Continue reading "WHEN BLOGGERS RULE "

I. THE ATTACK OF THE FIDDLING KLEAGLE

Step back a few weeks in time. In the immediate afterglow of the fall of Baghdad the President is cresting a wave of extraordinary popularity and support. The Democrats, of course, are hoping beyond hope to find some angle to take Dubya down one or two notches in the polls. Never relying on instinct or leadership ability when in unknown situations, they've always checked poll results before taking any action whatsoever. Now, however, they have a new option.

The Democratic leadership is fully aware of the Blogosphere (as are the Republicans). I've seen Capitol Hill servers on my hit lists, while big-blogger Scott Ott's Axis of Weasels comment (check the dance mix) has been quoted in the Senate. So, is it beyond the realm of possibility that Terry McAuliffe and his gang now cruise a few Blogs before taking bold decisive action?

Note this timeline:
May 1: President Bush (Commander in Chief) lands on USS Lincoln, Carrier returning from deployment during war.

May 1-5: Almost immediately, some right-leaning Blogs begin expressing doubts as to the wisdom of this event. And they raise very valid points, absolutely worthy of discussion. That discussion rages for several days through several comment sections of several very well-read Blogs. The lefty anti-Bush commenters have obvious responses deserving of immediate dismissal. But several pro-Bush types still express displeasure. Ignoring the envy-fueled hate posts from the left, the debate is actually one of the finest seen in the Blogosphere.

One week later: After consulting with polls and spin doctors, the Democrats boldly and decisively weigh in on the issue. Byrd and Waxman eventually receive a level of scorn rarely seen on the political stage. Bloggers take them to task. Having once again thoroughly miscalculated the mood of America, they rather quickly shut up and go away.

Byrd, it would seem, is the new sacrificial lamb of the Democratic Party. He can be portrayed as the "fiery old warrior going forth to battle the forces of evil" in the mainstream press. They can be counted on to enthusiastically endorse any Democratic Party idea, regardless of how utterly void of common sense or careful forethought. So Byrd gets to be the attack dog. If, as Standard bearer for the assault on George Bush, his championed cause gains the Democrats ground, then Hooray for good old Bob! He's our boy! If , however, he's shot down in a flame of public opinion, then, well, you know, he's actually kind of an out of touch old geezer anyhow, and definitely not-the-future-of-the-party, right?

Really, we're talking about the fiddling kleagle here; a man who's ready to don his drool bucket. A man who must be checked daily by his handlers to ensure he didn't put his depends on over his pants. At least the Dems can be assured of his vote. Even as he drifts into senility he'll be casting votes against Republicans, convinced they are trying to rob him of his non-existent social security benefits. And of course, once he's too enfeebled to make it to the polls he'll have lots of folks willing to vote in his name. I'm sure, long after his death Byrd will be a frequent voter for the democratic cause.

But for now, he's merely the living trial balloon. The expendable one, as one way or another he's leaving the Senate before too long.

Suppose the Democrats, in checking public opinion in order to develop dynamic leadership strategy, note the minor ripple in the Blog world and wonder if they've found some chink in the armor?

"Hey," says Terry McAuliffe, "lets get 'em!"

"Hold on Terry, " says a less bold James Carville, "we can't risk ourselves. We're too important to the cause. We need a sacrificial lamb"

"You mean a sacrificial Byrd!" Terry fires back with a gleam in his eye. And the rest is history.

All this is imaginary, of course. But the subsequent history is not. Byrd did his best to stir the pot, but no one cares. The Dems have doubly miscalculated.

One: Byrd is at best contemptable to mainstream America, and intensely despised by many; with no redeeming qualities his outcries garner sympathy only for his opponents. This will not change. It's of great benefit to Republicans that he wasn't forced out as a consequence of his racist statements; now every time he approaches a microphone decent people can cry "Look, a racist! What will it say? Let's listen so that we may gain a better understanding of wrong-headed thinking."

Two: The carrier landing was appreciated by the military and the public. And no one was overly concerned that it cost money for the commander to visit the troops. Even the moderate lefties could grasp this. "Find a real cause, please? You're embarrassing us." The sacrificial Byrd part could kick in if the backlash is strong enough, but it's not, and the issue fades.

Byrd may consider himself fortunate that there were no Blogs to call him to task for his revealing remarks. More recently there's been a bit of chest thumping in the Blog community regarding the idea that "Blogs brought down Trent Lott" - I would hesitate to go that far. But is it at all possible that Blogs are looked at by policy makers, as another entry point into the American mind? Evaluators of the collective psyche would be remiss not to look at Blogs for this purpose. Certainly not as a final solution, but as another reference point. And, perhaps, one that is growing in importance.

Note this look at the topic from London via Instapundit.

Consider the Blogosphere as comparable, perhaps, to talk radio of the 1980's - a presence on the political landscape, looked at as not too stable just yet. The difference, of course, is that talk radio of the '80s was very few people, while the Blogosphere is a modern day Wild Wild West of disparate ideas.

II. A BRIEF LOOK AT SOME BEASTIES OF THE BLOGOSPHERE

THE HABITAT (THE MOST DANGEROUS PLACE ON EARTH?)

Ancient Rome had its Forum; where people met, conducted business and debated the issues of the day. How fitting then that modern Rome has its own Forum...the Internet.

Transform yourself into a being of pure energy, pure thought, void of face and form, and travel electronically to a meeting place of ideas and expressions. What a marvelous opportunity, to have one's ideas expressed in a way that allows both criticism and support, while eliminating the potential for judgment based on the messenger; appearance and gender masked if you desire. Age? Not a factor. Fifteen or fifty, it's your thoughts and your ability to express them that matter, and nothing else. Race? Who cares? Ethnicity? Non-factor. If you come up with the solution to the crisis in Israel you can post it anonymously for the world, without being dismissed for being from Peoria.

Even those Bloggers fortunate enough to not need an assumed name are still little more then names (and sometimes faces) to the vast majority of their readers, with no real connection as corporate human beings. Proof? Those readers will say things to them via their comments or their own Blogs that they would never dare utter to a neighbor over the fence or a co-worker at an office party.

I fall into the category of "anonymous blogger." Strangely enough the reason I do this is so that I can give my real and honest opinion. I wish I didn't have to, and some day I won't, but for now such is life. You can, however, get a pretty accurate general depiction of who I am by reading my posts for a while. Many other Bloggers fall into this same category for much the same reason.

THE TROLL

Unfortunately, the anonymity of the Blogosphere opens the door for the Troll, annoying creatures who move through this system attacking and spreading hate. Anonymity in some cases foments viciousness, perhaps a trait suppressed in their corporal existence. "Troll" is just too cute a word for some of them. Read every Blog and it's comments posted on a given day (admittedly impossible) and you may swear that a significant number are written by people actually diametrically opposed to what they espouse; leading one to consider they exist merely to generate contempt for their subject matter. (Do note, however, the vast majority of Blogs and comments can be taken at face value.)

Who knows what inspires a Troll? A thrill at being annoying? A response to being ignored in the real world? Perhaps, I like to believe, though, that The Troll returns to the real world, having acted out their fantasy life in the Blogosphere, perhaps a little happier and better adjusted for having vented their frustrations here. Good for them. Maybe they won't kill coworkers now.

Of course, even the Troll can't ruin the Blogosphere as a great place to "meet" people. The desire of many in this regard is twofold; 1) to embrace those of like mind, to reinforce that you are not alone in thoughts and opinions and thus not the last sane person on earth; or 2) to understand those of differing opinion; to get some grasp, if you will, of what exactly went wrong in their developmental process, without having to offend a "real" person. Child abuse? Jilted at the Altar? What is the fundamental defect in your nature?!

(Of course, never to my knowledge has anyone in the Blogosphere convinced another to shout "Eureka! I was wrong!" on any issue of any merit. Even in the post-Iraq-war light of day the doomsayers, the "quagmire crowd," the "prophets of jihad" and the "WWIII tin foil hat brigade" are still claiming they were right all along, that there never were any WMDs!)

Ahhh...but find those like-minded individuals, your spiritual soul mates, and fly! The only people who think like me are other geniuses, don't you know?

Thus, the Blog reader is forced to become a thorough critic of new products and persona in the Blogosphere. Does this person bring something new to discuss? If not, does this person have something new and useful to add to the discussion? Does this person have a fresh perspective, an interesting voice?

Because we are all singers, after all. Some of Opera, some of Rock, some Jazz, some the Blues. Some are Rappers, and some Country. I respect the best artists of all genres. I have no time for the talentless, unless they have potential. I despise pretenders. Sing only that which is true to your heart. And practice developing that voice! Your thoughts on a topic are pointless if your voice is Roseanne's and your song is the National Anthem.

THE SIREN

The counterpoint to this of course, is the beautiful voice that spews hate. Like the Siren calling to all to come and crash on the rocks of bigoted or hateful ideologies. The Siren, then, is a nastier creature then a mere Troll. Of course, succumbing briefly to such a voice does no permanent harm to an individual, especially in the virtual forum. Perhaps the experience leaves them a bit wiser for future events, events that matter in the real world.

So what? Why care? Because the presence of the Siren, and the Troll, and the myriad of other less then savory characters that populate the Blogosphere, while providing half the "fun" are also the reason that the majority of the Blogosphere is still not ready for prime time.

Let's listen briefly then, to a Siren's song together.

The Siren, of course, can be a person or an idea, or both. An example? The Santorum case.

Many Bloggers from all over the political spectrum were quick to line up and denounce Santorum for what appeared to be a rabid anti-gay viewpoint. Santorum provided right-leaning Bloggers a chance to demonstrate their Libertarian, moderate views (since most are Republican on most other issues) and enabled them to express their unequivocal support for human rights. For Santorum bashers, however, there are three facts that are convenient to ignore.

1. At face value Santorum wasn't speaking directly about Gay Rights, he was addressing a larger legal point within the specific case. Attaching additional meaning and arguing against it is not valid debate. In fact, it's counter productive as it's just a way to avoid the real issue. This tactic is transparent to all but a few practitioners, and is unfortunately all too commonly seen here.

2, Ashcroft and Santorum are not leading death squads into peoples' bedrooms and hauling them off for unacceptable behavior.
From a Houston TV News site:
The case began in 1998, when a neighbor tricked police with a false report of a black man "going crazy" in John Geddes Lawrence's apartment. Police pushed their way in and found Lawrence having anal sex with another man, Tyron Garner.

Although Texas rarely enforced its antisodomy law, officers decided to book the two men and jail them overnight on charges of "deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex." They were each fined $200 plus court costs.

3. The entire attack on Santorum was orchestrated by the wife of John Kerry's campaign manager, and Kerry was the first to denounce his fellow Senator, thus demonstrating his unequivocal support for human rights. The last paragraph of the Fox story linked above:

Some Republican sources were quietly raising questions about the reporter who first quoted Santorum and who continued to report on the conflict it created. Lara Jakes Jordan is married to Jim Jordan, a former DSCC official who now manages Kerry's presidential campaign.

Here, for the record, is my take on the issue.

Now one would expect the left to lap this attack stuff up without question. When "centrists" or "moderates" do this it's disappointing, and leads one to question their "moderation". Expressing open mindedness by condemning people who think differently then you based on unquestioning acceptance of biased news reports is hardly the hallmark of intelligent public debate. Regardless of who's right or wrong, the questions I raised were not addressed by any of Santorum's many attackers in the Blogosphere. The shots taken at him came from the hip.

The Supreme Court, of course, is being called to consider its position on interfering with State laws as much as with the specific issue. By the way, quiz question for those who are outraged by any aspect of this case. How did the Supreme Court rule?

Sorry, trick question. They haven't yet. They are expected to any time now. If this is to be believed, two are solidly for, two against, and five justices undecided.

(Those who expressed great and terrible outrage at the behavior of a US Senator for speaking his mind can now contemplate their real motives. I give you a minute to shout Eureka! and then I'll accept your thanks.)

[Update - the Supreme Court has ruled to overturn the Texas law. The response from across the Blogosphere has been muted when compared to the attacks on Santorum during the initial wave of controversy. Many in the Blogosphere prefer personal attacks on individuals to issues of any real weight.]

In spite of much effort the Blogosphere did not bring down Senator Santorum. Shooting from the hip is rarely effective. A tempest in a teapot, and a perfect counter to those who claim Trent Lott's head is mounted on their wall. The voters of Pennsylvania will rightfully have the final say on the Senator's fate. All those Bloggers who are registered to vote there are encouraged to do so.

THE SIREN AND THE WOLF

But is the Blogosphere getting wiser? Another valid contrast point on the Siren issue may be the recent Paul Wolfowitz story. Wolfowitz is Deputy Secretary of Defense, and has served in the Pentagon off and on under Carter, Bush Sr., Clinton, and Bush. He was in the State Department for the first few years of the Reagan Administration. So his words carry some weight.

Wolfowitz has been twice mis-quoted in the mainstream media recently. First in Vanity Fair regarding WMD:

The quote (from DoD transcripts of a recorded phone interview):
...The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason, but -- hold on one second --

(Pause)

Wolfowitz: -- there have always been three fundamental concerns. One is weapons of mass destruction, the second is support for terrorism, the third is the criminal treatment of the Iraqi people. Actually I guess you could say there's a fourth overriding one which is the connection between the first two. Sorry, hold on again.

The third one by itself, as I think I said earlier, is a reason to help the Iraqis but it's not a reason to put American kids' lives at risk, certainly not on the scale we did it. That second issue about links to terrorism is the one about which there's the most disagreement within the bureaucracy, even though I think everyone agrees that we killed 100 or so of an al Qaeda group in northern Iraq in this recent go-around, that we've arrested that al Qaeda guy in Baghdad who was connected to this guy Zarqawi whom Powell spoke about in his UN presentation.

Q: So this notion then that the strategic question was really a part of the equation, that you were looking at Saudi Arabia --

Wolfowitz: I was. It's one of the reasons why I took a very different view of what the argument that removing Saddam Hussein would destabilize the Middle East. I said on the record, I don't understand how people can really believe that removing this huge source of instability is going to be a cause of instability in the Middle East.

I understand what they're thinking about. I'm not blind to the uncertainties of this situation, but they just seem to be blind to the instability that that son of a bitch was causing. It's as though the fact that he was paying $25,000 per terrorist family and issuing regular threats to most friendly governments in the region and the long list of things was of no account and the only thing to think about was that there might be some inter-communal violence if he were removed.

The implication of a lot of the argumentation against acting -- the implication was that the only way to have the stability that we need in Iraq is to have a tyrant like Saddam keeping everybody in check -- I know no one ever said it that way and if you pointed it out that way they'd say that's not what I mean. But I believe that really is where the logic was leading.

Vanity Fair Quote: "For bureaucratic reasons we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on."

See the attraction of the Siren Song for the Left? But note the original quote; thought provoking and to the point. A real glimpse at how policy is made at the highest levels. Rather then debate that process openly, the interviewer twists it into something else and lets others attack. Why? Once the original un-edited quote is released the attackers look foolish. Both sides of any issue must watch for this if their debate is to have any validity.

The second mis-quote was in the London newspaper The Guardian, reporting statements made by Wolfowitz in Singapore regarding North Korea and Iraq. The actual quote (from DoD Transcripts):

Q: What I meant is that essentially North Korea is being taken more seriously because it has become a nuclear power by its own admission, whether or not that’s true, and that the lesson that people will have is that in the case of Iraq it became imperative to confront Iraq militarily because it had banned weapons systems and posed a danger to the region. In the case of North Korea, which has nuclear weapons as well as other banned weapons of mass destruction, apparently it is imperative not to confront, to persuade and to essentially maintain a regime that is just as appalling as the Iraqi regime in place, for the sake of the stability of the region. To other countries of the world this is a very mixed message to be sending out.

Wolfowitz: The concern about implosion is not primarily at all a matter of the weapons that North Korea has, but a fear particularly by South Korea and also to some extent China of what the larger implications are for them of having 20 million people on their borders in a state of potential collapse and anarchy. It’s is also a question of whether, if one wants to persuade the regime to change, whether you have to find -- and I think you do -- some kind of outcome that is acceptable to them. But that outcome has to be acceptable to us, and it has to include meeting our non-proliferation goals.

Look, the primarily difference -- to put it a little too simply -- between North Korea and Iraq is that we had virtually no economic options with Iraq because the country floats on a sea of oil. In the case of North Korea, the country is teetering on the edge of economic collapse and that I believe is a major point of leverage whereas the military picture with North Korea is very different from that with Iraq. The problems in both cases have some similarities but the solutions have got to be tailored to the circumstances which are very different.

The Guardian Quote (perhaps repeating German reports):

"Oil was the main reason for military action against Iraq, a leading White House hawk has claimed, confirming the worst fears of those opposed to the US-led war.

The US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz - who has already undermined Tony Blair's position over weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by describing them as a "bureaucratic" excuse for war - has now gone further by claiming the real motive was that Iraq is "swimming" in oil.

The latest comments were made by Mr Wolfowitz in an address to delegates at an Asian security summit in Singapore at the weekend, and reported today by German newspapers Der Tagesspiegel and Die Welt.

Asked why a nuclear power such as North Korea was being treated differently from Iraq, where hardly any weapons of mass destruction had been found, the deputy defence minister said: "Let's look at it simply. The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil."

To credit The Guardian, they did retract the quote once it was exposed as blatant lie.

(You can read a synopsis of the Wolfowitz misquotes, and a few other recent newspaper 'gaffes', here.)

To credit the Blogosphere, the Wolfowitz situation was handled quite differently then the Santorum story; with caution at the initial reports followed by indignation and mild outrage at their exposure as almost right. Of course an argument could be made that this is because Santorum was opposed to a popular cause, while the Iraq war (Wolfowitz) was supported by most Bloggers. Thus, the Santorum Siren was much more appealing then the Wolfowitz example. This however, implies a willingness to deny truth (or at least a wilingness to accept something less; the "willful suspension of disbelief" that is the hallmark of good fiction) when it suits the bloggers purpose, or casts dispersion on the validity of claims to value the truth. This does not increase the credibility of a new medium.

III. THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY

Interesting then, that a bloggers, (of whom so many are so often so eager to accept so much that they read as being gospel, without ever considering the possibility that they are being exposed to erroneous information or outright lies) have claimed responsibility for bringing down a couple of managers at the NY Times, who were guilty of doing essentially the same thing. The claim could be made that the Times should be held to a higher standard, but then that pretty much ends the case for Blogs ever being taken more seriously then supermarket tabloids.

And some shouldn't. Sadly some Bloggers are more willing then others to blindly accept anything they read as gospel, and then pass it on. And when the truth is revealed don't retract, just move to a new "story". I repeat myself:

Of course, never to my knowledge has anyone in the Blogosphere convinced another to shout "Eureka! I was wrong!" on any issue of any merit. Even in the post-Iraq-war light of day the doomsayers, the "quagmire crowd," the "prophets of jihad" and the "WWIII tin foil hat brigade" are still claiming they were right all along, that there never were any WMDs!

Case in point: The Whiskey Bar, a Blog that repeated the original Wolfowitz mis-quote on WMDs as conclusion to a collection of Bush administration WMD statements, the desired effect being to use the Wolfowitz statement as denouement exposing Presidential hypocrisy. Obviously the truth about this quote renders the entire piece pointless; but that truth is nowhere to be found on the site. No retraction can be found, nor can any of the Democratic, Clinton administration, or "world leader" quotes on the same subject. Even so this Blog garnered numerous links and kudos for this denial of truth. A "well written" Blog, assuredly. But one that heaps scorn upon (among others) the 101st Airborne. I don't pretend to know what percent of Americans consider Jimi Hendrix' old unit to be worthy of scorn or derision, but as long as the Blogosphere embraces the behavior it certainly can't expect to be embraced by mainstream America.

I came close to not mentioning this particular site in this post on the grounds that I recognize that the author is as much entitled to his free speech space on the internet as I am. Then I read his entry about watching a young girl he sees at his kid's elementary school graduation ceremonies who is dying of cancer. Her elementary school graduation too, and as she's wheeled on the stage to get her diploma, the author describes thinking how much braver she was then President Bush or the heroes of the Iraq war.

Has it come to this - a dying fifth grader fans the flames of an author's passionate hatred of the President and military - starts him wondering how he can use her in an anti-Bush post in his blog? Politicizing a little girl dying of cancer - in a blog? Are people actually so blinded by hate, or so driven by their own self interest that this is acceptable behavior? I hope it's just another fable from a website with a proven lack of integrity. Even if it's a fabricated story, it's easily the lowest thing I've ever seen in a Blog. Politicizing Paul Wellstone's funeral was tame compared to this - Wellstone was at least a politician. And of course the Palestinians gleefully danced in the streets of his comments section on this one.

I'm a real proponent of free speech. I defend the rights of any American to disagree with me. I state only that the this kind of hateful site, regardless of how well written, gives Blogs in general a bad name. When it's embraced by a significant number of other bloggers it certainly is not a good sign for possible future respectability of blogging as a whole.

But wait! There's more! Macaroni. I've discussed that site in another post . Once again, we are talking about a "good writer". An apparently intelligent person who has garnered support from lots of corners of the Blogosphere. On false pretenses, I hope. I don't believe any rational person would support this kind of activity. In this case, the Blogosphere (at least those who are victims of the author or aware of the behavior) recognizes and rebukes racism. However, the worst of the author's race baiting and general negativity occurs in the comments sections of other Blogs; perhaps leading those who are only familiar with her Blog to sympathize with an individual who is forced to spend an inordinate amount of space defending herself against accusers. A claim could be made that this is all done for the sake of notoriety and its impact on the hit counter. As such, that behavior may well be rewarded. Once again, this does not reflect positively on the Blogosphere. There's a difference between "exposure" and "exposed."

Blogs, have an intrinsic power to unite or divide. Even the briefest insight into the minutiae of an author's thoughts may be enough to start the process of erasing a lifetime of misunderstanding. (Or at least I'm naive enough to think so.) Many, including the two above, have chosen the divisive route. However, that which was meant for harm can be turned to good; even these can provide the insight into hatred that could help erase it. (Note, however, to up and coming Bloggers: If the sites above are your examples for how to be a rising star in the Blogosphere, enjoy your trip. I'll stay right here, thanks.)

POLICING THE SPHERE?

The Blogosphere tends to "police" itself; those who are good will thrive, those who are not will fade. But "good" is an undefined quantity; Soap Operas and "Celebrity" news shows draw more audience then C-Span. Some supermarket tabloids outsell the local papers. Much of that trend holds true on the internet; any Blogger can tell you the bizarre search engine requests that lead to visitors to their sites. They know what brings the readers in.

Certainly there's room for everyone, and all with the freedom to do so should be thankful they can post their thoughts and opinions without fear. Still, when integrity and truth take a back seat to agenda, when outrage and spite are used as drawing cards, then Blogs will never be considered any more reliable then tabloid journalism.

Much ado has been made lately about how important Blogs have been in bringing down people in the public eye; Trent Lott, Howell Raines, on and on. There's probably some truth to that. And whoever looses the next Presidential election I'm sure Bloggers will take credit for that too. People do read Blogs, after all. Perhaps not as many as watch Bill O'Reilly, but a growing number. But it's interesting isn't it, that negative results are the yardstick by which we choose to measure the success of our medium?

And what of Mr. O'Reilly? His recent comments, once the initial furious response subsides, should also be considered and addressed. His remarks are open to interpretation and should be clarified. Offhand dismissal of critics is not a good practice for any business, organization, group, or individual. In the O'reilly/Internet case, this is a two-way street as each party feels slighted by the other. The response of a Blog community in search of some respectability should be moral high ground; to demand that clarification, and not to assign meaning to his somewhat blurry commentary.

Mr O'Reilly, in launching a vague attack against unspecified foes, has cast a wide net. Clarify and specify, Bill: exactly who is libeling you? Is it the same crowd that was out to get Perot in '96? Is it Glenn Reynolds, Britneyfan95, ...or both?

And is there any conclusion to be drawn from the fact that O'Reilly's comments drew more heated criticism from more Blogs then Orrin Hatch's ill-considered remarks? Once again, the Celebrity outdraws the Senator, the difference being that one can whine about perceived injustice while the other can actually perpetrate it on the American people. O'Reilly, however, received a barrage of contempt and promises to turn the channel. Hatch was commented on briefly and dismissed. Interesting priorities indeed. I would speculate that within six months only one's statements will be remembered by Bloggers, becoming forever a part of internet lore.

And what discussion of the down side of Blogs could be complete without mention of the wonderful sophomoric Blogfights that rear up now and then? When someone says something about someone else, a third party repeats it, and suddenly everyone is linking everyone as an apparent feud erupts. All involved get to relive their days as middle-schoolers; except these days the links mean swapping readers and driving each other up the ecosystem ladder to their own amusement as they cry in public for the world to see. Should have millions flocking to those Blogs in no time. Soap Opera fans have to do something in the evenings don't they?

Small wonder then, that Drudge made his "anything but blogger" comment?

Where is the blogospheric outrage at that comment? There was none of O'Reilly's ambiguity in it; to Drudge a blogger is the lowest. Was the outraged backlash stifled by a paralyzing fear of Drudge? Or is he respected to the point that whatever he says must be accepted?

Actually, Drudge's comments, like O'Reilly's, should provoke a thoughtful discusion of why? As with O'Reilly, offhand dismissal of critics is not a good practice for any business, organization, group, or individual.

The Wild Wild West Redux

So amongst all this aforementioned "negative" success, maybe some positive emphasis wouldn't hurt? I've made small positive contributions - from raising awareness of The Fallen Heroes Fund to the Senator Craig hostage fiasco to a minor part in the Boycott Hollywood story.

Bigger Blogs have done even bigger things; a couple thousand dollars raised for some GIs who lost everything in a tent fire, Troop Trax, Blog-a-thons... a great start.

Until a few months ago, I was like 279 million other Americans, ignorant of the word Blog. Once I started blogging the first feedback I got from non-blogging people who were familiar with the concept was generally negative. "Ohhh, one of those 'flame sites'?" Was a common question.

Two hundred people may read this post each of the first three days it is up. If for some reason one of the bigger Blogs in this world links it you can triple that. A link from a really big Blog (not likely- let's face it, this is not glowing with Blog love) means ten to twenty times that number. Five thousand in one day at the most.

In large American cities, infomercials and public access cable reach more people.

So yes, the top Bloggers are approaching the "power and influence" of a good editorial writer in a local paper in a mid-sized city. And Bloggers as a group should be certainly be noticed by anyone concerned with public opinion. And yes, growth can be expected. And yes, the Blogging segment of the American population will likely be comprised of a subset of the segment of the population called "voters", and thus have even more sway.

But we have a long way to go on the road to respectability.

Perhaps not the ten to twenty years it took talk radio to really explode; the world moves faster now, and the highway beckons.

It's the Wild Wild West. And likely to stay that way, for a little while at least. But the survivors, those who stick around, are in for something...

Probably a time when they'll miss the good ol' days of the Wild Wild West...

And now, to close with a happy thought.

All done!

Continue reading "The sins of Mohammad Saeed Al-Sahhaf "

From CENTCOM Operation Iraqi Freedom Briefing ~ 11 April 2003 Brigadier General Vincent Brooks, Deputy Director of Operations

GEN. BROOKS:...I would add that information-wise, the coalition governments have identified a list of key regime leaders who must be pursued and brought to justice. The key list has 55 individuals who may be pursued, killed or captured, and the list does not exclude leaders who may have already been killed or captured. This list has been provided to coalition forces on the ground in several forms to ease identification when contact does occur. And this deck of cards is one example of what we provide to soldiers out -- soldiers and marines out in the field -- with the faces of the individuals and what their role is. In this case, there are 55 cards in the deck...

Then later, in Q & A:

Q General, Jeff Meade from Sky News. You've changed regime for anarchy, it seems, in many places. And some Iraqis seem to take the view that the coalition forces are too passive in this, in controlling what's going on, because they may be liberated but they don't feel particularly safe. I wonder if you're going to use any of these prisoners -- you talked about the Five Corps surrender, or maybe get the police back on the street, some of these people who are used to following orders may now follow your orders. Do you have any plans for that?

And if I can also ask a second question, your deck of 55 most wanted, does that include the former information minister -- because every pack needs a joker? (Laughter.)

GEN. BROOKS: Well said, Jeff. Well said. Well, there are jokers in this deck, there's no doubt about that. (Laughter.) And that is also there are cards that have "joker" marked on them.

Now you may claim the reporter was joking, but then I'll point to his first question and say "No, he's just an idiot." A stooge, in fact.

And he wanted that card to be there. Every reporter in that room wanted that card to be there.

Why?

Because Mohammad Saeed Al-Sahhaf had committed the most heinous crimes against humanity possible; in time of war or not. He had lied to the press! And they believed him! He bamboozled them. And as I said, that was his job, and he did it well. To see him denying the tanks behind him will always stand in the history of corporate loyalty as the most dedicated act of total commitment to an employer that any one will likely ever perform. Expect all the really savvy management seminars to include it soon.

Laughable? Yes, the Information Minister is. He's Gimli the Dwarf in the movie version of Lord of the Rings - the comic relief amidst carnage.

The response to him by the media was not funny. It was the job of the reporters to asses his validity, and they failed utterly. He exposed them for the bumbling incompetent anti-American droolers they are. They believed him because they wanted to believe him. They wanted to believe it was CENTCOM that was lying about the amazing advance of the American Orcs Army and Marines on Helms Deep Baghdad. Even with the airport taken he was able to successfully sow seeds of disbelief amongst the most ignorant members of the press. It was only after the statues fell that the last of the stalwart lefties finally surrendered to reality - no quagmire, no refugee crisis, no thousands dead in house-to-house fighting.

Saddam's crimes pale in comparison to the brutal lies that Mohammad Saeed Al-Sahhaf sowed among our poor naive journalists, so eager to be on the front lines of the next Vietnam. Add the fact that it wasn't a quagmire, that it wouldn't result in the impeachment of the President, that the good guys would win, to the fact that they were lied to and you can probably imagine the sense of despair that must have overwhelmed the Baghdad Press corps when the first of the statues fell. A tribute to their professionalism that they persevered and reported even when confronted with the ultimate reality of such a stunning setback to their cause.

And what then of Mohammad Saeed Al-Sahhaf? His instant superstar status on the internet and late-night talk shows (now fully recognizing the clown for what he was) probably forced suppression of most of the rage that so many in the mainstream press felt for the man. That plus mis-reporting about museum looting took their little minds off the topic of forming a lynch mob and tracking him down.

And now he has turned up on Arab TV claiming to be alive. (Note to media: you can believe him this time. He is alive.) Claiming to have been questioned and released by the Americans. And looking like the supply of Clairol in Baghdad has dwindled to nil. (Note to searchers for Saddam.)

A sad pathetic man, separated by weeks of hard living (ironically while becoming a superstar via ridicule in the west) from the jut-jawed darling of the left-wing press that ranted live via satellite in our living rooms every day.

Questioned and released.

Oh how that must burn within the stomachs of his betrayed but once adoring fans.

All done!

Continue reading "WHEN BLOGGERS RULE "

PART I
PART IIa
PART IIb
Interesting then, that a bloggers, (of whom so many are so often so eager to accept so much that they read as being gospel, without ever considering the possibility that they are being exposed to erroneous information or outright lies) have claimed responsibility for bringing down a couple of managers at the NY Times, who were guilty of doing essentially the same thing. The claim could be made that the Times should be held to a higher standard, but then that pretty much ends the case for Blogs ever being taken more seriously then supermarket tabloids.

And some shouldn't. Sadly some Bloggers are more willing then others to blindly accept anything they read as gospel, and then pass it on. And when the truth is revealed don't retract, just move to a new "story". I repeat myself:

Of course, never to my knowledge has anyone in the Blogosphere convinced another to shout "Eureka! I was wrong!" on any issue of any merit. Even in the post-Iraq-war light of day the doomsayers, the "quagmire crowd," the "prophets of jihad" and the "WWIII tin foil hat brigade" are still claiming they were right all along, that there never were any WMDs!

Case in point: The Whiskey Bar, a Blog that repeated the original Wolfowitz mis-quote on WMDs as conclusion to a collection of Bush administration WMD statements, the desired effect being to use the Wolfowitz statement as denouement exposing Presidential hypocrisy. Obviously the truth about this quote renders the entire piece pointless; but that truth is nowhere to be found on the site. No retraction can be found, nor can any of the Democratic, Clinton administration, or "world leader" quotes on the same subject. Even so this Blog garnered numerous links and kudos for this denial of truth. A "well written" Blog, assuredly. But one that heaps scorn upon (among others) the 101st Airborne. I don't pretend to know what percent of Americans consider Jimi Hendrix' old unit to be worthy of scorn or derision, but as long as the Blogosphere embraces the behavior it certainly can't expect to be embraced by mainstream America.

I came close to not mentioning this particular site in this post on the grounds that I recognize that the author is as much entitled to his free speech space on the internet as I am. Then I read his entry about watching a young girl he sees at his kid's elementary school graduation ceremonies who is dying of cancer. Her elementary school graduation too, and as she's wheeled on the stage to get her diploma, the author describes thinking how much braver she was then President Bush or the heroes of the Iraq war.

Has it come to this - a dying fifth grader fans the flames of an author's passionate hatred of the President and military - starts him wondering how he can use her in an anti-Bush post in his blog? Politicizing a little girl dying of cancer - in a blog? Are people actually so blinded by hate, or so driven by their own self interest that this is acceptable behavior? I hope it's just another fable from a website with a proven lack of integrity. Even if it's a fabricated story, it's easily the lowest thing I've ever seen in a Blog. Politicizing Paul Wellstone's funeral was tame compared to this - Wellstone was at least a politician. And of course the Palestinians gleefully danced in the streets of his comments section on this one.

I'm a real proponent of free speech. I defend the rights of any American to disagree with me. I state only that the this kind of hateful site, regardless of how well written, gives Blogs in general a bad name. When it's embraced by a significant number of other bloggers it certainly is not a good sign for possible future respectability of blogging as a whole.

But wait! There's more! Macaroni. I've discussed that site in another post . Once again, we are talking about a "good writer". An apparently intelligent person who has garnered support from lots of corners of the Blogosphere. On false pretenses, I hope. I don't believe any rational person would support this kind of activity. In this case, the Blogosphere (at least those who are victims of the author or aware of the behavior) recognizes and rebukes racism. However, the worst of the author's race baiting and general negativity occurs in the comments sections of other Blogs; perhaps leading those who are only familiar with her Blog to sympathize with an individual who is forced to spend an inordinate amount of space defending herself against accusers. A claim could be made that this is all done for the sake of notoriety and its impact on the hit counter. As such, that behavior may well be rewarded. Once again, this does not reflect positively on the Blogosphere. There's a difference between "exposure" and "exposed."

Blogs, have an intrinsic power to unite or divide. Even the briefest insight into the minutiae of an author's thoughts may be enough to start the process of erasing a lifetime of misunderstanding. (Or at least I'm naive enough to think so.) Many, including the two above, have chosen the divisive route. However, that which was meant for harm can be turned to good; even these can provide the insight into hatred that could help erase it. (Note, however, to up and coming Bloggers: If the sites above are your examples for how to be a rising star in the Blogosphere, enjoy your trip. I'll stay right here, thanks.)

POLICING THE SPHERE?

The Blogosphere tends to "police" itself; those who are good will thrive, those who are not will fade. But "good" is an undefined quantity; Soap Operas and "Celebrity" news shows draw more audience then C-Span. Some supermarket tabloids outsell the local papers. Much of that trend holds true on the internet; any Blogger can tell you the bizarre search engine requests that lead to visitors to their sites. They know what brings the readers in.

Certainly there's room for everyone, and all with the freedom to do so should be thankful they can post their thoughts and opinions without fear. Still, when integrity and truth take a back seat to agenda, when outrage and spite are used as drawing cards, then Blogs will never be considered any more reliable then tabloid journalism.

Much ado has been made lately about how important Blogs have been in bringing down people in the public eye; Trent Lott, Howell Raines, on and on. There's probably some truth to that. And whoever looses the next Presidential election I'm sure Bloggers will take credit for that too. People do read Blogs, after all. Perhaps not as many as watch Bill O'Reilly, but a growing number. But it's interesting isn't it, that negative results are the yardstick by which we choose to measure the success of our medium?

And what of Mr. O'Reilly? His recent comments, once the initial furious response subsides, should also be considered and addressed. His remarks are open to interpretation and should be clarified. Offhand dismissal of critics is not a good practice for any business, organization, group, or individual. In the O'reilly/Internet case, this is a two-way street as each party feels slighted by the other. The response of a Blog community in search of some respectability should be moral high ground; to demand that clarification, and not to assign meaning to his somewhat blurry commentary.

Mr O'Reilly, in launching a vague attack against unspecified foes, has cast a wide net. Clarify and specify, Bill: exactly who is libeling you? Is it the same crowd that was out to get Perot in '96? Is it Glenn Reynolds, Britneyfan95, ...or both?

And is there any conclusion to be drawn from the fact that O'Reilly's comments drew more heated criticism from more Blogs then Orrin Hatch's ill-considered remarks? Once again, the Celebrity outdraws the Senator, the difference being that one can whine about perceived injustice while the other can actually perpetrate it on the American people. O'Reilly, however, received a barrage of contempt and promises to turn the channel. Hatch was commented on briefly and dismissed. Interesting priorities indeed. I would speculate that within six months only one's statements will be remembered by Bloggers, becoming forever a part of internet lore.

And what discussion of the down side of Blogs could be complete without mention of the wonderful sophomoric Blogfights that rear up now and then? When someone says something about someone else, a third party repeats it, and suddenly everyone is linking everyone as an apparent feud erupts. All involved get to relive their days as middle-schoolers; except these days the links mean swapping readers and driving each other up the ecosystem ladder to their own amusement as they cry in public for the world to see. Should have millions flocking to those Blogs in no time. Soap Opera fans have to do something in the evenings don't they?

Small wonder then, that Drudge made his "anything but blogger" comment?

Where is the blogospheric outrage at that comment? There was none of O'Reilly's ambiguity in it; to Drudge a blogger is the lowest. Was the outraged backlash stifled by a paralyzing fear of Drudge? Or is he respected to the point that whatever he says must be accepted?

Actually, Drudge's comments, like O'Reilly's, should provoke a thoughtful discusion of why? As with O'Reilly, offhand dismissal of critics is not a good practice for any business, organization, group, or individual.

The Wild Wild West Redux

So amongst all this aforementioned "negative" success, maybe some positive emphasis wouldn't hurt? I've made small positive contributions - from raising awareness of The Fallen Heroes Fund to the Senator Craig hostage fiasco to a minor part in the Boycott Hollywood story.

Bigger Blogs have done even bigger things; a couple thousand dollars raised for some GIs who lost everything in a tent fire, Troop Trax, Blog-a-thons... a great start.

Until a few months ago, I was like 279 million other Americans, ignorant of the word Blog. Once I started blogging the first feedback I got from non-blogging people who were familiar with the concept was generally negative. "Ohhh, one of those 'flame sites'?" Was a common question.

Two hundred people may read this post each of the first three days it is up. If for some reason one of the bigger Blogs in this world links it you can triple that. A link from a really big Blog (not likely- let's face it, this is not glowing with Blog love) means ten to twenty times that number. Five thousand in one day at the most.

In large American cities, infomercials and public access cable reach more people.

So yes, the top Bloggers are approaching the "power and influence" of a good editorial writer in a local paper in a mid-sized city. And Bloggers as a group should be certainly be noticed by anyone concerned with public opinion. And yes, growth can be expected. And yes, the Blogging segment of the American population will likely be comprised of a subset of the segment of the population called "voters", and thus have even more sway.

But we have a long way to go on the road to respectability.

Perhaps not the ten to twenty years it took talk radio to really explode; the world moves faster now, and the highway beckons.

It's the Wild Wild West. And likely to stay that way, for a little while at least. But the survivors, those who stick around, are in for something...

Probably a time when they'll miss the good ol' days of the Wild Wild West...

And now, to close with a happy thought.

All done!

Continue reading "Ooglay Hussein's Diary "

But here is a different thing I do. There was a Moose, but now there are sandals. I am having a cousin who is Al Quada guy who sells sandals in a shop near the UN building and also does interpreter thing there on the side. (One day for fun he is letting me do some interpreter on the side because I am speaker of France, English, and many dialects of my homeland. It is fonny I said wrong thing on purpose as joke but France ambassador believes it and is soon meeting me in central park with briefcase full of money to preserve oil rights with Saud family! This is easy money, the French believe anything they hear that is not American. But that is long complicated story and I am not telling it now. Next time though I am going to start a war for fun.)

Now though I am telling of getting hundreds of pairs of sandals from my cousin paid for by Times with finders fee and profit sharing for me and my cousin also gives a kickback, it is no crime if I did not tell him what he does not ask! So what I make more on sandals then him? It is proving Allah loves me more.

Now everyone who is making me happy at newspaper is getting sandals. And all are wanting them because they are not just for wearing. If you have these sandals now at NY Times you are allowed to strike anyone who angers you as often as you like. I am sure you are seeing the attraction; it is not being surprising to me that these people will do anything for the earning of sandals. Some give money so my wealth increases even more. Some do other things. A girl writer who is not to be named tried to demonstrate some talent she had but after I was finished slapping her hindquarters with sandals I was not going to give her some to use on me! Sorry Maureen!

So at first the people who had some sandals would only use them on interns and mail room types who moved a bit too slow, but soon they learned I wanted them used on reporters and others here too. I have never seen some group so eager to inflict the slappings of the sandals on one another! They are gleeful when they are applying this discipline. They call it "total cultural immersion" and "celebrating diversity", but I think they just are getting what you call jollies. And do not be the one who shows weakness! This makes the whole office come after you. And they are much worse then the crowd who smacked my Glorious Father's statue (may the pilings of one thousand camels line every path they walk) I am telling you now! The painful screams of whoever they are slapping only drive them to more frenzied smacks.

So the Publisher I am worried will not be happy to see all the slappings, but he is loving it! "You have certainly shaken the heirarchal structure here, boy!" He is saying and giving me cigar. "Let's go to my club and discuss the leadership and managment technique book we're going to write together!"

Then as we are leaving he is laughing and sandalslapping my secretary and the doorman!

Hah! Moose was stupid, yes?

All done!

Continue reading "OOGLAY HUSSEIN'S DIARY "

OOGLAY'S HUSSEIN'S DIARY

Wear out your filthy unclean American infidel Great Satan mouse fingers! Listen I am Ooglay Hussein and the son of my glorious Father, may he give a fisted pounding to you if you are with the evil georgebush. Once I was beaten by my Father long may he reign and two of his body doubles at the same time!! This was bad for me I will tell you now but by the will of the prophet I survived and became stronger. But still this again you must know:

Here is story of first day of your immoral war, infidel pigdogs! I will stil be adding to this thing because so many things went wrong. I am telling you know by the will of Allah it was not a so good day for me...

DAY 1

Hello I am having trouble sleeping. Can I ask for planes to only be stealthy ones? Also the bomb dropping is too loud. I am angry now at stoopid GeorgeBush because I rote to him a nice letter and sed if he wanted to fight dad then he could meet dad at the bunker and i also said exactly when even though dad said he would kill me if i sent that letter i didn't tell him i sent it.
but GeorgeBush did not show up instead the planes came and george bush is a big coward because my dad could beat him up and show it on al jazeera.
Dad is a hero and one day I will be be a hero too and my older brothers will stop making me do the things they make me do that are not heroic at all so i am telling you!!!
So maybe I will give georgebush one more chance to come debate my dad just like dad sed.
And also if you are so great America why you bombs so loud? I need to sleep now. I will tell you more about the war in baghdad later for now goodby Allah be praised.
--Ooglay Hussein
Posted by Ooglay Hussein at March 19, 2003 11:40 PM

Ohh hello again i am still Ooglay and it is so very exiting what i am telling you of what i will be doing in baghdad here today by the will of Allah because the sun has come upward and george bush flew away.
Glorious father saddam for whom we will all die i said why does george bush hate us when he is a republican and we have the republican guards and then father saddam who is all wise smacked my face and spoke ill of my mother.
But then he said he was sorry and now here is what is exiting to me. Glorious Father Saddam says I Ooglay will today be allowed to drive in his fathers biggest Mercedes all around Baghdad!
This is wonderful i am not ugly like my two brothers who are older and make me do things that i think have no word for in your english i learned at university in france. I am not ugly like them i am handsome and look just like glorious father saddam and when i drive through baghdad's glorious streets the people cheer me. Allah be praised.
This way i said okay i am not angry you smacked me and he smacked me again then and now i will be driven around in Baghdad to celebrate driving off the aggressor georgebush in our triumphant victory. my brothers will feel some jealousy i am telling you now!
i will take this my laptop computer so i will tell you about baghdad in the e-mails and i am heroic.
We are triumphant!
Also it is a convertable!
Posted by Ooglay Hussein at March 20, 2003 12:16 AM

And Here i am Ooglay Hussein again and now I have finished the hearing of my glorious father who was talking on the TV but I am only having a radio in this car but still i am now more inspired. You Americans are weak and must tremble. Before he went on tv and i went on the car my father kicked me in my hindquarters and then he fell and broke his good glasses and had to wear the ones my mother bless her soul made him get. He said the kicking made me stronger.
And you are not strong you weak americans you are not even talking to me and i said why dont they talk to me and my slave said that you are all asleep. This is why you Americans are weak because you are sleeping in the daylight and we are getting some things ready hear i am telling you now.
And yes the slave i am having with me is a human shield from america and he tells me what you are like and so this is how we know you are divided coountry and we will defeat you!
Your cowrd president flew away when up came the sun and now he is not bombing on us so my glorious father for whom i cant wait to die for is letting me to drive around baghdad in his convertible mercedes.
And I will not let my slave human shield use my laptop computer to talk. I am cruel and when my older brothers do bad things to me i do bad things to my human shield.
I will make him wear the driver hat and drive me around in the convertible. My brother took my hat away and said not to wear it so everyone could see me and know how much i look like my father and so my mother is pure even if she is ugly as a camel. This is what my brother said and his mother is different. But I did not say it, because camels are not ugly. Now my laptop batery is dying!
Posted by Ooglay Hussein at March 20, 2003 12:54 AM

Okay so you know I am Ooglay and I am cheered in the streets of Baghdad! And maybe the smart ones of you say I have new battery, and I do. And here is why: My slave and I broke into the boarded up peasant store and though first the peasant said he could not help I showed him one of my brother's tricks and then he became very helpful, yes!!
So now we are driving near the Ziggurat. It is an ancient ruin and very much not good for anything because hey, it is 5000 years ago that it was built by infidels! But still the Republican Guard are getting ready to dynamite it now and they have some slaves doing the work and then we will kill them and then blow it up the ziggurat! This will be funny because then we will be blaming the Americans and British and all their other allies who are against the world in this unilateral attack with no UN improvements!
And okay now listen because with Allahs blessings this is my favorite part that my slave has called his organization in America and when we blow this up we will have your Protestors make another big parade! And in London too they will do it and the funny thing is to me that my father for whom these peasants are willing to die in flames hates their communisms!
But that is not why now I am laughing but you cant hear that. It is because i got my solid gold cigar lighter in the dash very hot to light my Cigar and then I didn't want to waste the extra hot in it so I jabbed this human shield's back part of his neck but that's not why I laugh! And he made a funny noise and almost wrecked my fathers most beloved mercedes but that is also not why I am laughing.
I am laughing because I said then "see what a fine little human shield you are" - you see I can make english language joke, eh? I am a French University graduate is why I am the smartest of all my fathers sons.
I am hearing some loud kind of noise tha
Posted by Ooglay Hussein at March 20, 2003 02:20 AM

[3/20/2003 1:52:11 AM |
Okay now yes It is Ooglay in Baghdad now okay and I will tell you the things that happened but first I must say more words about my slave who is american human shield. I enjoy him, you know, but Sean Penn the Actor was a better time I think but we had to be better to him outside but in the palace when my glorious father who gave me life turned away then we would enjoy SeanPenn some more. And we made a movie because he is a movie star and if you little funny american soldiers come to take over maybe you will give this movie to the madonna yor singing american tramp singer who will know one thousand tortues in the life hereafter. The funny part he carried me on his back like a pony but didn't laugh. When he ran off we were a long time til the humanshields came. He does not talk on the tv about the good things of my glorious father and this country now so I don't think he will come back?
So the loud noise anyway I thought it was a jet first but it wasn't and I thought I was going to die but guess what I am alive and it wasn't a jet.
They blew up the ziggurat too early and that is what I heard and my ears are ringing so it is good we talk in writing cause maybe I don't hear anything as good as that for a while. Someone said that one of the peasants did it on purpose because the guard was still there and now they are not in good shape. Some are laying now on the ground and yelling and bleeding and kicking. So I think the peasant slaves new we were going to kill them but who knows? But there is no one here to take care of the ones who are kicking because they are no doctors here because georgreBush embargo. Thousands have died like this one I'm standing over looking at him kick and now just twitch. And he is Republican Guard and they are elite and i just walked over where I couldn't see him anymore.
And I went back a little way towhere the car was and it was dirty and I knew my father for whom I would cut off my own left hand would not be happy.
But then I tell you maybe this new humanshield is more better then Seanpenn because he got out of the car and I could see that when the explosion happened it scared him and he wet his pants. I laughed at him and slapped him to make him stronger.

[3/20/2003 2:56:25 AM |
Okay I am Ooglay Hussein and I am knowing that you are not knowing about war, so here I will tell all of you friends of my glorious home country that it is a terrible thing to be relentlessly bombed by the evil georgebush and also we know it is not the american people.
Okay now i had gone from the car but while so my slave got my notebook computer but then before i slapped him he showed me he had made this web site and now i can tell you here about these things. So yes he did all that before i slapped him.
Now we are having a phone in the car so when next it was ringing i thought "oh here is georgebush or tony the jew blair and they want to ask my father to delever a pizza again" But that is what they do on fridays not today so in fact it was my righteous father from whom all blessings flow.
And his anger knew no bounds because the collection of hand blown glass that Chiraq had given to him long ago was destroyed in the raid.
But this is what so help me if he sees this ever he will have my head on a spike was funny.
He had forgotton there was a key he needed on the keyring he gave us and it was to the vault where the missles were and now we really need to get those to Syria Ooglay as if it was my fault he didn't have Blix take them with the ones they took there last week. But my father for whom I wud nail my own tongue to a door said he was not too angry but he would take another toe from my foot if I didn't have the key to the vault in a half hour.
And this was not good because we were supposed to be at the elmentary school with the human shields and Republican Guards at that same time to meet the reporter from CNN Europe.
And oh did i mention the craters in the roads?
By the tears of the prophet i have never had such a day...

[3/20/2003 3:53:37 AM |
Okay am I thinking that maybe now you are knowing I'm between Iraq and a hard place - Haha! this is a big joke i have made for you in your language!
Now here is more jokings in your language: How many Georgebush to put in the litebulbs? Oh please let it be no more then one!!!
Now you see I am not always serius. But for now no more joking! Here is what a situation i am in: I have to get to the hospital to unlock the vault so Uday can be getting to the missles, and if they are the missles i think they might be i want to go away from there real quick just throw the keys, okay?)
Then I have to get to the school where the human shields are playing in the playground with the kids while the CNN Europe people are there filming the danger Georgebush is putting the kids in and make sure none of the stoopit Republican Guards poke their heads out of the school building while this reporting person is there. Or at least bust up the camera.
So tell me why if Ooglay can do all those things he is still going to have to wash his esteemed elder brothers dirty burnoose tonight? These are things that are wrong...
And so my feeble pants wetter of a human shield starts driving slowly around one of last nights craters on the way to the hospital. Now I am thinking it is good i bought for my glorious father for whom i would cut myself up into small pieces and feed myself to a dog I bought him last fathers day the beads to go over the leather seats in this car or else he would kill me for the wetness of the infidel on the leather.
And that (i swear to you by the prophet i nearly died 5 times today) is when the F16 attacked...

[3/20/2003 8:17:45 PM |
See listen now while I reveal the miraculous story of shooting the plane down. It came screaming out of the sky and my most useful humanshield chose to run outside of my car then so never mind him for now. He did not shield me though.
So I am alone in the back seat of the mercedes and the f16 comes diving out of the sky shooting and I know some bullets got in my fathers illustrious car. So it goes i hope he does not let his anger lead to my death by a beating.
But now i think "well they forgot to give me a weapon again" but just then, and this is the part you must have some believing for, by the will of Allah I am holding a Kalishnikov.
And still the f16 is diving and i can't believe they are coming in so low and still shooting and i think my reward of 71 virgins is very close indeed. but i raised my most beloved kali and began to empty the clip. And is this the strangest thing of all that i hit the plane and then it was flaming and smoking and by the will of Allah the plane was destroyed. I know then that Allah is on my side and no virgins for me yet!
Nobody saw this thing and it makes me the greatest hero of the war! And the wreckage of the plane is nowhere to be seen, because the heat was so great it was utterly consumed!
So soon i will get my slave human shield and i wont have time to give him a beating because as it is unless Allah wills otherwise we are now to be late to meet Uday.
So now I know when i find Uday he will say "you son of a pig you are late and if the Frenchmen doesn't get these soon the deal is off!"
And I will be able to swear I was late because of the cursed plane but the best hope is that he will let me choose which bone inside my body he will break.
And then when i found the infidel he had an idea that if he gave Uday some of the drugs he brought from your decadent country that maybe i would avoid that beating after all!
I took his drugs and shoved them in my pocket, and will offer them to Uday but Allah be praised I would never touch the unclean things myself!!
And then I realized we could take a shortcut across the cemetery of the 500000 martyrs. Some may know this is the cemetery that used to be a golf course but when the French reporter said we needed some way to prove the sanctions had killed 500000 Iraqi children we made it look like a cemetery. That was Qusay?s idea and I think maybe that is why my father favors him over some.
But my beloved father, may he live 1000 years and father me 10000 brothers, will perhaps give me another medal for my bravery.
And when I beat my human shield I will use a stick no thicker then my thumb. This shows my mercy. Remember it if I am captured by the infidels you swine.

[3/21/2003 7:16:56 AM |
Okay Here then is some thinking "yes, Ooglay, you are too long taking to do this diary because still you are writing about great things that happened yesterday while now outside it is tiday! Well yes, but that is because so many things are happening in every day and that is because georgebush - I spit when saying your name and then I feel unclean - has a cowboy rush to war!!!! So now I will do some trying to catch up .
Here is a thing you must know, and I myself with all my wisdom do not know if it is true. My slave American humanshield drove swiftly though the cemetery of one half million martyrs, knocking many of the fake tombstones down on their empty graves and thinking gleefully we could blame the tanks and maybe I would be spared a mighty fisted beating this time. But I know this thing is true.
Well then is the ringing of the phone, and still it isn't Friday so I answered and it was Dicks Cheney and here are the things he was saying:
"Where is Qusay"
"I am not knowing where is my exalted brother overfed american pig heart..."
"We killed him with 1000 bombings" Is what he said. And so that is the thing i don't know if is true, even though really it is tomorrow from there when I write this down.
And if it is true then he is now my most exalted brother and Uday is my most exalted living brother and if i say it wrong i will dangle by my heels somewhere cold for some time to learn it better. And Uday will strike with his cane!
But that is not now, now I am going to meet Uday and get him his keys to the missile vault. Drive faster, pig of a human shield!!!

[3/21/2003 7:47:49 AM ]
I am telling you now the things i am remembering mostly about my good brother Qusay, who gave so much to charitable causes! But by the will of Allah I don't think he is dead, though here are things I remember fondly:
When the first of the humanshields came and we said

"what are you doing here little hairy and foul smelling infidel dog?"
"and he said 'i'm going to find myself' and we had no idea what that was, even though we all are well knowing of your english monkey language.
Then i grabbed one arm and Uday grabbed an arm and Qusay started up the chainsaw and cut his legs off then threw them out the window. And this is what Qusay said because always he had that sense of humor about things he said: 'Well, start by looking out there!' And Uday and I hurled him living out the ten story window because we were not hiding in the under-palace then i am telling you.
So that is one thing I remember about Qusay: his sense of humor!!! What will be done with his rotting corpse? I asked my wise brother and he slapped me and said"stupid! He will be found after a bombing run...that is why he came here!!
And I did not need that slapping!
Also he could eat anything but that is not something I want to talk about now. I would rather forget that part of Qusay.
So one last thing I will remember about him is his goodness to animals. Here is how i know because of his goats and sheep! No really, when we were young he had sheep and goats kept at a private oasis that was highly fenced and no one could go in under pain of death! That is how much he loved them and he went every day. My father from whom all sunlight comes said we are descended from a people who would do this as nomads. And Qusay would do this with help from no one long after he married several wives and had many children, Allah be praised! Then when he took over the secret police he was too busy there and I don't know what happened to his goats and sheep.
So also if he is dead i will never be forgetting his kindnesses to animals.
Also for a minute I am realizing if Allah has given Qusay his reward then I am third in line to be ruler, but then I stopped thinking it because we were at the hospital where Uday keeps the missiles.

[4/6/2003 1:31:06 AM]
Okay it has been very busy for Ooglay. Lately the American's are keeping everybody awake very late with not driving their tanks through town. That noise they make not being here actually being 500 kilometers away has everyone on edge.
Also I am busy writing on American internet to encourage glorious filthy pig American war protestors to make parades to support my glorious family against the evil georgesbush who is trying to take our oil. Father Saddam, creator of the Mother of all Battles is telling you protestors his thanks! Do not stop now and the Father of MOAB will give you each some of his oil. And also 10 million Iraqi Dinar.
Now I am having more time and will be writing more about your georgebush cowboy war.
Okay but first some explaining. Someone says "Greyhawk it is Ooglay. Thanks you make me laugh!" Well, no Ooglay is Ooglay. Greyhawk is not. Ooglay meets Greyhawk on ScrappleFaces. Iraqi government blocks Iraqis from having great satan American Home page. So Greyhawk says to Ooglay he wants "Americans to see how Iraqi Baath party Saddam Hussein people really are" and so he will post for Ooglay the diary. Okay? So this is why Greyhawk has his name on it. But he tells me "tell them it is you, Ooglay! Some people think it is made up!!" No, it is Ooglay. Thanks be unto you for this opportunity Mr Hawk. Aso some people write bad things about my glorious father on ScrappleFace and write your Greyhawk name there. You should tell them stop.
Now it is back to my diary. Where was I?

[4/6/2003 4:50:21 AM]
Okay so please to remember I am still telling of the first day of your American aggression.
When I get to the Hospital with my infidel swine humanshield I first put the leash and collar on him. We always do this when we are around Uday. He likes to see the dogs treated like dogs. So "come in to the hospital on your allfours" is what I tell the human shield. His knees are bloody with scabbings and his hands hurt already to where he can not hardly drive the car, but he does what I tell him.
But then I see Hans coming out of the Hospital and he says "You are late! Don't bring him in. Just take your brother the keys!" Then he is going to the cafeteria and I say "Well here, Hans, you pig, you take him for a while" and Hans says "Screw you Ooglay. I'm going to get a porkchop and then get the hell out of here."
I swear by the hump of my camel this is how Hans talks when he is not on TV. He cracks me up!
And that stupid bald headed Swede, the last time he came over to the palace he drank all the good vadkaa and passed out and puked on the good Persian rug. The one from Al-Iskanders day. So that was funny too. He can't hold his liquor.
So I am now having to tie my humanshield to the car bumper and take the keys and go into the hospital basement to find Uday.
And I go to where they store the missiles in the basement and there is waiting at the door is Uday. But also with him is the Russian and the Syrian (I never know their names but I like them not and trust them less. They have a mean streak in them.) who usually don't always work together. So who knows when a war is going what might happen?
But esteemed brother Uday shakes his cane at me saying evil curses regarding my mother and the circumstances of my birth and why am I slow? And I tell him I shot down the F16 and then yes he hits me and says "Dog! I invented that one in '91!" And to this day I have a bruise where he hit me with the cane. But he got his key.
And the Syrian laughed at me a little then but by the will of Allah he will never laugh again some day.
So those three turned to the big doors and began to open the lock and then I notice on the hospital cart is human head. It is Pierre! And he has bullet hole in forehead! And the battery with the crank and wires with aligator clips is nearby. And yes I saw the marks on his ears.
Now I don't know what is going on but Uday and the Syrian and the Russian all had pistols on, and I can't remember if Hans had one or not. But Pierre had really got someone angry I can tell you.
Then Uday is coming out of the vault and he slaps me with open hand and says "Here put that in this bag" and gives me a satchel from inside the vault that usually holds detonators. So I have to put the filthy head in the bag. And I have heard rumors about the diseases Pierre had in life and I hope it is not the will of Allah I get one of those!
Now I have a chance to look in the vault and Uday forgive me but you are a fool! (I did not say this or even think it too hard) There were some red tips, blue tips, and sheesh! Even some green tips still there! No wonder Hans was pissed! This things were supposed to be across the border three weeks ago! And now the Russian and the Syrian are arguing about who is going to do what for moving them into the truck (they would only need one truck, Uday didn't keep too many behind) and I can just see them maybe getting stupid with some of each missile here! No thank you! I need to be at least 2 preferably 5 kilometers away now if you please! And which way is wind blowing? So while they argue and Uday is drawing his pistiol and firing rounds into the floor above to get their attention, Ooglay is running like an Iranian for the door!
Goodbye!!!!

So okay, now is Ooglay running like the wind away from the vault with the missiles. Some of each! I can't believe it. We make them in 2 days if we need some. Why did he keep some? I don't know. So I am hurrying into car and starting it up and driving away. And I see Hans in the rear view and he's yelling something but he has a big mouth full of food and I don't like Hans anyhow. Not since I caught him with Arnett. But that you are saying is another story, yes?
So I have to get to the school in big hurry anyway, remember? Is school where humanshields are playing with school kids for CNN Europe reporter to film them. My job will be to kill the reporters if they catch sight of the Fedayeen Saddam using the building as headquarters. Also I have to get the humanshields back into the truck to take them back to the prison. But this is making me think I'm forgetting something.
And the people of Baghdad are all yelling and pointing as I go by. They think I am my glorious Father! This is fine! But no, that is not it, they are pointing behind me but I look in rear-view mirrors and see nothing. Then I go over a bump and Uh-oh! He pops up in the air so I can see him. My stupid humanshield! He was still tied to bumper by leash! He must have been asleep when I hurried out of the hospitol. I drove up to where I could park without worrying about the car getting scratched. Then I go look at him.
He is not dead. He was unconcious. But also he is lots of bleeding. So now I can't put him in car with blood pouring out. So when he doesn't wake up after I am shaking him then I put him in trunk. I will take the infidel to Doctor later, first the school.
And of course whenever you say "School" I think "where's my gun." so I take a little time to put this on. Then I wash my hands from having had to touch him. Then I start driving to Uday Hussein elementary school. Of us all it is Uday who has most schools named for him, including one in Brooklyn NY. We aren't going their today either.
Very strange, I am thinking.

Okay so Ooglay is driving like crazy to get to school and thinking "Hey, I never used to be in this kind of rush to go to school, you know?" Haha. One time Ooglay got an F in school. That was last time I got one or that teacher gave one, you know? I bet American kids would like to have that going for them.
So I am cutting through Shi'ite market and thinking "Hey! This market always nice and good prices and clean and almost a shame it would be to blow this up during war and blame Americans!" But Shi'ites and Kurds are ruining my homeland, I am telling you.
And now be remebering my humanshield in the trunk? Is waking up now I am guessing because I hear the thumping sound from trunk. Also some groan but not very loud to compare to what Qusay could make someone do on the really hot days. So I am yelling "hey, shut up! I am heading right this minute straight to the hospitol for you!"
And if you are soft American reading this, well maybe you think you have bad day if tire goes flat let me tell you about bad day. I am cutting through park to get to school just ahead when suddenly I am hearing that ripping sheet metal sound from first war that means inbound Tommy Hawk! Good thing I was cutting through grassy area cause I can throw door open and roll out like we learned in the class taught by the Russians while car keeps going away. Then I curl into ball as car is heading for crowd but it doesn't get there because "boom" goes missile right into it.
Now I know my glorious Father for whom we fight this victorious war will be angry! He did not give Ooglay the car just to get it blown up by American missile! And will he blame Georgeboosh? Yes, may the flies of a thousand camels plague him for the rest of his days, but it is Ooglay who will take the fisted pounding for this one thank you very much Mr Navy Battleship Missile Boat!
And the worst thing is when I am looking around a little there are no parts of the humanshield big enough to use to embarass the Imperialist American Infidel Dogs!
And curse them all now I have to walk the last half kilometer to school! And I am late!

Okay, so here I am running a little to get to school now. And very late! And I get there and it is tragedy. Here is scene:
Children from childrens prison all trying to be looking happy playing.
Human shields never before near children all stand off to one side looking disgusted because of smell. All humanshields are weak!
CNN Europe reporter and cameraman not paying attention to them, because stoopid Fedayeen soldiers have anti-aircraft missile battery right out in open on playground! This is why Ooglay was to be here, to stop just this thing from its happening. So I have blown up car and no corpse of humanshield and now this! You know Ooglay is getting pounded with many angry fists tonight!
So maybe I can make things a little better. Am drawing gun and walking over to kill reporters when he is looking at me and is hey! Pete! So all is not so bad. I don't have to be killing him unless I want to. But Glorious Father says he is "useful idiot" so then I am thinking okay, better not shoot.
So what about cameraman? This is Ooglays only good break today. He is Russian agent! A blessing from Allah! Too good to be true! They are only giving pointers to the crew for how to be shooting down the American planes.
Okay, now the lateness of the day is comming, and it has been very long of a day I am telling you the pillows in the bed in my Glorious Father's Underpalace are seeming far away still but oh so soft! So quickly we are loading Children on bus for childrens prison and humanshields on bus for hell for all I care. But only after they are driving away in foul cloud of fumes and rattles am I thinking "hey, no car!" And if Ooglay is caught out in Shia neighborhoods tonight maybe day gets very worse very quickly. Will of Allah is not to be pushed too far, yes?
So hey, Pete, Yevgeny, can Ooglay catch ride back to Underpalace?
"No. Only car is crappy little French Renault with no room for you with camera gear in back."
So first I am thinking there will be room if I put three bulletts in your brain pan infidel dog! but then I am remembering Pete is always out for number 1. And when I am reaching for gun I find humanshield drugs in pocket and say "maybe Oogly can make this worth your while?."
So then Ooglay is getting to ride shotgun with Yezgeny holding tight to top of car that day I am telling you!

More Ooglay Hussein...

All done!

Continue reading "DEATH TOLL MOUNTS FROM TAX CUTS "

GOP Votes to Keep Cuts to Military Housing

Republicans proved that they don't match their rhetoric about the military with action when they refused Democrats' proposal for a minor reduction in millionaires' tax breaks to restore $1 billion in critical military housing funds cut by President Bush.

Democrats, led by House Appropriations Committee Ranking Member David Obey (D-WI), proposed cutting the tax breaks Republicans awarded to people making more than $1 million a year by just 5 percent in order to restore the funds cut by Bush to military housing.

The Democratic proposal would reduce the average millionaire tax cut from $88,326 to $83,546 in order to restore the funds for military housing. The funds would go to restore cuts that affect military housing, barracks, child care centers, schools, hangars, and office buildings.

The Bush/GOP Military Construction Appropriations Bill cut $1.5 billion from military housing and families from last year's level, in direct contradiction of Bush and other Republicans' high praise of the military after the war in Iraq. Their refusal to restore $1 billion at the cost of a small reduction in millionaires' tax breaks demonstrates the depth of their professed respect for our men and women in the military.

Hopefully the double-speak is noted: there is no "cut" to spending on military housing construction; the amount will simply be less then last year. This will not likely cause undue hardship to military families. (Who, by the way, have the option to take a housing allowance and live off-base if they find the quarters inadequate or undesirable. This is one of the many ways a military installation boosts local economies.)

And of course, since the tax cut has been approved, "reducing" it is a ridiculous concept. A tax increase is what this would be, pure and simple. Applaud the responsible forces of moderation that opposed this action.

Please also note the disconnect between the headline and the text; (which the Dems must assume will never be read anyway) housing is only a part of the military construction.

The military, of course, has no union. There are, however, several groups that (among other efforts) lobby Congress on issues of concern to military members. A look at their web pages reveals what those issues are - educational and veterans benefits being at the top of the lists of priorities. The Democrats, if they have any real concern for the well being of the troops, would do well to educate themselves on those issues, rather then dictate what they think the priorities should be.

Of course, that's not what's going on here. This is just another early volley in a multi-pronged attack from the left. Expect that in the future the far left will attempt to foist a "tax hike on the rich" at every opportunity to fund any welfare/human services-related issue beyond levels that current fiscal responsibility will allow. This will come in the form of riders to or provisions within any bill moving through Congress they can possibly get their fingerprints on. As these reckless schemes are defeated by moderates and conservatives in Congress the same type of rhetoric will follow. And those who are denied access to the re-distributed earnings of "the rich" will be depicted as victims of the heartless Republican evil.

Reports on the numbers of dead will soon follow.

Military members are as willing as anyone to tighten their belts when circumstances dictate, demonstrably more so then most. In this case, however, they won't have to. In attempting to portray themselves as protectors of the weak, the extremists in Congress have once again fallen short.

Perhaps the numbers of people willing to be taken in by this irrational rhetoric will dwindle appropriately. One can only hope.

All done!

Continue reading "UNANSWERED QUESTIONS, CONFUSION, FOLLOW IN WAKE OF RIOTS "

Those who may want to sort this out for themsleves can attempt to at:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/06/18/sprj.irq.main/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/06/18/sprj.irq.main/index.html

http://famulus.msnbc.com/FamulusIntl/reuters06-18-010506.asp?reg=MIDEAST

http://www.heraldpalladium.com/display/inn_news/news1.txt

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,89723,00.html

All done!

Continue reading "WHEN BLOGGERS RULE "

PART I
PART IIa

But is the Blogosphere getting wiser? Another valid contrast point on the Siren issue may be the recent Paul Wolfowitz story. Wolfowitz is Deputy Secretary of Defense, and has served in the Pentagon off and on under Carter, Bush Sr., Clinton, and Bush. He was in the State Department for the first few years of the Reagan Administration. So his words carry some weight.

Wolfowitz has been twice mis-quoted in the mainstream media recently. First in Vanity Fair regarding WMD:

The quote (from DoD transcripts of a recorded phone interview):
...The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason, but -- hold on one second --

(Pause)

Wolfowitz: -- there have always been three fundamental concerns. One is weapons of mass destruction, the second is support for terrorism, the third is the criminal treatment of the Iraqi people. Actually I guess you could say there's a fourth overriding one which is the connection between the first two. Sorry, hold on again.

The third one by itself, as I think I said earlier, is a reason to help the Iraqis but it's not a reason to put American kids' lives at risk, certainly not on the scale we did it. That second issue about links to terrorism is the one about which there's the most disagreement within the bureaucracy, even though I think everyone agrees that we killed 100 or so of an al Qaeda group in northern Iraq in this recent go-around, that we've arrested that al Qaeda guy in Baghdad who was connected to this guy Zarqawi whom Powell spoke about in his UN presentation.

Q: So this notion then that the strategic question was really a part of the equation, that you were looking at Saudi Arabia --

Wolfowitz: I was. It's one of the reasons why I took a very different view of what the argument that removing Saddam Hussein would destabilize the Middle East. I said on the record, I don't understand how people can really believe that removing this huge source of instability is going to be a cause of instability in the Middle East.

I understand what they're thinking about. I'm not blind to the uncertainties of this situation, but they just seem to be blind to the instability that that son of a bitch was causing. It's as though the fact that he was paying $25,000 per terrorist family and issuing regular threats to most friendly governments in the region and the long list of things was of no account and the only thing to think about was that there might be some inter-communal violence if he were removed.

The implication of a lot of the argumentation against acting -- the implication was that the only way to have the stability that we need in Iraq is to have a tyrant like Saddam keeping everybody in check -- I know no one ever said it that way and if you pointed it out that way they'd say that's not what I mean. But I believe that really is where the logic was leading.

Vanity Fair Quote: "For bureaucratic reasons we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on."

See the attraction of the Siren Song for the Left? But note the original quote; thought provoking and to the point. A real glimpse at how policy is made at the highest levels. Rather then debate that process openly, the interviewer twists it into something else and lets others attack. Why? Once the original un-edited quote is released the attackers look foolish. Both sides of any issue must watch for this if their debate is to have any validity.

The second mis-quote was in the London newspaper The Guardian, reporting statements made by Wolfowitz in Singapore regarding North Korea and Iraq. The actual quote (from DoD Transcripts):

Q: What I meant is that essentially North Korea is being taken more seriously because it has become a nuclear power by its own admission, whether or not that’s true, and that the lesson that people will have is that in the case of Iraq it became imperative to confront Iraq militarily because it had banned weapons systems and posed a danger to the region. In the case of North Korea, which has nuclear weapons as well as other banned weapons of mass destruction, apparently it is imperative not to confront, to persuade and to essentially maintain a regime that is just as appalling as the Iraqi regime in place, for the sake of the stability of the region. To other countries of the world this is a very mixed message to be sending out.

Wolfowitz: The concern about implosion is not primarily at all a matter of the weapons that North Korea has, but a fear particularly by South Korea and also to some extent China of what the larger implications are for them of having 20 million people on their borders in a state of potential collapse and anarchy. It’s is also a question of whether, if one wants to persuade the regime to change, whether you have to find -- and I think you do -- some kind of outcome that is acceptable to them. But that outcome has to be acceptable to us, and it has to include meeting our non-proliferation goals.

Look, the primarily difference -- to put it a little too simply -- between North Korea and Iraq is that we had virtually no economic options with Iraq because the country floats on a sea of oil. In the case of North Korea, the country is teetering on the edge of economic collapse and that I believe is a major point of leverage whereas the military picture with North Korea is very different from that with Iraq. The problems in both cases have some similarities but the solutions have got to be tailored to the circumstances which are very different.

The Guardian Quote (perhaps repeating German reports):

"Oil was the main reason for military action against Iraq, a leading White House hawk has claimed, confirming the worst fears of those opposed to the US-led war.

The US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz - who has already undermined Tony Blair's position over weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by describing them as a "bureaucratic" excuse for war - has now gone further by claiming the real motive was that Iraq is "swimming" in oil.

The latest comments were made by Mr Wolfowitz in an address to delegates at an Asian security summit in Singapore at the weekend, and reported today by German newspapers Der Tagesspiegel and Die Welt.

Asked why a nuclear power such as North Korea was being treated differently from Iraq, where hardly any weapons of mass destruction had been found, the deputy defence minister said: "Let's look at it simply. The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil."

To credit The Guardian, they did retract the quote once it was exposed as blatant lie.

(You can read a synopsis of the Wolfowitz misquotes, and a few other recent newspaper 'gaffes', here.)

To credit the Blogosphere, the Wolfowitz situation was handled quite differently then the Santorum story; with caution at the initial reports followed by indignation and mild outrage at their exposure as almost right. Of course an argument could be made that this is because Santorum was opposed to a popular cause, while the Iraq war (Wolfowitz) was supported by most Bloggers. Thus, the Santorum Siren was much more appealing then the Wolfowitz example. This however, implies a willingness to deny truth (or at least a wilingness to accept something less; the "willful suspension of disbelief" that is the hallmark of good fiction) when it suits the bloggers purpose, or casts dispersion on the validity of claims to value the truth. This does not increase the credibility of a new medium.

All done!

Continue reading "WHEN BLOGGERS RULE "

THE HABITAT

Ancient Rome had its Forum; where people met, conducted business and debated the issues of the day. How fitting then that modern Rome has its own Forum...the Internet!

Transform yourself into a being of pure energy, pure thought, void of face and form, and travel electronically to a meeting place of ideas and expressions. What a marvelous opportunity, to have one's ideas expressed in a way that allows both criticism and support, while eliminating the potential for judgment based on the messenger; appearance and gender masked if you desire. Age? Not a factor. Fifteen or fifty, it's your thoughts and your ability to express them that matter, and nothing else. Race? Who cares? Ethnicity? Non-factor. If you come up with the solution to the crisis in Israel you can post it anonymously for the world, without being dismissed for being a 14 year old Guamanian girl.

Even those Bloggers fortunate enough to not need an assumed name are still little more then names (and sometimes faces) to the vast majority of their readers, with no real connection as corporate human beings. Proof? Those readers will say things to them via their comments or their own Blogs that they would never dare utter to a neighbor over the fence or a co-worker at an office party.

I fall into the category of "anonymous blogger." Strangely enough the reason I do this is so that I can give my real and honest opinion. I wish I didn't have to, and some day I won't, but for now such is life. You can, however, get a pretty accurate general depiction of who I am by reading my posts for a while. Many other Bloggers fall into this same category for much the same reason.

THE TROLL

Unfortunately, the anonymity of the Blogosphere opens the door for the Troll, annoying creatures who move through this system attacking and spreading hate. Anonymity in some cases foments viciousness, perhaps a trait suppressed in their corporal existence. "Troll" is just too cute a word for some of them. Read every Blog and it's comments posted on a given day (admittedly impossible) and you may swear that a significant number are written by people actually diametrically opposed to what they espouse; leading one to consider they exist merely to generate contempt for their subject matter. (Do note, however, the vast majority of Blogs and comments can be taken at face value.)

Who knows what inspires a Troll? A thrill at being annoying? A response to being ignored in the real world? Perhaps, I like to believe, though, that The Troll returns to the real world, having acted out their fantasy life in the Blogosphere, perhaps a little happier and better adjusted for having vented their frustrations here. Good for them. Maybe they won't kill coworkers now.

Of course, even the Troll can't ruin the Blogosphere as a great place to "meet" people. The desire of many in this regard is twofold; 1) to embrace those of like mind, to reinforce that you are not alone in thoughts and opinions and thus not the last sane person on earth; or 2) to understand those of differing opinion; to get some grasp, if you will, of what exactly went wrong in their developmental process, without having to offend a "real" person. Child abuse? Jilted at the Altar? What is the fundamental defect in your nature?!

(Of course, never to my knowledge has anyone in the Blogosphere convinced another to shout "Eureka! I was wrong!" on any issue of any merit. Even in the post-Iraq-war light of day the doomsayers, the "quagmire crowd," the "prophets of jihad" and the "WWIII tin foil hat brigade" are still claiming they were right all along, that there never were any WMDs!)

Ahhh...but find those like-minded individuals, your spiritual soul mates, and fly! The only people who think like me are other geniuses, don't you know?

Thus, the Blog reader is forced to become a thorough critic of new products and persona in the Blogosphere. Does this person bring something new to discuss? If not, does this person have something new and useful to add to the discussion? Does this person have a fresh perspective, an interesting voice?

Because we are all singers, after all. Some of Opera, some of Rock, some Jazz, some the Blues. Some are Rappers, and some Country. I respect the best artists of all genres. I have no time for the talentless, unless they have potential. I despise pretenders. Sing only that which is true to your heart. And practice developing that voice! Your thoughts on a topic are pointless if your voice is Roseanne's and your song is the National Anthem.

THE SIREN

The counterpoint to this of course, is the beautiful voice that spews hate. Like the Siren calling to all to come and crash on the rocks of bigoted or hateful ideologies. The Siren, then, is a nastier creature then a mere Troll. Of course, succumbing briefly to such a voice does no permanent harm to an individual, especially in the virtual forum. Perhaps the experience leaves them a bit wiser for future events, events that matter in the real world.

So what? Why care? Because the presence of the Siren, and the Troll, and the myriad of other less then savory characters that populate the Blogosphere, while providing half the "fun" are also the reason that the majority of the Blogosphere is still not ready for prime time.

Let's listen briefly then, to a Siren's song together.

The Siren, of course, can be a person or an idea, or both. An example? The Santorum case.

Many Bloggers from all over the political spectrum were quick to line up and denounce Santorum for what appeared to be a rabid anti-gay viewpoint. Santorum provided right-leaning Bloggers a chance to demonstrate their Libertarian, moderate views (since most are Republican on most other issues) and enabled them to express their unequivocal support for human rights. For Santorum bashers, however, there are three facts that are convenient to ignore.

1. At face value Santorum wasn't speaking directly about Gay Rights, he was addressing a larger legal point within the specific case. Attaching additional meaning and arguing against it is not valid debate. In fact, it's counter productive as it's just a way to avoid the real issue. This tactic is transparent to all but a few practitioners, and is unfortunately all too commonly seen here.

2, Ashcroft and Santorum are not leading death squads into peoples' bedrooms and hauling them off for unacceptable behavior.
From a Houston TV News site:
The case began in 1998, when a neighbor tricked police with a false report of a black man "going crazy" in John Geddes Lawrence's apartment. Police pushed their way in and found Lawrence having anal sex with another man, Tyron Garner.

Although Texas rarely enforced its antisodomy law, officers decided to book the two men and jail them overnight on charges of "deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex." They were each fined $200 plus court costs.

3. The entire attack on Santorum was orchestrated by the wife of John Kerry's campaign manager, and Kerry was the first to denounce his fellow Senator, thus demonstrating his unequivocal support for human rights. The last paragraph of the Fox story linked above:

Some Republican sources were quietly raising questions about the reporter who first quoted Santorum and who continued to report on the conflict it created. Lara Jakes Jordan is married to Jim Jordan, a former DSCC official who now manages Kerry's presidential campaign.

Here, for the record, is my take on the issue.

Now one would expect the left to lap this attack stuff up without question. When "centrists" or "moderates" do this it's disappointing, and leads one to question their "moderation". Expressing open mindedness by condemning people who think differently then you based on unquestioning acceptance of biased news reports is hardly the hallmark of intelligent public debate. Regardless of who's right or wrong, the questions I raised were not addressed by any of Santorum's many attackers in the Blogosphere. The shots taken at him came from the hip.

The Supreme Court, of course, is being called to consider its position on interfering with State laws as much as with the specific issue. By the way, quiz question for those who are outraged by any aspect of this case. How did the Supreme Court rule?

Sorry, trick question. They haven't yet. They are expected to any time now. If this is to be believed, two are solidly for, two against, and five justices undecided.

(Those who expressed great and terrible outrage at the behavior of a US Senator for speaking his mind can now contemplate their real motives. I give you a minute to shout Eureka! and then I'll accept your thanks.)

In spite of much effort the Blogosphere did not bring down Senator Santorum. Shooting from the hip is rarely effective. A tempest in a teapot, and a perfect counter to those who claim Trent Lott's head is mounted on their wall. The voters of Pennsylvania will rightfully have the final say on the Senator's fate. All those Bloggers who are registered to vote there are encouraged to do so.

TO BE CONTINUED>>>

All done!

Continue reading "NEWS FROM THE BEACH "

Colonel, I wan to express how I feel in my heat and if you can, I ask that you pass my words to your leaders and commanders and the marines and soldiers who suffered and are suffering for my country. I want all of you to know that the great majority of Iraqis applaud your coming, your success in battle and your efforts to be kind, decent people now.

We suffered for many years and no one would help us, not even our Arab brothers. Only America had the strength, not only in military power, but also in vision, in character, in moral authority, in love for its fellowman to come to our aid. I know it is hard for the soldiers now, they have no air-conditioning in their vehicles, they must live on our streets to protect us, and they are away from their families. I want them to know that we know the sacrifices they make for us. I pray to Allah that they will sacrifice no more: too many already have sacrificed so much.

I also want to apologize for some of our young people who are not mature enough o understand what you have done and what you have given us. We have not known freedom for a long time, so it will take time to truly appreciate what a glorious gift you have given us.

Many of us blame the sanctions for all our problems. It was not the sanctions that created what we see today, it was the regime that existed everywhere, to include this very building that I work in, the Ministry of Health. It was the regime that cheated the people out of what was rightfully theirs by God's laws.

When I talk with my family and friends, I tell them that what is going on now, with the shortages and suffering, is like a surgery for cancer. Saddam was a cancer. When one operates for a cancerous tumor, one must cut through the muscle and sometimes the bone, to get the entire tumor out. After the tumor is removed, the patient's muscles and bones hurt greatly and the pain continues while healing. Over time, the patient sees a change, the patient begins feeling and doing better. That is how it is in Iraq. The Americans came and took out the awful cancer and now we must work through the pain of recovery, but eventually we will enjoy a full life, free of pain, with no fear of cancer. I want to thank all of you from the bottom of my heart.

Lots of good first-hand stuff (including pictures) at the Chief's Blog. A must read.

I found the Chief through Bernie Slattery, an Aussie Blogger and real live conservative-leaning professional journalist. You should visit Bernie too.

All done!

Continue reading "QUIET ON THE SET! "

Mike M: Surveys of our target demographic indicate that they prefer a strong female role model who...

Hillrod: Surveys? You are polling people to see what they think? I'll tell you what they think! I tell them what they think!

Mike M: But the target demographic is young unmarried democrats, and...

Hillrod: When I want to know what young unmarried democrats think I'll call Chelsea! And by the way, you will start referring to me with some respect or I will have your fat butt right back in that unemployment line. Kapish, chubby?

Mike M: Yes, but I..

Hillrod: What did you say?

Mike M (sheepishly): Yes ma'am.

Hillrod: That's better. Now lets talk some more about casting.

Mike M: I thought we agreed..

Hillrod (through clenched teeth): You want to talk about "agreed", what did we just agree to one second ago? (A large man who had been standing near her now steps towards Mike M, while reaching under his suit coat)

Mike M: Ma'am, I'm sorry. (Large man steps back.) Please accept my apology. But on the subject of casting...

Hillrod: Listen carefully Jabba, I'm not going to have this version turn out like that Sharon Stone TV movie nightmare a few years back! That woman playing me, she's too old, she looks too plain, and she's not convincing me that she's shocked by Bill's nasty pig behavior...she sucks. She can't act to save her life. In fact, threaten her with death, maybe she'll...

Mike M: We can't do that, ma'am, she's union.

Hillrod: Okay, say no more. But I'll take care of the "union" thing soon as I get back to DC. Let me think about her fate for a while. She's not cutting it. I need to be convinced that I was shocked when I discovered my husband's treachery.

Mike M: As do we all, ma'am.

Hillrod: What was that, cretin?

Mike M: I said, "yes, she's too small" it's a Hollywood term, the roll is just too big for her. Ma'am.

Hillrod: Exactly! I knew I picked the right man to direct! Now, how about this hag you've got playing....her? The skank?

Mike M: Playing Monica? That's...

Hillrod: Do not mention that name in my presence!

Mike M: Yes Ma'am.

Hillrod: Now who is that unknown young skank?

Mike M: She's more of a has-been skank then an unknown, ma'am. An old friend from the Iraq war days who needed some work...

Hillrod: I don't care about any of that! Just give me her name, moron! She's a great actress, she's got me convinced that she's a whore attracted by my husband's fame!

Mike M: That's Janeane Garofalo, ma'am

Hillrod: I despise her completely. Have Ms Garofalo sent to my trailer immediately after shooting is done for today. But make her ditch that blue dress first!

Mike M: It's quite realistic, yes? You know that spot is actually..

Hillrod: I don't care! Keep your Hollywood secrets to yourself. Now, I've decided the fate of that no-talent hack playing me. Fire her now.

Mike M: Ma'am, this will set us back and we're already way over our budget, so maybe...

Hillrod: Listen, Moby, I've still got some campaign money from the American Muslim whosis and the Chinese just sent another briefcase full of...

Mike M: Maybe it's the script...

Hillrod: Don't know. Don't care. Haven't read it. Fire her now.

Mike M: Ms C, Ma'am, with all due respect, you can't just...

Hillrod (face completely red, spittle flying): I'm the President of this stink hole of a country, buster! Do not tell me what I can and can't do. Now if that homely no-talent hack can't convince me that I was absolutely crushed when I discovered the truth about my husband and his 'ho's then we will find somebody who can! I'll be in my trailer! (Stomps off, secret service agents in tow, stops and shouts back) And don't forget! Send me Gafugalo!

Mike M (mumbling) It's Garofalo, yer highness. (Now waddling over to actress portraying Hillrod) Hey, Ms. Streep, Meryl, ummmm...we need to talk...

All done!

Continue reading "WHY DON'T I DO THIS? "

Because there's only one ScrappleFace.

Congratulations Scott.
This should be your daily hit count.

All done!

Continue reading "CHANCE TO GIVE BACK (PART II) "

Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund

The Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund was established by the Intrepid Foundation in 2000 to provide financial support for the dependents of United States military personnel lost in performance of their duty. This continues an effort begun in 1982 by Museum founders Zachary and Elizabeth Fisher. Between 1982 and 1999, when Zachary passed away, the Fishers made contributions of between $10,000 and $25,000 to the families of hundreds of military personnel lost in performance of their duty. These gifts were intended to assist these families through any financial hardships that might follow the loss of their loved ones. Zachary and Elizabeth Fisher personally funded this effort until Zachary’s passing in 1999.

The Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund continues to provide gifts to military families that have paid the ultimate price: the loss of a loved one in defense of our country. Our goal is to provide financial support to help spouses and children of military personnel through any immediate or long-term financial difficulties they may face. This gift is made quietly and without fanfare, to protect the privacy of the families. Our goal is to support them in their time of need, and to ensure that they know that our nation appreciates the sacrifice they have made for us. The gift is made possible by contributions by Mr. Arnold Fisher, Mr. Richard L. Fisher, Mr. Steven Roth, the Stamps Family Foundation, Mr. Nelson Peltz, Mr. Thomas Lee, Mr. William Graham, and other generous supporters.

The Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund is currently contributing to the spouses and children of U.S. and British military personnel killed in action, as defined by the casualty offices of the United States Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Coast Guard, and the Ministry of Defence of the United Kingdom, in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

How to Help

To continue this vital service, we need your help. Contributions may be made payable to the Intrepid Museum Foundation and forwarded to the below address. 100% of contributions go to support military families. The Intrepid Museum Foundation is a 501(c)(3) organization and contributions are tax deductible under applicable laws.

Contributions may be sent to

David A. Winters
Senior Vice President
Intrepid Museum Foundation
One Intrepid Square
West 46th Street and 12th Avenue
New York, New York 10036

For questions, please contact:
heroesfund@intrepidmuseum.org

Information for military families

The Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund works in coordination with the casualty offices of the United States Armed Forces in determining families eligible for support. The Fund will provide support only to the surviving spouses and/or children of United States and British uniformed military personnel killed in action in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

To protect the privacy of the families we support, the Fund does not communicate directly with military families. Upon receiving confirmation from the armed forces casualty offices that a member of the armed forces has been killed in action in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and that the member has left behind a spouse or dependent child or children, the Fund will process a contribution for the family. The contribution will be forwarded to the casualty office of the members branch of service, who will in turn forward the contribution to the family.

Eligible military families need take no action in regard to this contribution. It will be delivered to them through the military casualty office.

All done!

Continue reading "CLARE-IFFY-KASHUN "

Internashunal media mogul Scott Ott defended his company's proposed purchase uh Google.com, tellin' lawmakers de deal gots'ta not hurt competishun no' limit consuma' choices.

"Dis be not anticompetitive," Mr. Ah be baaad... Ott, chairman and chief 'esecutive uh ScrappleFace, told some Senate panel.

COCKNEY
OTT DEFENDS PLANS TO ACQUIRE BLOGGER.COM
(Rick Bragg, right, IP News, right, Werehington)

International media mogul Scott Ott defended 'is company's proposed purchase of Google.com, tellin' lormakers the bleedin' deal will not 'urt competition nor limit consumer choices, do wot guvnor!

"This ain't anticompetitive," Guvnor Ott, chairman and chief executive of ScrappleFace, right, told a Senate panel.

ELMER FUDD
OTT DEFENDS PWANS TO ACQWIWE BWOGGEW.COM
(Wick Bwagg, IP News, Washington)

Intewnationaw media moguw Scott Ott defended his company's pwoposed puwchase of Googwe.com, tewwing wawmakews the deaw wiww not huwt competition now wimit consumew choices. Oh, dat scwewy wabbit!

"Dis is not anticompetitive," Mw. Ott, chaiwman and chief executive of ScwappweFace, towd a Senate panew.

Now you can go have fun with it too. Other dialects available are Swedish chef, moron, pig latin, and hacker. I must warn you that something is wrong with 'moron', as the Mudville Gazette looked exactly the same when that dialect was applied.

(Here's the original story.)

Thanks to Serenity for the link. And great start on the new website, by the way.

All done!