Got travel this week. I'll be in sunny Dallas Tx for the week.
Saw this at the Smallest Minority.
Very irritating. Proves, yet again, why I think actors are generally fools.
Daniel Craig will have a problem playing the new James Bond - because he hates guns.
The actor will wield 007's famous Walther PPK in the movie Casino Royale.
But he revealed in OK! magazine: "I hate handguns. Handguns are used to shoot people and as long as they are around, people will shoot each other.
"That's a simple fact. I've seen a bullet wound and it was a mess. It was on a shoot and it scared me. Bullets have a nasty habit of finding their target and that's what's scary about them."
Man, and all these years I've been aiming. If they can find their targets out of habit, what the hell have I been doing wrong?
Roger Moore, who played the superspy from 1973 to 1985, said after quitting the role that he hated "that awful pose" of Bond with his gun which has become an iconic movie image.The actor later became an ambassador for children's charity Unicef and declared: "Today I am completely opposed to small arms and what they can do to children. I played every role tongue-in-cheek because I don't really believe in that sort of hero. I don't like guns."
I expect you had to play them tongue-in-cheek, because if you ever actually had to do the real thing you'd probably just shoot yourself in the foot, or worse, shoot the person you're trying to save.
The Supreme Court faces an unappealing question this week: What to do about a lower-court decision that gives the president unfettered authority to chuck the Constitution, military law, and the Geneva Conventions in trying foreign detainees being held at Guantanamo Bay? It's a question that's only been complicated further by Harriet Miers' withdrawal today as Bush's nominee and the uncertainty that creates for the court's composition.Chuck the Constitution, Military law and the Geneva Conventions? From what I've read of analysis, none of these apply. But let's assume Emily Bazelon knows something more.
The lower-court opinion in the case, by a panel of three judges on the D.C. Circuit in July, was breathtakingly broad. It allowed the administration to try Salim Ahmed Hamdan, the former bodyguard and driver of Osama Bin Laden, before a special military commission for crimes including murder and terrorism. Because it sets itself no limits, the opinion in theory would also allow the president to set up the same sort of commission—one that doesn't provide for basic rights afforded both in civilian court and in a military court martial—for any offense committed by any offender anywhere, including by an American on American soil.Nope, guess she doesn't. Hamdan was a foreign combatant taken in hostilities in Afghanistan. Making the huge leap that the finding could jump all the way to an American citizen on American soveriegn soil is extreme. Look at what Hamdan was charged with:
On July 9, 2004, Hamdan was formally charged with conspiracy to commit the following offenses: “attacking civilians; attacking civilian objects; murder by an unprivileged belligerent; destruction of property by an unprivileged belligerent; and terrorism. Dep'’t of Defense, Military Commission List of Charges for Salim Ahmed Hamdan, http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jul2004/d20040714hcc.pdf.She then goes forward with the arguments made by David Luban. His article is interesting and I'd strongly recommend reading it. His point appears to be:
The Geneva Conventions establish two levels of wartime protection, depending on the nature of the war. If the war is an "old paradigm" conflict between states, Geneva provides an elaborate system of protections - for prisoners of war in the Third Convention, and for civilians in the Fourth Convention. (The remaining two conventions concern wounded and sick combatants on land and sea.) But what about conflicts that don't pit state against state? Here, in "common Article Three" (common, that is, to all four Conventions), the Geneva framers insisted on at least minimum human rights for anyone who is detained. These include rights not to be sentenced or punished without minimum due process - the Geneva right on which Hamdan based his argument against the military commissions.Interesting, but let's actually read the article:
But common Article Three also provides for other basic human rights, including rights against violence, cruel treatment, torture, and "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment." When the D.C. Circuit held that Article Three does not apply to the War on Terror, it stripped away all these basic protections from detainees. In place of the split-level protections of Geneva - full protections in state-against-state wars, and at least minimum human rights the rest of the time - Hamdan creates a third tier of "protections," namely no protections at all, in the War on Terror. Where Geneva creates a main floor and a basement, Hamdan digs beneath the basement and adds a dungeon.
In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:Now, was Hamdan taken prisoner while he was not participating in hostilities? I find that nearly impossible to believe. He was acting as a body guard for bin Laden. He was also a member of a group that had clearly declared itself in open conflict with the USA. I guess this argument could be seen as weak, in that how do you know he was participating in hostilities, but on the reverse, how does one determine if a terrorist isn't participating in hostilities? (other than his being stone cold dead.)
(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed ' hors de combat ' by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) taking of hostages;
(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
(2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.
An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict. The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.
The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.
If this is the crap that's happening with the Republicans in control, what hope do we have?
Last week, Alaska's other senator, Lisa Murkowski, said it would be "offensive" not to spend your money on her bridge. When she first became a senator, I asked her if Republicans believed in smaller government. She was unusually candid: "We want smaller government. But, boy, I sure want more highways and more stuff, whatever the stuff is."
I'll say. Alaska's pork projects spanned 67 pages. They get much more than other states. "Oh, you need to come up," she said. "You would realize it's not pork. It's all necessity ... People look at Alaska and say, 'Well, gee, they're getting all this money.' But we still have communities that are not tied in to sewer and water. There are certain basic things that you've got to have."
But my children shouldn't have to pay for them. If people want to live in remote areas of Alaska, why can't they pay for their own sewers and water, through state or local taxes, or better yet, through private businesses? Why should all Americans pay to run sewer lines through the vast, frozen spaces of Alaska? Because Alaska has no money?
Don't believe it. Alaska has so much money, it has no state income tax or sales tax. Instead, it gives its citizens money from something called the Alaska Permanent Fund.
European Union leaders condemned Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for saying that Israel "must be wiped off the map,'' adding to tensions as Iran faces United Nations sanctions over its nuclear program."Calls for violence and for the destruction of any state are manifestly inconsistent with any claim to be a mature and responsible member of the international community,'' leaders of the 25-nation EU said in a statement today during a meeting at Hampton Court outside London, adding that they were concerned about Iran's ``future intentions.''
Even more disturbing:
At a summit of UN leaders in New York in September, Ahmadinejad sparked further concern among U.S. and EU diplomats after he said his country is willing to share nuclear technology with other Arab nations.Ahmadinejad yesterday suggested a violent uprising, telling his audience there was "no doubt the new wave in Palestine will soon wipe off this disgraceful blot from the face of the Islamic world.'' He also said: "Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury.''
Does this sound like a responsible international player?
Again from Schneier. Several interesting links and stories.
From EPIC.org:
Documents obtained by EPIC from the FBI describe thirteen cases of possible misconduct in intelligence investigations. The case numbering suggests that there were at least 153 investigations of misconduct at the FBI in 2003 alone.Check out the rest. It's not earth shattering, but it is irritating.
The Missouri Department of Transportation will spend $3 million annually on a program to monitor the movements of individuals on highways via their cell phones -- without their knowledge or consent.Well, if the phone is off, they can't track it. At least not right now. That will be the next intrusion.
Delcan NET, a Canadian company, developed the system which triangulates the location of each driver by monitoring the signal sent from the cell phone as it is handed off from one cell tower to the next. Each phone is uniquely identified and the information is compared with a highway map to record on what road each motorist is traveling at any given time. The system also records the speed of each vehicle, opening up another potential ticketing technology.
That's unexpected.
Under withering attack from conservatives, President Bush ended his push to put loyalist Harriet Miers on the Supreme Court Thursday and promised a quick replacement. Democrats accused him of bowing to the "radical right wing of the Republican Party."The White House said Miers had withdrawn her name because of a bipartisan effort in Congress to gain access to internal documents related to her role as counsel to the president. But politics played a larger role: Bush's conservative backers had doubts about her ideological purity, and Democrats had little incentive to help the nominee or the embattled GOP president.
But who are the men and women behind the number? Of those 2,000 troops lost, nearly a third were between the ages of 20 to 22, with the highest fatality rate (11.7 percent) being among 21-year-olds, according to figures from the Iraq Coalition Casualty Count, which gathers the bulk of its data from the U.S. government. Soldiers in their mid- to late-20s made up 37 percent of deaths, making almost 70 percent of U.S. casualties under age 30.Would you have made the wild guess that the majority of the military deaths were from people under the age of 30? Did we really need statistics to prove this?
Most casualties were suffered by men, with only 46 female fatalities. Seventy-three percent were white, compared to 11 percent Hispanic and 10.7 percent black; other ethnicities constituted the remaining 5 percent.I guess the MTV website isn't manned by those capable of reporting any real news.
As quickly as news of the latest figure broke, so did damage control by the Department of Defense. In a statement issued shortly after the 2000th loss was confirmed, military spokesperson Lieutenant Colonel Steve Boylan called the number an "artificial mark on the wall" and not a landmark that should be exploited by the press.and
Yet each fallen soldier intensifies a growing weariness from the U.S. public, whose support for the war has been dwindling in the recent months. According to the latest poll published in the The Wall Street Journal Tuesday, more than half of Americans (53 percent) now say it was wrong to invade Iraq, up from 43 percent one year ago.So, the Dept. of Defense is in "Damage Control" but the rest of the quotes aren't commented on for context to their statements.
In light of these numbers, antiwar activist Cindy Sheehan, whose son was killed in Iraq last year, is planning a four-day protest outside the White House, where she hopes 2,000 supporters will gather to die symbolically by laying on the grounds to represent each fallen soldier.
"Two thousand families have been destroyed for nothing," Sheehan told The Associated Press. "Enough is enough. The killing has got to stop."
Meanwhile, Senator Richard Durbin (D-Illinois) spoke out to his fellow politicians and urged them to take a stand in the name of the fallen troops, including the 357, he says, that "never saw their 21st birthday," according to a Washington Post report.
"We cannot allow our nation to drift into a war without end in Iraq," Durbin added. "We do not honor fallen soldiers simply by adding to their numbers."
John Kerry* gave a speech at Georgetown University today, in which he offered the following brilliant insights on Iraq:
- "When they [the Bush administration] could have listened to General Shinseki and put in enough troops to maintain order, they chose not to. They were wrong."
- "General George Casey, our top military commander in Iraq, recently told Congress that our large military presence 'feeds the notion of occupation' and 'extends the amount of time that it will take for Iraqi security forces to become self-reliant.' . . . It is essential to acknowledge that the insurgency will not be defeated unless our troop levels are drawn down."
Apparently Kerry was for more troops before he was against it.
Heh. If you doubt the context, you can read for yourself at the title link.
Critics of the war also acknowledged the sacrifice, even as they questioned the policies of those who lead it.Makes you wonder what would be worth the sacrifice? With these old turds lamenting, it make you wonder how much is honest feeling and how much politics.Sen. Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va, called Tuesday afternoon'’s news "“another tragic milestone in this costly war."
In a speech to the Senate, Byrd said, "“Too much blood has been spilled already. I offer my deepest sympathies to the brave men and women who have given their lives in selfless dedication to service to our nation,"” Byrd said in a speech on the Senate floor.
"“As we mourn the losses that have already occurred in the war in Iraq, Americans should be mindful that all indications are that there will be many more losses to come,"” he said.
Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said, "“our armed forces are serving ably in Iraq under enormously difficult circumstances, and the policy of our government must be worthy of their sacrifice. Unfortunately, it is not, and the American people know it,"’ said, the Massachusetts Democrat.
In an e-mail statement to Baghdad-based journalists, command spokesman Lt. Col. Steve Boylan said media attention on the 2,000 figure was misguided and "set by individuals or groups with specific agendas and ulterior motives."andHe described the grim statistic as an "artificial mark on the wall"’ and urged news organizations to focus more on the accomplishments of the U.S. military mission in Iraq.
For example, Iraqi officials announced Tuesday that voters had approved a new constitution in the Oct. 15 referendum, laying the foundation for constitutional, democratic Iraqi government after decades of Saddam'’s tyranny.
"I ask that when you report on the events, take a moment to think about the effects on the families and those serving in Iraq," Boylan wrote. "“The 2,000 service members killed in Iraq supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom is not a milestone."’
He complained that the true milestones of the war were "“rarely covered or discussed, " including the troops who had volunteered to serve, the families of those that have been deployed for a year or more, and the Iraqis who have sought at great risk to restore normalcy to their country.Then of course the article goes on to give the daily body count and the details of the daily suicide murders. Makes you wonder how the MSM can write a single story on Iraq, without returning to the body count."Celebrate the daily milestones, the accomplishments they have secured and look to the future of a free and democratic Iraq and to the day that all of our troops return home to the heroes welcome they deserve,"’ Boylan wrote.
With the death of the 2,000th American soldier in Iraq on his mind, Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy challenged the president Tuesday to recall U.S. troops from deadly insurgent hotbeds in Iraq after the embattled nation's elections in December.and"I believe the president should consult with Congress on a flexible plan that includes pulling our troops back from the densely populated areas where they are suffering the worst casualties and to bring them home," Leahy, D-Vt., said in a speech on the Senate floor. "Those consultations should begin in earnest as soon as Iraq's new government is in place."
Leahy derided the administration for its "outright distortions" in the lead up to the invasion more than two years ago, calling the bloody outcome "politically motivated" and "unnecessary."Histrionics without an understanding of history. I even heard one report that there is discussion of Senators blocking further funding of the Iraqi operations. Well, if it's not a Vietnam quagmire yet, this should help seeing this is exactly what went on during Vietnam."I believe that history will not judge kindly those who got us into this debacle by attacking a country that did not threaten us, after deceiving the American people and ridiculing those who appealed for caution," Leahy said.
Yeah, I know, it's on Instapundit and therefor reaching thousands of people a day, so why should I post here. Because it's so damned good. That's why. One soldier's reasons for reenlisting:
..."because as I look around at the state of this nation and see all of the weak little pampered candy-asses that are whining about this or protesting that, I'd be afraid to leave the fate of this nation entirely up to them."
It's been far too long since I lobbed a rock at the crapoux. So here's one. You have to love this, France and Canada seek protection from the US film & music industry. Well, sure. We need a lot more movies from France. Let's see, there's La Fem Nikita and... um... hang on, it'll come to me... um... Well of course Canada gave us David Cronenburg, for which we must all bow to them, but apart from the one, solitary, genius we got... wait for it... Pamela Anderson. Worse than that, the rest of the world blames us for Pamela Anderson. Hey people, it ain't our fault. To quote a song, "Blame Canada."
Seriously for a moment, Alphaville was good and France seems to turn out three to four bloody marvelous actresses every year, but by and large their films suck on toast. For every Rules fo the Game there's a Hiroshima Mon Amour (I want that hour plus of my life back and someday I'll take it out of a frenchman's hide). Somehow that's our fault. It also doesn't explain how India, Hong Kong and Japan seem to be able to create film industries so vital, vibrant and powerful that the US industry regularly goes over and steals from them (Seven Samurai becomes Magnificent Seven, City on Fire becomes Reservoir Dogs). Italy has turned out great pictures for years & years, especially their horror movies (say it with me, Dario Argento is GOD). Germany, while falling on it's face when it tries to emulate France, still churns out decent films (Lang, Herzog, Wenders, Fassbinder and, what the hell, Riefenstahl, the bitch). France needs a lot more protection from itself than it needs from the US. Canada... well, go here and look at their 20 greatest movies just to feel that virile, strong, upright feeling fade, wither, withdraw and go limp. It's no wonder when, not only the US, but Italy, Germany, Japan, India and China are making better movies you need to find a way to protect your weak little psyche from all those competent people oppressing you with their ability and success.
George Galloway has today challenged US senators to file criminal charges against him after they claimed to have tracked $150,000 (£85,000) in Iraqi oil money to his wife'’s bank account in Jordan.
The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations will refer the Respect Party MP for possible prosecution today after concluding in a report that he gave "false and misleading" testimony at his appearance before the panel in May.
This morning, Mr Galloway said that he was "completely bemused" by the allegations and demanded that he be charged so he could return to face to the committee, chaired by Senator Norm Coleman, a Republican from Minnesota, and clear his name.
"I did not lie under oath in front of the Senate committee," Mr Galloway told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.
"Indeed, it was the power of my truth in front of the Senate committee which has got the Senator so scorned that he has returned to this sneak attack."
"But I'’m still willing to go to the United States and still willing to face any charge of perjury in front of that Senate committee," he said.
"If a Senate committee can go on the international airwaves without putting this to you, without sending me an advance and accuse me of lying under oath in front of a Senate committee, then I demand they charge me with perjury and I'’ll be in the next plane to face it."”
The investigators spoke to Tariq Aziz, the former Deputy Prime Minister of Iraq, who told them that Mr Galloway asked him for political funding in allocations in the name of Mr Zureikat. The Senate report shows that Mr Zureikat received $740,000 from Taurus Petroleum on July 27, 2000, as commission for its purchase of 2,645,068 barrels of oil.Yeah, theres more, but I can't find myself wasting any more time on this jackass.The report then reproduces money-transfer documents from Citibank showing that Mr Zureikat sent Mr Galloway'’s wife $150,000 on August 3, 2000. They conclude that the amount was "largely" Oil-for-Food money because Mr Zureikat'’s account contained $848,683 at the time, only $38,000 of which did not come from the programme.
Mr Galloway's wife has denied receiving any money from Iraqi oil allocations. In a written reply to the sub-committee, Dr Abu-Zayyad wrote: "I have never solicited or received from Iraq or anyone else any proceeds of any oil deals, either for myself or for my former husband."
A really interesting article over at History News Network. The author of a book about Harvard graduates & members participation in the Civil War comments on their connections, or lack thereof, to modern America & American culture and our modern military. The comparison of the centrality of Harvard as a leader in American culture until relatively recently when it's become just a snobby university.
I know that after working at two dot com's in a row both run by Harvard graduates, they don't teach general knowledge or ethics at the school. The willingness of these individuals to toss out the door all semblance of common sense as an intentional exercise called "thinking outside the box" lead to some truly marvelous debacles. The willful denial of the physical laws of the universe was a sight to behold. Followed closely by lies, cheating and theft to close out the joy of the Harvard experience for me. Subsequently, I've worked at two companies, basically well run, where there were incredibly incompetent yet deeply arrogant people. Guess what, Harvard grads to a man. Actually, thinking about it, maybe it's better that Harvard grads aren't flocking into the military since the people who are joining these days are clearly some of the best & brightest.
Wow! I'm in humble awe at the high level of thought and the scope of the writing that makes up this post. Yeah, OK, he makes the same mistakes that most people make about WWI's resolution, and aftermath (yes, we won it, but no, we shouldn't have). With that exception, I was extremely pleased with what he wrote & said.
Minor nit to pick, I think the issue is not that there is too much communication, writing, talking, etc., rather that it is far to concentrated. From what I've seen & read more Americans in the past were writing & reading than they are today (Stephen King & Dannielle Steele don't count). They were at least somewhat practiced at communicating (if not spelling) well. I keep hoping that maybe the internet, blogging, citizen journalism and all that rot will actually lead to a rebirth of that sort of thing.
Anyway, it's a great read. Have fun.
Interesting meme. [H/T Ministry of Minor Perfidy where I stole the list originally.]
Rank | Movie | Nylar | Granted | geekWife |
1 | Yes | Some of it | ||
2 | Yes | Yes | ||
3 | No | No | ||
4 | Yes | Yes | ||
5 | Yes | Yes | ||
6 | Yes | |||
7 | Yes | |||
8 | No | |||
9 | Yes | Yes | ||
10 | Yes | |||
11 | Yes | Some of it | ||
12 | No | |||
13 | Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) | Yes | Yes | |
14 | Yes | Yes | ||
15 | Yes | God No | ||
16 | Yes | |||
17 | No | |||
18 | No | Yes | ||
19 | Yes | |||
20 | Yes | |||
21 | Yes | |||
22 | No | Yes | ||
23 | Yes | Yes | ||
24 | Yes | |||
25 | Buono, il brutto, il cattivo, Il [The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly] (1966) | Yes | ||
26 | Yes | |||
27 | Yes | |||
28 | Yes | |||
29 | No | |||
30 | Yes | |||
31 | No | |||
32 | Yes | |||
33 | Yes | |||
34 | Yes | |||
35 | Yes | |||
36 | C’era una volta il West [Once Upon a Time in the West] (1968) | Yes | ||
37 | Yes | |||
38 | Yes | |||
39 | Yes | |||
40 | No | |||
41 | No | |||
42 | Yes | |||
43 | Yes | |||
44 | No | |||
45 | Yes | |||
46 | Yes | |||
47 | Yes | |||
48 | Yes | |||
49 | No | |||
50 | No | |||
51 | Bridge on the River Kwai, The (1957) | Yes | ||
52 | All About Eve (1950) | Yes | Yes | |
53 | Se7en (1995) | Yes | ||
54 | Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975) | Yes | ||
55 | Saving Private Ryan (1998) | Yes | ||
56 | Cidade de Deus [City of God] (2002) | No | ||
57 | Raging Bull (1980) | Yes | ||
58 | Rashômon (1950) | Yes | ||
59 | Wizard of Oz, The (1939) | Yes | ||
60 | Sting, The (1973) | Yes | ||
61 | Alien (1979) | Yes | Yes | |
62 | American History X (1998) | No | ||
63 | Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) | Yes | ||
64 | Léon (1994) | Yes | Yes |
Yes |
65 | Vita è bella, La [Life is Beautiful] (1997) | Yes | ||
66 | Touch of Evil (1958) | No | ||
67 | Manchurian Candidate, The (1962) | Yes | ||
68 | 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) | Yes | ||
69 | Treasure of the Sierra Madre, The (1948) | Yes | ||
70 | Great Escape, The (1963) | Yes | Yes | |
71 | Wo hu cang long [Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon] (2000) | Yes | ||
72 | Reservoir Dogs (1992) | Yes | ||
73 | Clockwork Orange, A (1971) | Yes | ||
74 | Amadeus (1984) | Yes | ||
75 | Modern Times (1936) | Yes | ||
76 | Ran (1985) | Yes | ||
77 | Annie Hall (1977) | No | ||
78 | Jaws (1975) | Yes | ||
79 | On the Waterfront (1954) | Yes | ||
80 | Braveheart (1995) | Yes | ||
81 | High Noon (1952) | Yes | ||
82 | Apartment, The (1960) | Yes | ||
83 | Fargo (1996) | Yes | ||
84 | Sixth Sense, The (1999) | No | ||
85 | Aliens (1986) | Yes | ||
86 | Shining, The (1980) | Yes | ||
87 | Strangers on a Train (1951) | No | Yes | |
88 | Blade Runner (1982) | Yes | ||
89 | Metropolis (1927) | Yes | ||
90 | Duck Soup (1933) | Yes | ||
91 | Finding Nemo (2003) | Yes | Yes | |
92 | Donnie Darko (2001) | No | ||
93 | General, The (1927) | Yes | ||
94 | City Lights (1931) | Yes | Yes | |
95 | Princess Bride, The (1987) | No | ||
96 | Toy Story 2 (1999) | No | ||
97 | Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003) | Yes | Yes | |
98 | Great Dictator, The (1940) | Yes | ||
99 | Sjunde inseglet, Det [The Seventh Seal] (1957) | Yes | ||
100 | Lola rennt [Run Lola Run] (1998) | No |
