Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
I have zero problem with Obama taking dinner w/ Will, who, as Glenn has documented more than once, is sane on the evils of Bush-cum-monarch and related issues. Now, if Limbaugh was also in attendance, I'd sure as hell want to know what Will and Obama were thinking.
It would be unfortunate if, as happens in such conflicts, Glenn somehow becomes the "bad guy". Glenn hasn't harshly condemned bebop-o or shown anything but good will towards him; the prospects of bebop-o's future access is strictly between him and Glenn, IMO.
First, I want to apologize to Glenn for all this off-topic.
Second, I don't really think anyone who has posted here on behalf of Bebop's past contribution history is attempting to portray Glenn as a "bad guy". On the contrary, several of us have acknowledged that his reasons for his actions are understood and accepted.
But I urge restraint in second-guessing, noodging, or guilt-tripping Glenn.
Lastly, this is not what is happening. At least, not from me.
I am not happy with the situation, but that doesn't mean I blame Glenn.
I'm sorry I'm so far behind tonight......it's starting to become a horrible habit.
Hamas May Survive Offensive, Israel Says
Group Is Weakened, Military Officials Assert; Goal Is to Apply Pressure and Force a Truce
Link at sig.
After all this murder, how absurdly obscene. Right back to where we were a month ago, minus 1000 lives and an entire infrastructure. Is their a circle in hell for banally evil bureaucrat mass murderers? I hope they make room for Barak, Livni and Olmert.
so is it time for the daily tagteam of endless crass, condescending, emotionally cold egomania ready for nitey-nite yet?
sleep well-maybe that conscious will seep in eventually
or
replenish those bullets.
Sweet dreams.
HI BOP!!
I think its the combination of Bill Kristol, Limbaugh, and Krauthammer that did it for me. Serious conservatives are actually enjoyable dinner companions, but those three clowns are simply over the top.
Seriously, what could they add?
There are probably many reasons why some people would think you're an idiot. In my case, I think of you as incredibly stupid because you think a Palestinian with family in the West Bank, WHO SPENT TWO YEARS UNDER ISRAELI SIEGE IN THE WEST BANK, who has written countless pro-Palestinian rants herein, and has a blog literally replete with angry condemnations of Israeli actions, is pro-Israeli somehow, SIMPLY BECAUSE HE DOESN'T AGREE WITH YOU ON CERTAIN ISSUES!!! My GOD!
I'm still catching up too.
I'm back about page 37 and still catching up... but did you know voles mate for life? Yeah. Just leaned that yesterday.
Why do you think I always dance with an even number? ;-}
Jesus, Mona.
I'm gonna have nightmares now.
Thank you. I'd not been able to get in touch with him to find out. I knew it was imminent. I am sorry I missed the post.
Pow wow as mensch of the day.
Why might one feel like posting in French today?
From 4 years ago, here's the unbearable Blimpishness of Instapundit:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/oct/28/uselections2004.usa4
Explaining the 'Anglosphere'
Glenn Reynolds
Thursday 28 October 2004I think it's worth taking a moment to note the importance of the Anglosphere in today's world [...]
[...] This term, which can be defined briefly as the set of English-speaking, Common Law nations, implies far more than merely the sum of all persons who employ English as a first or second language. To be part of the Anglosphere requires adherence to the fundamental customs and values that form the core of English-speaking cultures. [...]
[...] Persons or communities who happen to communicate or do business in English are not necessarily part of the Anglosphere, unless their cultural values have also been shaped by those values of the historical English-speaking civilisation. [...]
[...] This is, of course, the reason why Tony Blair and John Howard wield such influence, while Chirac can barely get his calls returned.
As Mark Steyn observes:
"Howard's a more consequential figure in world affairs these days than Chirac. Indeed, he's a transformative figure. I know this, because my nation has been on the other end of the transformation. I'm Canadian and, for those who remember when the Royal Canadian Navy was once the third largest surface fleet in the world, it's sobering to hear Australia spoken of as the third pillar of the Anglosphere.
"Under Howard, Australia is a player while Canada is a global irrelevance."
[...] the root source of anti-Americanism in the world lies in the deep-rooted anti-modern tradition of Continental Europe. [...]
[...] the Anglosphere has been far more open to progress and change than, say, the Francosphere [...]
- - Glenn Reynolds, 10/28/2004
* * * * *
President Bush, today:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2009/01/20090113-7.html
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
January 13, 2009President Bush Honors Presidential Medal of Freedom Recipients
East Room
1:07 P.M. ESTTHE PRESIDENT: [...] Tony Blair's entire career is defined by his devotion to democratic values and human dignity. [...]
[...] John Howard of Australia [...] won the respect of leaders around the world for his commitment to free markets, cooperation, and the peaceful resolution of differences. [...]
- - President Bush, 01/13/2009
Pow wow as mensch of the day.
We can't win. I think maybe she (beth) thinks you are too nice to the Zionists, and I am not nice enough, or maybe it's the other way 'round, I can't tell.
Pow-wow a fine choice.
We have a winner!
link at sig
My wife is out, no doubt dancing on tables at the local honky-tonk or attending some kind of wimmin's group.
And I will go to bed with Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr's "The Age of Jackson"
Good night, and thanks to all who responded to me.
I'm living for the twentieth of January.
I'll tell you why Sartre represents an existential threat to Israel. It's 'cause he wrote Les jews sont faits!
with some non-information about Gaza
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/13/AR2009011303372.html
Bob Woodward is reporting that Susan J. Crawford (Convening Authority for the Office of Military Commissions) has found that Mohammed al Qahtani was tortured by the U.S. military, and that is why she did not forward his case for prosecution.
The top Bush administration official in charge of deciding whether to bring Guantanamo Bay detainees to trial has concluded that the U.S. military tortured a Saudi national who allegedly planned to participate in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, interrogating him with techniques that included sustained isolation, sleep deprivation, nudity and prolonged exposure to cold, leaving him in a "life-threatening condition."
"We tortured [Mohammed al-]Qahtani," said Susan J. Crawford, in her first interview since being named convening authority of military commissions by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates in February 2007. "His treatment met the legal definition of torture. And that's why I did not refer the case" for prosecution.
Somehow she doesn't see that she has an obligation to forward the names of those responsible to the Justice Department for prosecution?
Crawford, 61, said the combination of the interrogation techniques, their duration and the impact on Qahtani's health led to her conclusion. "The techniques they used were all authorized, but the manner in which they applied them was overly aggressive and too persistent. . . . You think of torture, you think of some horrendous physical act done to an individual. This was not any one particular act; this was just a combination of things that had a medical impact on him, that hurt his health. It was abusive and uncalled for. And coercive. Clearly coercive. It was that medical impact that pushed me over the edge" to call it torture, she said.
Yeah, that and the feeling that if she didn't quickly align herself with the good guys, when Philippe Sands and the rest of the QC types decide to press for charges, she in deep doo doo. I must say, there are people involved in all this I truly wish weren't, but at this point, I don't see how anyone who didn't defy the process (like Frakt, Morris, Swift, Vandeveld, Diaz,...etc.) stands to get out of spending time under oath answering questions. Obviously, findings of torture are in the future as well as in the past, and it isn't looking backward when you see them coming in the windshield and not going in the rearview mirror.
Okay, once again the picture has changed. We now have a formal complaint of torture, informal admissions of torture, and a formal legal finding of torture by a person invested with judicial authority by an act of Congress. Mr. Obama, by treaty, should have no choice on the investigation, if his Justice Department knows how to read plain English. Major Frakt made an allegation of CIDT in uniform on camera, too.
Anyone want to bet we get another statement from somebody? Like maybe Holder or Johnsen? Or maybe it's Gregory Craig's job to tell PEBO whether or not he still has a choice on investigations? Donald Rumsfeld ordered the techniques on Qahtani. How can he not be investigated given this finding? And still claim 18 U.S.C. ยง 2340 fulfills our obligations under the treaty? Glenn? DCLaw1? anybody know?
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
