Welcome to Medary.com Saturday, May 18 2024 @ 08:00 PM CST

Current Affairs

Dressing down Muslims

  • Contributed by:
  • Views: 1,337
What "moderate" Muslims need to hear more of--words like those of Australian Government spokesman Andrew Robb:
"We live in a world of terrorism where evil acts are being regularly perpetrated in the name of your faith," Mr Robb said at the Sydney conference.

"And because it is your faith that is being invoked as justification for these evil acts, it is your problem.

"You can't wish it away, or ignore it, just because it has been caused by others.

"Instead, speak up and condemn terrorism, defend your role in the way of life that we all share here in Australia."
Emphasis added.  In the words of R.E.M., "Silence means approval."  Begin the begin.

'Toxic Soup' of New Orleans? Not so much

  • Contributed by:
  • Views: 1,824
Among the other myths of the Katrina-New Orleans mythfest was the 'toxic soup' flood waters.

Turns out it wasn't as bad as "they" thought it would be (from Science Daily):
Despite the tragic human and economic toll from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita along the Gulf Coast in 2005, the much-discussed "toxic-soup" environmental pollution was nowhere close to being as bad as people thought.

That's the bottom-line message from dozens of scientific papers scheduled for presentation at a four-day symposium that opened here today at the American Chemical Society's national meeting, according to symposium organizer Ruth A. Hathaway. Entitled "Recovery From and Prevention of Natural Disasters," it is one of the key themes for the meeting, which runs through Sept. 14.
. . .
"As I look at the presentations in this symposium, that's perhaps the most striking message," Hathaway said in an interview. "The dust has settled now and all the hoopla is over. We've actually had a chance to look at the real-world data from New Orleans. All indications at this point are that the hurricanes were not as devastating in stirring up chemicals as once feared.

Praise the Goddess!

  • Contributed by:
  • Views: 1,707
Nevada OK's widow's wish to place Wiccan symbol on slain soldier/husband's tombstone:

Sgt. Patrick Stewart, 34, was killed in Afghanistan last September when a rocket-propelled grenade struck his helicopter. Four others also died. Stewart was posthumously awarded the Bronze Star and the Purple Heart.

He was a follower of the Wiccan religion, which the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs does not recognize and therefore prohibits on veterans' headstones in national cemeteries.

I've got no problem with this.  Stewart served honorably and deserves to be recognized with respect.

Big Surprise: Hezbollah committed war crimes

  • Contributed by:
  • Views: 1,332
The somnambulent Amnesty International finally gets around to noticing that Hezbollah is a group of murderous barbarians with no respect for human life:
"The scale of Hizbollah's attacks on Israeli cities, towns and villages, the indiscriminate nature of the weapons used and statements from the leadership confirming their intent to target civilians make it all too clear that Hizbollah violated the laws of war," Amnesty's Secretary-General Irene Khan said.
Of course, in the world Amnesty International lives in, Israel and Hizbollah are equally barbarous, making this statement seem like it's even-handed and rational:
"The fact that Israel has also committed serious violations in no way justifies violations by Hizbollah," she said in a statement. "Civilians must not be made to pay the price for unlawful conduct on either side."


A 14 pound, 3 ounce baby!

  • Contributed by:
  • Views: 1,352
Yikes!  A Connecticut woman gives birth to a big'un:
NORWICH, Conn. - Oh baby! Marie Michel's fifth child was one for the record books. Michel gave birth to a 14-pound, 13-ounce boy Tuesday at William W. Backus Hospital.

Backus officials said the newborn -- Stephon Hendrix Louis-Jean -- broke the 18-year record for the biggest baby ever born at the hospital by 1 pound, 13 ounces. He was nearly 23 inches long.

"He's built like a linebacker," said Dr. David Kalla, who delivered the baby by Caesarean section.

We 'support the troops' we just won't talk to them

  • Contributed by:
  • Views: 1,194
Code Pink's purpose on this Earth, I think, is to provide comic relief.

Code Pink is the organization that delights in infiltrating disruptors into Congressional Joint Sessions, Congressional committee meetings, and other way-too-serious events.  These are the ladies wearing sloppily hand-painted T-shirts with such inspiring slogans as "No War" and "Bush Is Hitler" and other lofty thoughts.

Loyal readers will recall Code Pink's ill-fated attempt to picket Kansas City area gas stations.

Citizen Smash, at Indepundit, tries to discuss, well, anything with Code Pink protesters outside Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.  It does not go well. 

Chapter One is where Smash attempts to engage Code Pinko "Bruce" in dialogue:
SMASH: If people are uncomfortable, they don’t have to talk to me. . .

BRUCE: You see, we have two hours when we do our vigil. . .  So this isn’t the time for us to be talking to anybody else or anything... We’re not here to do interviews... What we’re thinking about, to be really honest, are the soldiers. You know, whether you believe us or not, that’s what we’re here for. So, we’re just staying focused on that. . .  We’re really not here for ourselves. To be honest... We don’t go out of our way to attract media attention... But we’re not here, between seven and nine, to get into. . .  I know it happens sometimes, because we’re human...

SMASH: Well, maybe you’re not here to do that, but everybody here is an individual, in addition to being part of a larger group, but if people want to talk to me. . .  I’m not trying to break up the protest, or anything, I just want to talk to them. . .  That shouldn’t be a problem.

BRUCE: You’re right, if anybody wants to talk to you, that’s perfectly OK... I’m just trying to communicate to you, the general thrust, and rules if you wanna say. . .  Well, they’re not rules, but you know what I mean... What we’re here for, that is, we’re trying to be facing out this way (he gestures towards the street). And that’s basically what we’re doing. Well, I will admit, when soldiers come out, we like to talk to them, because we know that they need to. . .  I mean, it’s healthy for them. They can say whatever they want, but just to be able to speak their minds. We have no problem with that. We communicate, and they can tell us what’s going on. But, that’s 'cause we’re here for them.
Emphasis in original.

Chapter Two, the punch line, is when Smash interviews two soldiers leaving Walter Reed, who also tried to talk to the Pinkos:
SMASH: What do you think their general attitude was towards the military?

P.D.: Towards the military... they really don’t support what we’re doing over there.

Mason: But they say they "support" us.

P.D.: I’m not saying that they do, but they say that they support us.

SMASH: Did you feel supported?

P.D.: I don’t feel supported, because they’re...

Mason: They wouldn’t even talk to us! How are they supporting us, if they won’t even talk to us, or look us in the eye?

P.D.: Exactly! That’s what we got from them. If they won’t even talk to us...

SMASH: Well, what was the general attitude, when you first got down there?

P.D.: The general attitude was, they were kind of pushing us out. Wouldn’t talk to us. Just blowing us off.

SMASH: Had you identified yourselves as soldiers from Walter Reed?

P.D.: Oh, yeah...

Mason: Oh, yes sir. We had told them all about our background. I served in Iraq. He served in Afghanistan and Iraq. We were patients at the hospital. That we were just curious... But that did not seem like a good answer to them.

Once again, emphasis in the original.  Much more, including audio, at the Indepundit article.

Comic relief.  Thanks, Code Pink, for being who you are.

Hat tip:  blogfather Glenn at Instapundit.

The Path to 9/11

  • Contributed by:
  • Views: 1,690
After watching last night's installment of ABC-TVs The Path to 9/11, my overriding impresson is that it's essentially an episode of 24, but without the superstar CTU anti-terrorism unit of that fictional TV series.

This movie isn't anti-Clinton.  It's just a tragedy.  And despite the dramatization, it's pretty much the truth.  The bad guys aren't the politicians, bureaucrats, and agents--they're all victims, too.  Clinton isn't the bad guy.  Bush isn't the bad guy.  The bad guys are the Islamists who worship death.

I renew my call for Senators Reid, Durbin, Stabenow, Schumer, and Dorgan to resign immediately.  They have violated their oaths to protect the Constitution with their call for censorship of this movie.  Their contemptable, hypersensitive letter linked above demeans not only the political process but all those who perished on 9/11 and all those who have died in the service of this country, responding to that barbaric day.

Today's headlines, 9/9/06

  • Contributed by:
  • Views: 1,324
From the irrepressable Yahoo News.  No commentary today . . . because the headlines themselves tell a story.  What that story is, I don't quite know . . .

Pilgrims or tourists, millions come to Ground Zero

NATO chiefs want more troops for Afghan south

Merkel criticizes U.S. over CIA prisons

Iran, EU set crunch atom talks; U.S. seeks sanctions

Ships back in Beirut as blockade ended

Party civil war after bid to oust UK's Blair

'Star Trek' marks 40th anniversary

Indian troops patrol town after blasts

Journalists fired for taking gov't money

French troops land in Lebanon

Red Cross fined for breaking safety laws

30 Taliban killed in south Afghanistan

Hooch liquor kills 23 in Nicaragua

And, this just in, the Shuttle finally managed to get off the ground this morning.

Censorship is OK if you're a Democrat

  • Contributed by:
  • Views: 1,310
If you think that the Democratic leadership in Congress believes in free speech, you would be wrong.  Read the whole thing below (emphasis added).

This is bald-faced prior-restraint censorship. Senior members of the United States Congress are openly threatening private broadcasters due to the content of a planned broadcast. If President Bush had sent a similar letter, impeachment proceedings would quite rightfully be contemplated.

With this letter, Reid, Durbin, Stabenow, Schumer, and Dorgan have shown themselves to be unfit for office. They are the ones who should immediately resign in disgrace.

The complete text of the infamous letter:

The text of the letter, signed by Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, Assistant Democratic Leader Dick Durbin, and Senators Debbie Stabenow, Charles Schumer, and Byron Dorgan, is below.

September 7, 2006

Mr. Robert A. Iger

President and CEO

The Walt Disney Company

500 South Buena Vista Street

Burbank CA 91521

Dear Mr. Iger,

We write with serious concerns about the planned upcoming broadcast of The Path to 9/11 mini-series on September 10 and 11. Countless reports from experts on 9/11 who have viewed the program indicate numerous and serious inaccuracies that will undoubtedly serve to misinform the American people about the tragic events surrounding the terrible attacks of that day. Furthermore, the manner in which this program has been developed, funded, and advertised suggests a partisan bent unbecoming of a major company like Disney and a major and well respected news organization like ABC. We therefore urge you to cancel this broadcast to cease Disney’s plans to use it as a teaching tool in schools across America through Scholastic. Presenting such deeply flawed and factually inaccurate misinformation to the American public and to children would be a gross miscarriage of your corporate and civic responsibility to the law, to your shareholders, and to the nation.

The Communications Act of 1934 provides your network with a free broadcast license predicated on the fundamental understanding of your principle obligation to act as a trustee of the public airwaves in serving the public interest. Nowhere is this public interest obligation more apparent than in the duty of broadcasters to serve the civic needs of a democracy by promoting an open and accurate discussion of political ideas and events.

Disney and ABC claim this program to be based on the 9/11 Commission Report and are using that assertion as part of the promotional campaign for it. The 9/11 Commission is the most respected American authority on the 9/11 attacks, and association with it carries a special responsibility. Indeed, the very events themselves on 9/11, so tragic as they were, demand extreme care by any who attempt to use those events as part of an entertainment or educational program. To quote Steve McPhereson, president of ABC Entertainment, “When you take on the responsibility of telling the story behind such an important event, it is absolutely critical that you get it right.”

Unfortunately, it appears Disney and ABC got it totally wrong.

Despite claims by your network’s representatives that The Path to 9/11 is based on the report of the 9/11 Commission, 9/11 Commissioners themselves, as well as other experts on the issues, disagree.

  • Richard Ben-Veniste, speaking for himself and fellow 9/11 Commissioners who recently viewed the program, said, “As we were watching, we were trying to think how they could have misinterpreted the 9/11 Commission’s findings the way that they had.” [“9/11 Miniseries Is Criticized as Inaccurate and Biased,” New York Times, September 6, 2006]
  • Richard Clarke, the former counter-terrorism czar, and a national security advisor to ABC has described the program as “deeply flawed” and said of the program’s depiction of a Clinton official hanging up on an intelligence agent, “It’s 180 degrees from what happened.” [“9/11 Miniseries Is Criticized as Inaccurate and Biased,” New York Times, September 6, 2006]
  • Reports suggest that an FBI agent who worked on 9/11 and served as a consultant to ABC on this program quit halfway through because, “he thought they were making things up.” [MSNBC, September 7, 2006]
  • Even Thomas Kean, who serves as a paid consultant to the miniseries, has admitted that scenes in the film are fictionalized. [“9/11 Miniseries Is Criticized as Inaccurate and Biased,” New York Times, September 6, 2006]
  • That Disney would seek to broadcast an admittedly and proven false recounting of the events of 9/11 raises serious questions about the motivations of its creators and those who approved the deeply flawed program. Finally, that Disney plans to air commercial-free a program that reportedly cost it $40 million to produce serves to add fuel to these concerns.

    These concerns are made all the more pressing by the political leaning of and the public statements made by the writer/producer of this miniseries, Mr. Cyrus Nowrasteh, in promoting this miniseries across conservative blogs and talk shows.

    Frankly, that ABC and Disney would consider airing a program that could be construed as right-wing political propaganda on such a grave and important event involving the security of our nation is a discredit both to the Disney brand and to the legacy of honesty built at ABC by honorable individuals from David Brinkley to Peter Jennings. Furthermore, that Disney would seek to use Scholastic to promote this misguided programming to American children as a substitute for factual information is a disgrace.

    As 9/11 Commission member Jamie Gorelick said, “It is critically important to the safety of our nation that our citizens, and particularly our school children, understand what actually happened and why – so that we can proceed from a common understanding of what went wrong and act with unity to make our country safer.”

    Should Disney allow this programming to proceed as planned, the factual record, millions of viewers, countless schoolchildren, and the reputation of Disney as a corporation worthy of the trust of the American people and the United States Congress will be deeply damaged. We urge you, after full consideration of the facts, to uphold your responsibilities as a respected member of American society and as a beneficiary of the free use of the public airwaves to cancel this factually inaccurate and deeply misguided program. We look forward to hearing back from you soon.

    Sincerely,

    Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid

    Assistant Democratic Leader Dick Durbin

    Senator Debbie Stabenow

    Senator Charles Schumer

    Senator Byron Dorgan


    Bush's speech today

    • Contributed by:
    • Views: 1,677
    My first real attempt at liveblogging . . . refresh the page for updates . . .

    No secret, Bush needs to find a new riff. For our country's sake, I hope that's what we'll hear today.
    Why the terrorists have not succeeded . . . "hard-working people." "we've given law enforcement the tools"
     . . . same old, same old.
    "Our enemies are"
     . . . same old same old.
    "The most important source of information is the terrorists themselves."

    "These are "enemy combatants" who are waging war against our nation. . . we have an obligation to detain these combatants and stop them from re-joining the battle."

    Disappointing, so far. He's not breaking any new ground that I can tell.
    "A small number . . . have been held and questioned outside the U.S. . . . by the CIA."
    Some examples:

    Abu Zabada (sp?) gave up some information, then stopped talking. "The CIA used an 'alternative set of procedures.' The DOJ 'determined the procedures to be lawful.'"
    The left is going to have a field day with that . . . look for details on those procedures tomorrow in the New York Times.
    Khalid Sheik Mohammed ("KSM") talked, too. Al Qaida was working to develop anthrax. KSM thought we already knew what he told us--but we didn't know about "Yazeed's" role in the anthrax program.
    I don't know if these vignettes Bush is offering will have much effect.

    Heh. Two guys ducking behind a flag behind the President. My guess is that they'll get a talking-to.
    "Were it not for this program . . . Al Qaida would have launched a successful attack."
    That should get people's attention. It won't.

    In order to hear, one must listen. The opponents of Bush have stopped listening. I don't think there's anything he can say which will make a difference to them. They're sanguine in their belief that they are right, and Bush is wrong.
    Sending to Congress legislation to authorize military tribunals to try terrorists for war crimes.
    Here's the meat of the speech. In my opinion, he would have been better off getting to this twenty minutes ago.
    Terrorists being transferred from the CIA to the military facility at Guantanamo.

    "Those who killed 3,000 Americans on 9/11/01 will face justice"
    . . . standing ovation from the White House Staff.

    The ICRC is being advised of their detention. Look for the 'CIA tortured me' stories in the next couple of weeks from these guys.

    Other nations must take back their nationals being held in Guantanamo. "America has no desire to be the world's jailer."

    There are now no terrorists in the CIA program. Having a CIA program to question terrorists will be crucial to gaining information.
    Why reveal the CIA program now? 1) The current detainees have already been questioned. 2) the Supreme Court's decision has put the CIA program into doubt.
    Asking Congress to clarify behavior restricted by war crimes act and restrict access by terrorists to domestic legal system.

    And it's over.  Let the firestorm begin.