will al-Qaeda draw from this? Osama bin Laden may be a religious fanatic, but he's not stupid, and my guess is that he'll conclude that in a post-9/11 security environment it's simply impossible to keep a plot this big a secret. There are too many entry points and too many ways for a single mistake to derail the whole thing.
Bin Laden may be fond of big statements, but I wonder if this failure will convince him and his compatriots to think smaller? Is our future now more likely to be full of lots of little attacks rather than the occasional big one?
These are excellent points. I wonder whether our alarmist media will think to ask them.
Monday, August 07, 2006
That crazy Gore....
So INSANE...How could he have been so reckless, dangerous and just downright loony.....
Let's remember that's EXACTLY what the Bill Kristols of the world were saying when Gore gave this speech:
Relevany portions of Al Gore’s Sept. 23, 2002, speech to the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco:
GORE: “To begin with, to put first things first, I believe that we ought to be focusing our efforts first and foremost against those who attacked us on September 11th and who have thus far gotten away with it. The vast majority of those who sponsored, planned and implemented the cold-blooded murder of more than 3,000 Americans are still at large, still neither located nor apprehended, much less punished and neutralized. I do not believe that we should allow ourselves to be distracted from this urgent task simply because it is proving to be more difficult and lengthy than was predicted.
"And, I believe that we are perfectly capable of staying the course in our war against Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network, while simultaneously taking those steps necessary to build an international coalition to join us in taking on Saddam Hussein in a timely fashion. If you're going after Jesse James, you ought to organize the posse first, especially if you're in the middle of a gunfight with somebody who's out after you.
"I don't think we should allow anything to diminish our focus on the necessity for avenging the 3,000 Americans who were murdered and dismantling that network of terrorists that we know were responsible for it. The fact that we don't know where they are should not cause us to focus instead on some other enemy whose location may be easier to identify.
"Nevertheless, President Bush is telling us that America's most urgent requirement of the moment right now is not to redouble our efforts against Al Qaida, not to stabilize the nation of Afghanistan after driving his host government from power, even as Al Qaida members slip back across the border to set up in Afghanistan again.
"Rather, he is telling us that our most urgent task right now is to shift our focus and concentrate on immediately launching a new war against Saddam Hussein. And the president is proclaiming a new uniquely American right to preemptively attack whomsoever he may deem represents a potential future threat.
"Moreover, President Bush is demanding, in this high political season, that Congress speedily affirm that he has the necessary authority to proceed immediately against Iraq and, for that matter, under the language of his resolution, against any other nation in the region regardless of subsequent developments or emerging circumstances…..
"Now, here's another of the main points I want to make: If we quickly succeed in a war against the weakened and depleted fourth-rate military of Iraq, and then quickly abandon that nation, as President Bush has quickly abandoned almost all of Afghanistan after defeating a fifth-rate military power there, then the resulting chaos in the aftermath of a military victory in Iraq could easily pose a far greater danger to the United States than we presently face from Saddam. …
"I believe that we can effectively defend ourselves abroad and at home without dimming our core principles. Indeed, I believe that our success in defending ourselves depends precisely on not giving up what we stand for. We should have as our top priority preserving what America represents and stands for in the world and winning the war against terrorism first.”
Full text here.
Let's remember that's EXACTLY what the Bill Kristols of the world were saying when Gore gave this speech:
Relevany portions of Al Gore’s Sept. 23, 2002, speech to the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco:
GORE: “To begin with, to put first things first, I believe that we ought to be focusing our efforts first and foremost against those who attacked us on September 11th and who have thus far gotten away with it. The vast majority of those who sponsored, planned and implemented the cold-blooded murder of more than 3,000 Americans are still at large, still neither located nor apprehended, much less punished and neutralized. I do not believe that we should allow ourselves to be distracted from this urgent task simply because it is proving to be more difficult and lengthy than was predicted.
"And, I believe that we are perfectly capable of staying the course in our war against Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network, while simultaneously taking those steps necessary to build an international coalition to join us in taking on Saddam Hussein in a timely fashion. If you're going after Jesse James, you ought to organize the posse first, especially if you're in the middle of a gunfight with somebody who's out after you.
"I don't think we should allow anything to diminish our focus on the necessity for avenging the 3,000 Americans who were murdered and dismantling that network of terrorists that we know were responsible for it. The fact that we don't know where they are should not cause us to focus instead on some other enemy whose location may be easier to identify.
"Nevertheless, President Bush is telling us that America's most urgent requirement of the moment right now is not to redouble our efforts against Al Qaida, not to stabilize the nation of Afghanistan after driving his host government from power, even as Al Qaida members slip back across the border to set up in Afghanistan again.
"Rather, he is telling us that our most urgent task right now is to shift our focus and concentrate on immediately launching a new war against Saddam Hussein. And the president is proclaiming a new uniquely American right to preemptively attack whomsoever he may deem represents a potential future threat.
"Moreover, President Bush is demanding, in this high political season, that Congress speedily affirm that he has the necessary authority to proceed immediately against Iraq and, for that matter, under the language of his resolution, against any other nation in the region regardless of subsequent developments or emerging circumstances…..
"Now, here's another of the main points I want to make: If we quickly succeed in a war against the weakened and depleted fourth-rate military of Iraq, and then quickly abandon that nation, as President Bush has quickly abandoned almost all of Afghanistan after defeating a fifth-rate military power there, then the resulting chaos in the aftermath of a military victory in Iraq could easily pose a far greater danger to the United States than we presently face from Saddam. …
"I believe that we can effectively defend ourselves abroad and at home without dimming our core principles. Indeed, I believe that our success in defending ourselves depends precisely on not giving up what we stand for. We should have as our top priority preserving what America represents and stands for in the world and winning the war against terrorism first.”
Full text here.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
Israel -- the Neighborhood Bully
Neighborhood Bully - Bob Dylan
Well, the neighborhood bully, he's just one man
His enemies say he's on their land
They got him outnumbered about a million to one
He got no place to escape to, no place to run
He's the neighborhood bully.
The neighborhood bully he just lives to survive
He's criticized and condemned for being alive
He's not supposed to fight back, he's supposed to have thick skin
He's supposed to lay down and die when his door is kicked in
He's the neighborhood bully.
The neighborhood bully been driven out of every land
He's wandered the earth an exiled man
Seen his family scattered, his people hounded and torn
He's always on trial for just being born
He's the neighborhood bully.
Well, he knocked out a lynch mob, he was criticized
Old women condemned him, said he could apologize
Then he destroyed a bomb factory, nobody was glad
The bombs were meant for him. He was supposed to feel bad
He's the neighborhood bully.
Well, the chances are against it, and the odds are slim
That he'll live by the rules that the world makes for him
'Cause there's a noose at his neck and a gun at his back
And a licence to kill him is given out to every maniac
He's the neighborhood bully.
Well, he got no allies to really speak of
What he gets he must pay for, he don't get it out of love
He buys obsolete weapons and he won't be denied
But no one sends flesh and blood to fight by his side
He's the neighborhood bully.
Well, he's surrounded by pacifists who all want peace
They pray for it nightly that the bloodshed must cease
Now, they wouldn't hurt a fly. To hurt one they would weep
They lay and they wait for this bully to fall asleep
He's the neighborhood bully.
Every empire that's enslaved him is gone
Egypt and Rome, even the great Babylon
He's made a garden of paradise in the desert sand
In bed with nobody, under no one's command
He's the neighborhood bully.
Now his holiest books have been trampled upon
No contract that he signed was worth that what it was written on
He took the crumbs of the world and he turned it into wealth
Took sickness and disease and he turned it into health
He's the neighborhood bully.
What's anybody indebted to him for ?
Nothing, they say. He just likes to cause war
Pride and prejudice and superstition indeed
They wait for this bully like a dog waits to feed
He's the neighborhood bully.
What has he done to wear so many scars ?
Does he change the course of rivers ? Does he pollute the moon and stars ?
Neighborhood bully, standing on the hill
Running out the clock, time standing still
Neighborhood bully.
Well, the neighborhood bully, he's just one man
His enemies say he's on their land
They got him outnumbered about a million to one
He got no place to escape to, no place to run
He's the neighborhood bully.
The neighborhood bully he just lives to survive
He's criticized and condemned for being alive
He's not supposed to fight back, he's supposed to have thick skin
He's supposed to lay down and die when his door is kicked in
He's the neighborhood bully.
The neighborhood bully been driven out of every land
He's wandered the earth an exiled man
Seen his family scattered, his people hounded and torn
He's always on trial for just being born
He's the neighborhood bully.
Well, he knocked out a lynch mob, he was criticized
Old women condemned him, said he could apologize
Then he destroyed a bomb factory, nobody was glad
The bombs were meant for him. He was supposed to feel bad
He's the neighborhood bully.
Well, the chances are against it, and the odds are slim
That he'll live by the rules that the world makes for him
'Cause there's a noose at his neck and a gun at his back
And a licence to kill him is given out to every maniac
He's the neighborhood bully.
Well, he got no allies to really speak of
What he gets he must pay for, he don't get it out of love
He buys obsolete weapons and he won't be denied
But no one sends flesh and blood to fight by his side
He's the neighborhood bully.
Well, he's surrounded by pacifists who all want peace
They pray for it nightly that the bloodshed must cease
Now, they wouldn't hurt a fly. To hurt one they would weep
They lay and they wait for this bully to fall asleep
He's the neighborhood bully.
Every empire that's enslaved him is gone
Egypt and Rome, even the great Babylon
He's made a garden of paradise in the desert sand
In bed with nobody, under no one's command
He's the neighborhood bully.
Now his holiest books have been trampled upon
No contract that he signed was worth that what it was written on
He took the crumbs of the world and he turned it into wealth
Took sickness and disease and he turned it into health
He's the neighborhood bully.
What's anybody indebted to him for ?
Nothing, they say. He just likes to cause war
Pride and prejudice and superstition indeed
They wait for this bully like a dog waits to feed
He's the neighborhood bully.
What has he done to wear so many scars ?
Does he change the course of rivers ? Does he pollute the moon and stars ?
Neighborhood bully, standing on the hill
Running out the clock, time standing still
Neighborhood bully.
Wednesday, May 17, 2006
Frank's Champions League Final Prediction....
I know the conventional wisdom is that this one will be a free-flowing affair, but I don't think that will be the case. I do think there will be goals, but I think it will end 1-1 after extra time and Arsenal will win the penalty shootout. Henry will put us up late in the first half, then Barca will come out guns blazin in the second half and equalize on about 70 minutes, probably due in part from a catastrophic gaffe by Sol.
We'll come close in the late stages thanks to a moment of inspiration from DB10.
Extra time will be, for the most part, uneventful.
We'll win the penalty shootout 5-3, with Ronaldhino missing and the mad German saving one.
----
Of course, what I WANT is a 3-0 thrashing with Bergkamp finishing Barca off with a miracle goal in the 89th minute and an immediate post-match joint announcement from Pires, Henry and Cole that they've all signed reasonably priced contract extensions. Not likely of course but a fella can dream.
Leaving work for the afternoon in a bit. My marginal Gooner friend Chris and his friend, a Canadian whose profession is that of a player in Italy's professional hockey league are coming to the Franklin's Tower Pub to watch the match.
I'll be rubbing my Villareal ticket stub for good luck.
C'mon Arsenal! C'mon Arsenal!
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
London Photos!
Man feeding squirrel in St. James Park (I don't know whether this squirrel was the same squirrel who ended up on the Highbury pitch that night):
Saracens v. Wasps (throw in):
The rest can be found here.
Saracens v. Wasps (throw in):
Hleb scores to put Arsenal up 1-0:
A lunging tackle at Roots Hall:
An owl on the Southend High Street:
The rest can be found here.
"He Almost Looks Like You"
A funny, pretty song about prison rape from Otis Lee Crenshaw and the Black Liars.
Enjoy. Right click HERE.
Enjoy. Right click HERE.
Sunday, April 16, 2006
London Update!
So this is my 2nd full day in London for football. Friday saw Southend United lose a close one at home to Gillingham. I was 1 row off the pitch and had to stare directly in the sun for the entire match. Pre-match fish and chips from the inventively named "The Fish House" were tremendous. Thick, clean tasty fish and big bulky chips. Simply excellent. Got some nice pictures. Will post later. Southend is a nice little town.
Yesterday Arsenal beat WBA 3-1, goals from Hleb, Pires (set up by DB10) and DB10. AND it was Dennis Bergkamp day at Highbury. Storybook stuff. Following the match, enjoyed some time at the Tavern, talking to James and Tom from Richmond, Jeremy from LA and Adam from Indianapolis/Cleveland. We also went for a late dinner at the Finsbury Bite, a nice little Morrocan joint where I had the Merges Sausage Brochette with savoury rice.
Went to mass this morning and then to the Spring Cafe for some Eggs, chips and beans. Solid if unspectacular. Good tea, though.
LAter today it's off to Watford for Saracens v. Wasps in an exciting Rugby Union contest.
Tomorrow it's Southend v. Barnsley with Pete. Tuesday, mercifully, is a break.
Until next time----
Frank
Yesterday Arsenal beat WBA 3-1, goals from Hleb, Pires (set up by DB10) and DB10. AND it was Dennis Bergkamp day at Highbury. Storybook stuff. Following the match, enjoyed some time at the Tavern, talking to James and Tom from Richmond, Jeremy from LA and Adam from Indianapolis/Cleveland. We also went for a late dinner at the Finsbury Bite, a nice little Morrocan joint where I had the Merges Sausage Brochette with savoury rice.
Went to mass this morning and then to the Spring Cafe for some Eggs, chips and beans. Solid if unspectacular. Good tea, though.
LAter today it's off to Watford for Saracens v. Wasps in an exciting Rugby Union contest.
Tomorrow it's Southend v. Barnsley with Pete. Tuesday, mercifully, is a break.
Until next time----
Frank
Friday, April 07, 2006
Lies and hypocrisy and deceit, Oh My!
First THIS, from yesterday
Vice President Dick Cheney's former top aide told prosecutors President Bush authorized the leak of sensitive intelligence information about Iraq, according to court papers filed by prosecutors in the CIA leak case.Before his indictment, I. Lewis Libby testified to the grand jury investigating the CIA leak that Cheney told him to pass on information and that it was Bush who authorized the disclosure, the court papers say. According to the documents, the authorization led to the July 8, 2003, conversation between Libby and New York Times reporter Judith Miller.There was no indication in the filing that either Bush or Cheney authorized Libby to disclose Valerie Plame's CIA identity. But the disclosure in documents filed Wednesday means that the president and the vice president put Libby in play as a secret provider of information to reporters about prewar intelligence on Iraq.
Now, let's take a trip back to September 30, 2003:
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Let me just say something about leaks in Washington. There are too many leaks of classified information in Washington. There's leaks at the executive branch; there's leaks in the legislative branch. There's just too many leaks. And if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of.
...
I want to know the truth. If anybody has got any information inside our administration or outside our administration, it would be helpful if they came forward with the information so we can find out whether or not these allegations are true and get on about the business.
...
I know of nobody -- I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action.
...
And we can clarify this thing very quickly if people who have got solid evidence would come forward and speak out. And I would hope they would.
...
And we've had leaks out of the administrative branch, had leaks out of the legislative branch, and out of the executive branch and the legislative branch, and I've spoken out consistently against them and I want to know who the leakers are.
Ok, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, etc. let's step up to the plate. Bush lied. Again. Blatantly and on a matter of importance. Let's go. Don't gimme the "Well, republicans dispute the characterization of the president's comments as misleading..." baloney. Bush KNEW who authorized the leak of classified information. HE did it. He knew he did it and he sat there and lied to you, media people. Lied to your face. So step up, call him the liar he is. We're waiting.
Update: We've got the party line. ATTENTION! ATTENTION! FULL SPIN MODE!
A senior administration official, speaking on background because White House policy prohibits comment on an active investigation, said Bush sees a distinction between leaks and what he is alleged to have done. The official said Bush authorized the release of the classified information to assure the public of his rationale for war as it was coming under increasing scrutiny.
Ya see, it wasn't a lie, there was a distinction, it's not the same. See, he didn't LEAK the classified information, he authorized its release. Not the same at all. Completely different words and everything. Leak and authorize even have a different number of sylables. Besides, he was doing it for a GOOD reason, to educate the public.
Unbelievable.
Later Update: Here's a man who means what he says!!! --->
“But it is a shameful act by somebody who has got secrets of the United States government and feels like they need to disclose them publicly. . . . We’re at war, and we must protect America’s secrets. “
– George W. Bush, December 19, 2005.
Vice President Dick Cheney's former top aide told prosecutors President Bush authorized the leak of sensitive intelligence information about Iraq, according to court papers filed by prosecutors in the CIA leak case.Before his indictment, I. Lewis Libby testified to the grand jury investigating the CIA leak that Cheney told him to pass on information and that it was Bush who authorized the disclosure, the court papers say. According to the documents, the authorization led to the July 8, 2003, conversation between Libby and New York Times reporter Judith Miller.There was no indication in the filing that either Bush or Cheney authorized Libby to disclose Valerie Plame's CIA identity. But the disclosure in documents filed Wednesday means that the president and the vice president put Libby in play as a secret provider of information to reporters about prewar intelligence on Iraq.
Now, let's take a trip back to September 30, 2003:
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Let me just say something about leaks in Washington. There are too many leaks of classified information in Washington. There's leaks at the executive branch; there's leaks in the legislative branch. There's just too many leaks. And if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of.
...
I want to know the truth. If anybody has got any information inside our administration or outside our administration, it would be helpful if they came forward with the information so we can find out whether or not these allegations are true and get on about the business.
...
I know of nobody -- I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action.
...
And we can clarify this thing very quickly if people who have got solid evidence would come forward and speak out. And I would hope they would.
...
And we've had leaks out of the administrative branch, had leaks out of the legislative branch, and out of the executive branch and the legislative branch, and I've spoken out consistently against them and I want to know who the leakers are.
Ok, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, etc. let's step up to the plate. Bush lied. Again. Blatantly and on a matter of importance. Let's go. Don't gimme the "Well, republicans dispute the characterization of the president's comments as misleading..." baloney. Bush KNEW who authorized the leak of classified information. HE did it. He knew he did it and he sat there and lied to you, media people. Lied to your face. So step up, call him the liar he is. We're waiting.
Update: We've got the party line. ATTENTION! ATTENTION! FULL SPIN MODE!
A senior administration official, speaking on background because White House policy prohibits comment on an active investigation, said Bush sees a distinction between leaks and what he is alleged to have done. The official said Bush authorized the release of the classified information to assure the public of his rationale for war as it was coming under increasing scrutiny.
Ya see, it wasn't a lie, there was a distinction, it's not the same. See, he didn't LEAK the classified information, he authorized its release. Not the same at all. Completely different words and everything. Leak and authorize even have a different number of sylables. Besides, he was doing it for a GOOD reason, to educate the public.
Unbelievable.
Later Update: Here's a man who means what he says!!! --->
“But it is a shameful act by somebody who has got secrets of the United States government and feels like they need to disclose them publicly. . . . We’re at war, and we must protect America’s secrets. “
– George W. Bush, December 19, 2005.
Monday, March 27, 2006
Clarion Ledger letter of the day - March 27, 2006
A variation today. The C/L online poll asks whether the media are accurately portraying the Iraq Murder. Well, once again, the readers of the C/L have bought the silly, unfounded "the media are losing the war" propaganda from the Republican slime machine. A full 82% voted that the media were not accurately portraying the war. Gee whiz. Blaming the media for the war in Iraq is about like blaming your buddy for telling you your girl is fooling around on ya. It's not HIS fault, ya know. But I guess there's a segment of the population that will just lap up, without question, whatever the current GOP talking points are. The "media" is the scapegoat of the moment so follow away they will.
Lara Logan, CBS news correspondent, responding to a GOP talking point regurgitated by Howard "Time Warner/Washington Post" Kurst, summed it up well:
KURTZ: But critics would say, well, no wonder people back home think things are falling apart because we get this steady drumbeat of negativity from the correspondents there.
LOGAN: Well, who says things aren't falling apart in Iraq? I mean, what you didn't see on your screens this week was all the unidentified bodies that have been turning up, all the allegations here of militias that are really controlling the security forces.
What about all the American soldiers that died this week that you didn't see on our screens? I mean, we've reported on reconstruction stories over and over again…I mean, I really resent the fact that people say that we're not reflecting the true picture here. That's totally unfair and it's really unfounded.
...Our own editors back in New York are asking us the same things. They read the same comments. You know, are there positive stories? Can't you find them? You don't think that I haven't been to the U.S. military and the State Department and the embassy and asked them over and over again, let's see the good stories, show us some of the good things that are going on? Oh, sorry, we can't take to you that school project, because if you put that on TV, they're going to be attacked about, the teachers are going to be killed, the children might be victims of attack.
I mean, security dominates every single thing that happens in this country….So how it is that security issues should not then dominate the media coverage coming out of here?
On conservative radio host Laura Ingraham's recent statement that journalists need to do less "reporting from hotel balconies" in Iraq, LOGAN said: I think it's outrageous. I mean, Laura Ingraham should come to Iraq and not be talking about what journalists are doing from the comfort of her studio in the United States, the comfort and the safety. I mean, I don't know any journalist that wants to just sit in a hotel room in Iraq. Does anybody understand that for us we used to be able to drive to Ramadi, we used to drive to Falluja, we used to drive to Najaf. We could travel all over this country without having to fly in military helicopters. n\nThat's the only way we can move around here. So, it's when the military can accommodate us, if the military can accommodate us, then we can go out and see. I have been out with Iraqi security forces over and over again. And you know what? When Bob Woodruff was out with Iraqi security forces and he was injured, the first thing that people were asking was, oh, was he being responsible by placing himself in this position with Iraqi forces? And they started to question his responsibility and integrity as a journalist. I mean, we just can't win. I think it's an outrage to point the finger at journalists and say that this is our fault. I really do. And I think it shows an abject lack of respect for any journalist that's prepared to come to this country and risk their lives. "
Oh, sorry, we can't show this reconstruction project because then that's going to expose it to sabotage. And the last time we had journalists down here, the plant was attacked. I mean, security dominates every single thing that happens in this country….So how it is that security issues should not then dominate the media coverage coming out of here?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
