September 10, 2006
The Path To 9/11 Clips You're Not Supposed To See
Go and see them now, before the anti-free speech crazies find out and crash the site.
Update: Betsy Newmark explains why it matters.
Think for a moment about the concerted action by Democrats, their lawyers, former White House operatives, Bill Clinton, sympathetic historians, and lefty bloggers to stop this show. Remember that this was the same crowd that was full of praise of for Fahrenheit 9/11 for crystallizing their opposition to George Bush. Accuracy and versimilitude didn't bother them then. And they weren't saying a word about 60 Minutes "fake but accurate" story on Bush's National Guard service. Now, ask yourself. If this crowd were to control the White House, how many more of these attempts to stifle any criticism of them would we be seeing? Think of how much has been aired during Bush's tenure, even a movie depicting him being assassinated and more denials of civil liberties gets made without Bush's White House unleashing its lawyers. But, for this thing, the Democrats go to the mattresses. Are they perhaps modeling for us what their response would be to further criticism if they should gain control of the White House - or even of Congress? Don't forget those not-so-veiled threats to ABC's license. Ponder that chill wind.
Exactly. These are the anti-free speech crazies I'm talking about.
h/t Michelle Malkin
Posted by: annika at
08:38 AM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 239 words, total size 2 kb.
1
You can tell the that ABC took dramatic license with this film.
The scene where the distraught woman accusing the cowardly members of the NSA of murder could not have happened.
The Clintons would never allow a person with a conscience to work at the White House.
Posted by: Jake at September 10, 2006 09:52 AM (r/5D/)
2
Anti-free speech crazies?
I am sure my comments mean nothing to you. You just aren't smart enough to realize that you are allowing yourself to be manipulated. A shame.
The reason their are objections to this movie is due to how the film is a huge multi-million dollar right-wing propaganda effort. Like you, most American's are not well informed and will walk away from seeing that movie with the very incorrect belief that Clinton is primarily culpable and Bush did no wrong - which is just not true.
When the time comes for ignorant Americans - which includes you BTW - to pay the price for all this stupidity and blind belief, please remember my words. I am certain you are too thick headed to pay them much head today.
A little under 70 years ago, people like you were standing on the streets of Berlin, waving little flags - blindly accepting what their leaders told them. You are no different.
Posted by: Barney at September 10, 2006 08:13 PM (Lx+Sm)
3
Barney:
Where were you when Michael Moore was selling his revisionist history?
You liberals are all alike; ready to slam anything that smacks of conservative, true or not, but unready to stand up to criticize the liberal lies that are spewed daily.
That is called hypocrisy; the best word in the world to describe the pseudo liberal holier than thou assholes that inhabit the world and the blogisphere.
Go preach somewhere else. We've got your number around here.
Posted by: shelly at September 10, 2006 08:55 PM (ZGpMS)
4
"Like you, most American's are not well informed and will walk away from seeing that movie with the very incorrect belief that Clinton is primarily culpable and Bush did no wrong - which is just not true."
Barney, you are an idiot. You haven't seen the film, yet you are willing to pass judgment. If you had seen the film, you'd know that Bush gets hammered - along with The Pervert. Save your propoganda.
So, when did the Dems send out the post to its sheep telling you all to hit up the blogs and let people know how this film was nothing but a "a huge multi-million dollar right-wing propaganda effort."?
And 70 years ago, dipshit, it was people like us willing to fight Nazi's. It was people like you who wanted to appease them and then go join Stalin's communist party.
So, do me a big favor and go blow yourself and the rest of your left-wing nancy boys.
Posted by: Blu at September 10, 2006 09:34 PM (TVuWZ)
5
Dear Barney,
The bologna is in the nest.
The pastrami is recyclable.
I only say this in jest,
cuz the dickcheese you will gobble.
Love,
Spanky
Posted by: Spanky at September 10, 2006 10:42 PM (dFOlH)
6
Dear Barney, you fucking purple dinosaur. Get yourself two history degrees then pop off. And learn how to fucking spell you idiot.
Posted by: annika at September 10, 2006 10:53 PM (qQD4Q)
7
Heh now, I LOVE to hear from meth addicts. They're so... imaginative.
Posted by: Casca at September 10, 2006 10:54 PM (2gORp)
8
Its like Rush was saying today, you couldn't paint a starker contrast than Bush warning the NYT not to run a story because it would cost lives, versus Clinton et al warning not to run a story because it would make them look bad.
Posted by: Scof at September 11, 2006 02:02 PM (a3fqn)
9
Hey Barn,
Did you ask Aint Bea or Andy if you could use their computer? Fuckin' Tard.
Posted by: tony at September 12, 2006 07:27 AM (/ccf+)
10
Damn... I'm sorry I missed this thread when it was fresh, I could've gotten my kick in while Barney F****n' Fife was still conscious.
But, why beat a moron when he's down? He'll take himself out of the gene pool by just opening his mouth and talking. Zero effort on our part.
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at September 13, 2006 03:31 PM (xHyDY)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 09, 2006
Saturday Sports Questions
1. Troy Smith and Colt McCoy are some great quarterback names. How could either of those guys play any other position?
2. If USC goes to number 2 this week, will we see a repeat of the great Casca/Shelly comments debate of 2005?
3. How many times did you say "shutup Musburger" during tonight's game?
4. Maria Sharapova is awesome. I know, that's not a question, but she is.
5. Penn State looked fugly today. Weren't they number three last year?
6. How will Emmit do this season? With Cheryl coaching him, I say he'll do better than Jerry.
Posted by: annika at
08:51 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 105 words, total size 1 kb.
1
1 - Troy Smith is kinda generic, I could see him playing anywhere. Colt McCoy would make a great running back (he'd be a workhorse).
2 - probably
3 - didn't see the game, but it probably would have made for a great drinking game had I seen it
4 - yes, yes she is
5 - they lost their quarterback, and ND is flat out better. Unfortunately, I didn't get to see this game either (I was at a first birthday party for a cousin)
6 - huh?
Posted by: KG at September 09, 2006 09:16 PM (AC0TE)
2
Well, the big game ended up pretty much as I suspected Colt is an up and coming QB but we have to remember that just last year he was in High school, and that made a big difference.
Now the big game will be Notre Dame VRs Ohio State in just a few weeks. As usual, USC cruises without any real opponants. Look for the game between LSU and Tennesee, whoever comes out of that one alive might be the favorite to go to the big game.
Posted by: kyle8 at September 09, 2006 09:31 PM (s80U7)
3
There are no "real opponents" for USC to play in the PAC 10 this year, or most years. But Cal always give us trouble in Strawberry Canyon, and we are in the Coliseum this year for the Golden Bears, who, incidentally found their game yesterday, a week late.
If you think Notre Dame is ever a "cruise", than you aren't much of a fan; fortunately, Touchdown Jesus will not see the likes of us this year, as we are home to them as well. But the Catholics are everywhere, they have their share of rooters in LA, believe me. I live with one.
Finally, UCLA is never a cruise. A good season is when we beat either UCLA or Notre Dame; a great season is when we beat both. The rest of the teams are usually just warm ups, although Cal can be tough to beat at home, as I said above. We've played in the Rose Bowl so often, it is just like home anyway, and our fans fill it up by buying out the UCLA kids' tickets.
Finally, USC will play OSU in the National Championship Game, which I believe is in Tempe this year at Sun Devil Stadium. OSU is the real thing this year; Woody was rolling in his grave as they passed a lot, but their D definitely shut down Texas, as Dick Cheney would say "Big Time".
USC's D is the fastest and biggest we've had in the Carroll era. But it is young and untested, really.
By the time we get to Tempe, we'll be ready for the Nutmegs. Will they be ready for us, is the question?
Posted by: shelly at September 10, 2006 12:42 AM (ZGpMS)
4
Heh, I'd have been here earlier, but I have a woman who expects hot sex on a Sunday morning.
1. I'll stipulate to that.
2. I'll stipulate to that.
3. Heh, THREE times, NO SHIT! And, it was STFU Mburger! I've almost learned to tune him out. But in the old boys defense, he's no Keith Jackass, whom I'd like to physically hurt.
4. Russian chicks usually are.
5. Last season was a fluke, Akron almost had their ass last week, and worth mentioning Akron beat NC State with a fabulously coached last minute score with no time left on the clock yesterday.
6. From the cut I saw, think Grandmaster P.
Heh Kyle, what's all this shit about "he was a high school QB last year"? That fucking horse has been going to camps and clinics with his high school coach dad for twenty years! He took shots from the OSU pass rush and rolled right back. Give a little love where it's deserved. Ohio State reloaded. If you think that Jim Tressel is going to show up without a defense, then you haven't been paying attention. He's all about defense, offense is the icing! Mack Brown was out-coached yesterday.
Posted by: Casca at September 10, 2006 09:35 AM (2gORp)
5
For the record, ND doesn't play the Buckeyes this year. I think they got enough last year. Still the best football game I ever attended was the 1985 ND USC game in the Coliseum. It was cold and pouring rain in November, and by halftime the only people left in the stands were about 5000 crazy Catholics screaming for the domers. It was a slugfest in the mud, and USC lost. At the end of the game, we were all down at the tunnel screaming for ND as they came off the field covered with mud.
When I go to the ND website, they say the score was something outrageous, but I recall them winning 5 to 3 on a safety. It was one of Gerry Faust's few bright moments.
Another item worth remembering, when Ohio State beat USC for the National Championship in 1968, OJ came to the OSU locker room, and told the Buckeyes that they were the greatest team that he'd ever seen. So much for OJ not having any class.
Posted by: Casca at September 10, 2006 10:35 AM (2gORp)
6
1. Agreed, Colt is slightly better given he has the perfect name to play QB in Texas.
2. I have no idea. But a undefeated ND vs. an undefeated USC would be awesome.
3. Watched in a bar, didn't hear him.
4. Yes.
5. That game was not the repeat of the 1992 snow bowl.
6. No Clue.
Posted by: the Pirate at September 10, 2006 01:56 PM (Rg0+S)
7
What an amazing woman
Posted by: Scof at September 11, 2006 02:03 PM (a3fqn)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
9/11 Film Controversy
I don't get this stupid controversy about
The Path to 9/11. Democrats are thrashing about like a
T-1000 in a vat of molten steel. What's the problem?
Is the movie defamatory? If it is then file a lawsuit. They might have a little trouble with the malice requirement, but that's one remedy.
It seems to me that the only objections Democrats have raised are that it's allegedly misleading, innacurate, and fictional. The truth is, they don't like the way it portrays Clinton. So fucking what. Since when have ex-presidents been immune from criticism? If they don't like it, why don't they do their own movie about how bad Bush is?
Oh that's right, they already did. It won the Palme d'Or.
And another thing. Isn't it government censorship when a bunch of Senators and Congressmen threaten ABC's license if they don't pull a tv show because of its political content? Isn't that prior restraint?
The DNC blog has a picture of a stack of 120,000 petitions they've printed. What they don't mention is that they're unsigned, but the picture is supposed to be impressive. I'm impressed that they think there are enough lemmings out there who care about a movie they haven't even seen yet.
And Daily Kos is now calling ABC, "GOP-TV." That is the funniest thing of all. Makes you wonder if they've ever watched ABC News. Would that it were true, it might take some of the heat off of Fox News.
A Kos writer also made the logically insupportable assertion the she "despise[d] censorship" and was in favor of "the free expression of even the most foul and erroneous ideas" except in cases when the speaker (in this case ABC) cannot be expected to "present a factual rebuttal" of its own speech.
By the same logic, Farenheit 9/11, a film that has made hundreds of millions of dollars to date, should never have been released unless Michael Moore also did a follow up film rebutting the lies in his original movie.
Jefferson and Madison would certainly have raised an eyebrow at that one.
Update: Kevin Kim have best comment.
I first read and thnk Bill Clinnton stuipd because is drama like "JFK" by Oliber Rock. "Is ONLY DRAMA BILL AND RELAX! Moreovering, you SUCK Monnica Lunski DIK is INCONTROVERTIBALLY FACT! YOU ONLY YOU!" I shoutted at moni tor.
Clik here to see.
Posted by: annika at
10:13 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 400 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Jefferson and Madison probably would have raised an eyebrow, and probably Adams and Hamilton also, but some of the other Federalists might not have.
Posted by: Ontario Emperor at September 09, 2006 11:25 AM (JCZIU)
2
There have been a number of books and hundreds of articles written over the years how Clinton was asleep at the switch when it came to terrorism.
What is ironic about this Demo-meltdown is that all of that documentation has been forgotten by most people. Not any more-all that material will be dredged up and put back into public view. Maybe we will have the debate that should have taken place in the 1990s.
Posted by: Jake at September 09, 2006 11:40 AM (r/5D/)
3
Jake, would a debate truly have taken place in the 1990s? Perhaps I was asleep at the wheel also, but the only serious debate that I remember about terrorism at the time regarded the initial false accusations that the Oklahoma City bombing had been masterminded by Muslim extremists. I can't picture a climate in which 1990s America would have opted for greater anti-terrorist protections. Frankly, even 2000s America can't stomach significant anti-terrorist protections.
P.S. I thought more about the Alien and Sedition Acts and related issues, and went off on a tangent
here.
Posted by: Ontario Emperor at September 09, 2006 12:02 PM (JCZIU)
4
Emperor:
They did not have blogs in those days so a debate was not possible. MSM was suppressing most terrorism stories and experts, who were warning us, had no public forum.
Plus the Republicans were too chicken to stand up to Clinton. There were no blogs to kick them in the ass. For instance:
In 1996, DaschleÂ’s wife (as head of the FAA) was ordered by the Republican Congress to come up with a list of banned items that the airport security people should search for. The Clintonistas ignored that order. The Republicans said nothing.
In 1996, the Republican Congress ordered the INS to create a computerized system for tracking the entry and exits of all visitors to the US. The Clintonistas ignored that order. The Republicans said nothing.
Posted by: Jake at September 09, 2006 01:07 PM (r/5D/)
5
Ahhhhh, they're being weighed by the judgment of history, and being found wanting.
Posted by: Casca at September 09, 2006 02:20 PM (2gORp)
6
ABC's docu-drama..."The Pathway To 9/11"
It's only the truth
It's only our national security
It's only our fate and lives
It's only a rationalization away
To produce something completely contrived
How about it
Are you going to change the script
Are you going to bend over and cave in
Are you going to fold to the manipulations
Of the Clinton Political pressure and spin
Neils
9:19 pm
09/09/2006
*
my comment to ABC
about their docu-drama
"The Path to 9/11"
*
transcribed this time
10:00 pm
09/09/2006
*
here's the link to ABC's feed back department:
http://abc.go.com/site/contactus.html
N....again
Posted by: neilsthepoet at September 09, 2006 08:01 PM (aBxFS)
7
Maybe it's me and I'm not remembering this correctly because I drink a lot, but didn't the GOP make the very same noises not too very long ago about a TV movie about President Reagan?
Posted by: skippystalin at September 09, 2006 10:20 PM (ohSFF)
8
Bery thank Annika is good to shouting out.^0^
Kevin
Posted by: Kevin Kim at September 10, 2006 12:09 AM (1PcL3)
9
It's time to come home. You've had one too many bottles of soju.
Posted by: Casca at September 10, 2006 02:08 PM (2gORp)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 08, 2006
And The 2006 Annika's Jeopardy Champion Is...
Tonight was the finale of the real Jeopardy's Tournament of Champions. Well, here at Annika's Journal we've just concluded our own contest, and I'm about to announce the new 2006 Annika's Jeopardy Champion.
The Final Jeopardy clue was very hard, I know. I test googled it first, just to make sure. The category was "Heroes," and the clue was: "A famous historian once described him thusly: 'He is incapable of violent action, he never raises his voice.' Yet today he is recognized as one of the Greatest Generation's great leaders."
The famous historian was Stephen E. Ambrose, if that helps any. The correct response will be revealed in the extended entry.
Let's see how the contestants did, shall we?
more...
Posted by: annika at
09:14 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 766 words, total size 6 kb.
1
Dammit! I was almost positive it was Dick Winters, but I didn't have any of my Ambrose books with me to be certain. JPII seemed like the safer guess.
Winters is truly a great man. You get the sense from reading Band of Brothers or D-Day that any of the men of E Company would still, today, lay down their lives for him if he asked them to.
Thanks for doing this, Annie. It was a blast.
Posted by: Leif at September 08, 2006 11:18 PM (MKlM3)
2
Dayum. Congratulations, Leif, well played!
Annie,
Those 'toons of each of us are da bomb!
Posted by: Tuning Spork at September 09, 2006 12:21 AM (KPlUg)
3
So, those of us who don't have the time to watch 20 hours of TV or read Ambrose are screwed?
Jeez, Annie, ya gotta admit that was a real far out choice.
Thanks for doing this, but next year, in the words of the immortal Darryl F. Zanuck, "Include me out".
Posted by: shelly at September 09, 2006 02:17 AM (ZGpMS)
4
Bah! Percy, jus' be glad you weren't pictured clutching a McTencile. :p
Posted by: Tuning Spork at September 09, 2006 05:36 AM (KPlUg)
5
Thanks for the Jeopardy contest Annie. Also the cartoon made me look a bit less foolish than I feel. As ususual you rule...
Posted by: Drake Steel at September 09, 2006 10:36 AM (ZnkB7)
6
annika, it was a lot of fun, and I can't wait for next year's edition...if there is a next year's edition.
BTW, all ye need do is ask, and I could have given you a much better pic of a rat.
Posted by: Victor at September 09, 2006 11:44 AM (l+W8Z)
7
Forgot to mention: That pic of Blu makes him look like he's hung like a brontosaurus.
(And all this time, I thought Sgt. Rock led Easy Company. Guess that's what I get for learning about WWII from comic books.)
Posted by: Victor at September 09, 2006 11:47 AM (l+W8Z)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
The Jeopardy Champion!
...will be announced later this afternoon!
Posted by: annika at
07:55 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 12 words, total size 1 kb.
1
No, I'm sorry, that's the wrong answer.
The correct answer is.............
Drumroll
Who gives a fuck!
Posted by: Casca at September 08, 2006 08:58 AM (Z2ndo)
2
Did you ever stop to think that might be the grand prize?
Posted by: shelly at September 08, 2006 10:43 AM (ZGpMS)
3
That's what 400+ of Casca's, er, fantasies have been based on.
Posted by: will at September 08, 2006 02:28 PM (h7Ciu)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
I'm Shoe Blogging At 6MB
Check out
Laurie Dhue's shoes at 6MB.
Posted by: annika at
07:30 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 17 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Laurie Dhue is hot, guess she's the only way people will watch Gerlado is if her legs and nice shoes are in the shot.
Posted by: Scof at September 08, 2006 09:33 AM (a3fqn)
2
Shoeblogging is what you do best, annika.
Posted by: Victor at September 08, 2006 10:39 AM (L3qPK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Happy 40th Star Trek!
[Just havin' a little fun at Shatner's expense. He knows I love him.]
Today is the 40th anniversary of Star Trek's first broadcast. From the official website:
On the evening of the 8th of September, following Daniel Boone, this new NBC show premiered with an episode called "The Man Trap." The angle of the story was different, to say the least: It was a love story with a sci-fi twist, borne of a relationship from the doctor's past, featuring a monster that, in the end, just wanted to live. It was moving, tragic and anything but cheesy. The viewers — at least the ones who were paying attention — were hooked.
This show proved it had something different. It had a unique life that would go on to exist beyond expectation. It stood outside of time, as it tapped into universal themes and epic struggles, and put the cosmos on notice. Things have changed! Primetime on NBC eventually proved that this was no place for something so big, so broad in scope. This three-season show, after all, would go on to spawn four live-action spin-offs, an animated series, ten movies and counting, plus a licensing empire that, to this day, embraces books, videos, exhibits and assorted merchandise.
Like other cultural, artistic or philosophical phemonena (think Mozart, Van Gogh or Jesus) this new show was largely unappreciated in its own time and only later would be seen as what it is today, a world-wide, cultural juggernaut. Thanks to a form of TV recycling called syndication, the show became a hit to generations of young, impressionable kids, including many future scientists, astronauts and actors. What's ironic is that by today's ratings standards, it would have been a hit in its original run. But back then, with only three major networks, it didn't quite pull its weight. It was only with the need to syndicate TV programs, to get more than one bite out of the entertainment cherry, did this show become what it was all along. It just needed a form of resurrection; the people who had heard of it from their parents, teachers, friends or older siblings tuned in after school, prior to the dinner hour. It turned out to be the perfect time to hit this new, fresh audience and the show became lodged in the collective minds of a nation.
Indeed it has.
Happy birthday Star Trek. And thanks Gene, wherever you are.
Update: Check out the Star Trek 40th Anniversary Carnival at A Mama's Rant. Submit your own post, if you got one.
Posted by: annika at
01:24 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 418 words, total size 3 kb.
1
William Shatner on space travel:
The Star Trek legend was offered a ticket by Richard Branson onboard Virgin Galactic's first passenger flight in 2008. But Shatner, fearing he would be ill in space or the starship would crash, ironically revealed he's terrified of space travel.
The 75-year-old actor said: "I'm interested in man's march into the unknown but to vomit in space is not my idea of a good time. Neither is a fiery crash with the vomit hovering over me."
Classic.
Kevin
Posted by: Kevin Kim at September 08, 2006 04:52 AM (TDwc6)
2
I would be honored if you joined your Star Trek 40th Anniversary post to my Star Trek blog carnival at http://mamarant.blogs.com/a_mamas_rant/2006/09/to_boldly_go_wh.html.
If you wish to add a submission, just click "submit post" on the blog carnival badge.
Thanks.
Posted by: Anne-Marie at September 08, 2006 10:30 AM (GHtN0)
Posted by: annika at September 08, 2006 10:36 AM (zAOEU)
4
I can't lie: I've loved Star Trek since I can remember watching TV. If that establishes me firmly in the nerd camp, then so be it.
Live long and prosper!
Posted by: Blu at September 08, 2006 11:22 AM (TVuWZ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 07, 2006
Kiki Is Still Crappy
I took time out from watching Miami vs. Pittsburgh to catch Kiki Couric doing the nightly news. I missed her the last two nights. Tonight, I made it to exactly eight minutes before switching back to the game in anger. I had no idea how bad the CBS Nightly News had gotten. It's been years since I watched any evening news show. The first two segments of Kiki's broadcast tonight were almost total fiction. It was laughable, except for the fact that many thousands of people were watching who had no idea they were being lied to.
I don't blame Kiki so much. She's more of a master of ceremonies for this contemporary version of the Liars Club. Besides her poor posture and crooked mouth (which I never noticed before), she did a serviceable job. I find her manner more pleasant than Dan Rather's, but that ass surely didn't set the bar too high for his successor.
Kiki's show started with Jim Axelrod asserting quite unequivocally that the latest tape from Bin Laden contradicts the President's message in his recent War On Terror speeches. Anyone with a brain can see that just the opposite is true. In fact, the al Qaeda video features terrorists that are now in U.S. custody, whose interrogation led to the arrests of further terrorists. Bin Laden's video not only disproves beyond any doubt the stupid "inside job" conspiracy theories, but it shows how we've made a big dent in al Qaeda's leadership.
The second segment promised to show how support for the Iraq War has fallen among conservatives of the Bible Belt. They then showed only three people, two of whom said that they support the war! [Actually, the third guy supports the war too! See update, infra.] Now, I'm not trying to claim that support for the war has not fallen. It obviously has, but this joke of a news segment proved nothing of the sort. The one guy who said he was going to vote for Democrats was cut off just as he was about to state the reason why. No doubt his reasons had more to do with immigration and runaway spending, but CBS didn't want their audience to know that.
In the next segment, both Kiki and the reporter blatantly repeated the lie that Valerie Plame was an undercover agent. I guess they believe that old totalitarian principle about repeating the big lie often enough. Then followed an interview with Armitage, which nearly made me keel over with disinterest. This story is so irrelevant, why doesn't CBS just move on dot org?
That was when I turned it off, and to my dismay learned that I had missed a touchdown.
Update: The guy who said he was voting democratic in the second segment I mentioned above was retired Colonel Jim Van Riper, USMC. The unedited interview is here. I was wrong about his reasons for planning to vote Democratic. But CBS, very sneakily, omitted from their televised soundbites any of Colonel Van Riper's very strong pro-Iraq War statements. His objection is not that we're in Iraq, he just wants to win and he doesn't think the administration is getting the job done.
While I think it's misguided to think a Democratic Congress will do anything but weaken America, I can totally understand Col. Van Riper's frustration. We all want to win. Does anybody really think that Bush's poll numbers would be where they are now if we had already succeeded in Iraq? For most Americans — and this is the dirty little secret CBS and the elite media don't want you to know — the issue is victory, not whether the war was legal or right or wrong or unilateral or any of the other Michael Moore objections. If we had won already, nobody would be complaining. Wanting to win is patriotic, as is frustration that we might not be winning.
Posted by: annika at
07:06 PM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 647 words, total size 4 kb.
1
"support for the Iraq War has fallen among conservatives of the Bible Belt."
I don't see how this can't be true, even if you just start counting from last year. And it is overwhelmingly true if you start at "Mission Accomplished".
Posted by: will at September 07, 2006 07:11 PM (h7Ciu)
2
Never trade a touchdown for the newstwat. I, however, I'm bouncing back and forth between football and Federer/Blake, which is getting ugly.
Posted by: Preston Taylor Holmes at September 07, 2006 07:24 PM (I1Jw8)
3
Never leave a good football game for Kiki!
Posted by: Greta at September 07, 2006 07:49 PM (Cbtbf)
Posted by: Tuning Spork at September 07, 2006 08:40 PM (znU0k)
5
All sane people have long ago stopped watching network news.
A study showed that people who regularly watch network news are more neurotic, more pessimistic and more fearful for their future.
Now you know why that study is true.
Posted by: Jake at September 07, 2006 08:49 PM (r/5D/)
6
All that in eight minutes! Wow, she moves fast.
Posted by: Blake at September 07, 2006 09:23 PM (1B44J)
7
I recently found myself
quoting from John Kerry's comments about killing Osama bin Laden during the 2004 presidential debates. Doubt he would have done it, but it sounded good.
Posted by: Ontario Emperor at September 07, 2006 11:47 PM (Wotgj)
8
Jim, eh, I worked for his brother Paul many moons ago. Paul, or PK Van Riper is one of the Generals who has come our against Dubyah. Most of us thought he was crazy twenty-years ago.
Posted by: Casca at September 08, 2006 08:35 AM (Z2ndo)
9
We have the same viewing habits. I also tuned in to Katie, and, as the bullshit began piling higher and higher, my thoughts were:
"This is unbelievable! This is one lie, after another misrepresentation, after another lie, again and again! Is anyone I know seeing this? I would love for someone I know to see it, so they could verify what I am watching."
So, I'm really happy you saw it, and documented it, so I can show my friends. The clash of realities - as they said the Bin Laden tape was bad for Bush, and as they emoted that Republicans were turning against the war, all the while showing Republican after Republican saying they were in favor of OIF - was breaking my brain. Dissonance.
Posted by: gcotharn at September 08, 2006 09:06 AM (Rhyyb)
10
Casca, you ancient fuck, I went to The Basic School with Paul's *SON*.
Posted by: Matt at September 08, 2006 11:39 AM (10G2T)
11
Of course I'm ancient! Casca II graduates from IOC in two weeks.
Posted by: Casca at September 08, 2006 01:32 PM (2gORp)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Future Headline
"Dems Celebrate End of Bush Security Measures"
Have you seen the America Weakly campaign ads?
If not, start here, with a satirical look at what a Democratic Congress will do to national security. Or maybe not so satirical.
A Democratic Congress will be bad, no question about it. They have no plan except opposition to Bush, and a desire to embarrass Republicans. Since they don't hold the executive branch, these goals will have to be furthered by de-funding, and endless investigations.
I think 9/11 might have been an unintended result of Ken Starr's crusade to nail the President on a "process crime." If so, what new tragedy might occur while President Bush is occupied by the latest round of political vendettas, investigations and impeachment proceedings?
Posted by: annika at
08:18 AM
| Comments (25)
| Add Comment
Post contains 129 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Annika,
You believe that tragedies are prevented by Bush's vigilance and attention to the details of the national security program? You know I live in Brooklyn and right outside my window there is a large stone and cable edifice I could offer you if Blu's offer is not accepted.
If W were to leave government tomorrow and not tell anybody and President Logan took over with a different makeup job, nobody would notice. He contributes nothing except bad diction, poorly rehearsed hand and arm motions, sophomoric intensification of his speech to make it sound more earnest, and a weak intellectual grasp of the issues that preempt his ability to talk off the cuff about anything. Remember the blubbering nonsense he kept spewing when he tried to explain the need for changes to Social Security?
Or how about last week when he hoped nobody would notice when he harped on the word "ordered"? Declaring that although Chaney repeatedly said their was indisputable evidence connecting Saddam to 911, he never used the phrase "Saddam ordered 911", as a defense against the charge of deception? Who do these people think they are talking to? the kindergarteners that had to sit while the dumfounded and irrelevant President sat contemplating how irrelevant he was to the leadership of the nation even as it was attacked.
He is still irrelevant and if the committees start REAL investigations after the leadership changes, the nation will be the richer for it and hardly less safe.
Posted by: strawman at September 07, 2006 09:45 AM (tuy00)
2
Well, you don't like Bush. But my point is, I didn't like Clinton. I think the lesson of the Lewinsky scandal is, a president who is fighting impeachment is a distracted president. Now, before my Republican friends go all nuts, yes, I know Clinton's judgment on matters of National Security was flawed, even when he wasn't distracted (c.f. Jamie Gorelick?! et al.). But the man might have been able to see the light if he wasn't continually fighting for his life over shit that FDR and JFK etc. did with impunity.
Posted by: annika at September 07, 2006 09:59 AM (zAOEU)
3
Annika,
Yes, we have discussed the damage the impeachment proceedings had on ClintonÂ’s presidency and I agree. I also think that Clinton had the ability to engage in and lead the process of government whereas, regardless of whether I like W or not (he might be a good drinking buddy or so I'm told) I firmly and objectively believe W is not part of the process. I look in his eyes, I listen to the childish complexity and vocabulary of his speech, his religious faith (more childish mythology) his wisecracking good old boy frat house demeanor in his unguarded moments, his professed anti-intellectualism, and I come away convinced his presidential qualities extend no further than his suit and haircut and that America is ruled by fear.
Posted by: strawman at September 07, 2006 10:15 AM (tuy00)
4
"I also think that Clinton had the ability to engage in and lead the process of government whereas, regardless of whether I like W or not (he might be a good drinking buddy or so I'm told) I firmly and objectively believe W is not part of the process."
Oh yeah, Clinton was a fucking genius. Why? Because he was a good public speaker. Clinton was a disaster of a President. He crippled our military and was responsible for 9/11 and for ignoring the Islamo-fascist threat. Now, Ronald Reagan was also a great public speaker. In fact, Reagan was much, much better than The Pervert. But, I'm betting you don't think Reagan was a genius, right Straw? In fact, if Al Gore had invented the internet in the 80's instead of the 90's and this sort of forum existed, you'd be writing about how stupid Reagan was and about how communism wasn't really a threat, and how Reagan was a puppet, and how our actions were actually making things worse in the world, and how America was the problem not the communist butchers. See the pattern, Straw? You are always wrong about important issues. Bush isn't dumb. Not even close to being dumb. Like Reagan he sees and understands the bigger picture; and unlike Clinton, Kerry, Carter (name your favorite left-wing idiot), he understands the difference between right and wrong. The job of the President is to set policy at a very high level - to provide a vision. From what I hear, Clinton and Carter loved to discuss policy at a detailed level. Well, so what? They are two of the worst Presidents we have ever had. While Reagan defeated Communism and Bush will be know in history for being the first to recognize the threat of militant Islam, Clinton will be know as the guy who banged 20-year olds in the White House and Carter will be known as a very inept old man, who liked to build houses.
You just don't like his vision as you are more comfortable with the world view of Chairman Mao, and Castro [insert your favorite commie dictator/murderer].
Posted by: Blu at September 07, 2006 11:10 AM (j8oa6)
5
Blu,
You sure got religion, Blu, no doubt about it. You just don't have an accurate view of history or the tip of your nose.
I don't wih to engage you in the historical bullshit about geniuses and dolts, best or wort presidents, or if Al invented the internet or Ronnie Raygun defeated communism. All water under the bridge (one that may be yours someday).
Fact is you Bush is by all outward appearances an idiot and you, here's the religious part, have faith, (not supported by fact) that he is a bright fella with a strong moral grip and focus on what is right and wrong and not an emotionally crippled alcholic, brow beaten by an unaffectionate overbearing father compounded by being the fuck up in a family of achievers, propped up by an over zealous religious faith, who's shirking and shady past and present are non issues.
You want to do everything but talk about the man and the product of his policies. You want only to place him in the context of those whose self serving portraits you paint then react to. You sound just like the Germans defending Hitler in the early 30's for his vision and strength. His prescience in knowing what caused the hadships in Grmany and who the current threats were. You've swallowed the bullshit from the Goebbles' of this day. (911 on ABC accompied by teachers kit explaining Clinton was the inadvertant architect of 911 and leaving out the "...determined to attack/vacation memo and that Iraq had no part what so ever in 911)
What's the point in talking? You've got your Fuhrer, you have been told what to think, you are happy, now watch your (our) empire crumble as this cabal continues to disrupt the balance of world politics adversely. They are like a man in a hornets nest that thinks flailing will scare the hornets into retreat and future respect.
Posted by: strawman at September 07, 2006 12:02 PM (tuy00)
6
Your premise is fucked. The Clintonistas were/are/and always have been hopelessly self-serving, thus incapable of acting in the interest of the nation.
Dubyah has demonstrated strength of character through sacrifice, and the strength to be unswayed by the wailing and gnashing of teeth, of the chattering classes.
Before he's done, he's going to hang those cocksuckers down in Gitmo. After a fair trial of course.
Posted by: Casca at September 07, 2006 12:03 PM (Z2ndo)
7
Casca,
Explain whose sacrifice? His? I don't see his daughters in fatigues. Yours? Mine?
Posted by: strawman at September 07, 2006 12:06 PM (tuy00)
8
Unlike your communist paradises, we have a volunteer army, Straw. So, whether his daughters wear fatigues is really not terribly germane, now is it?
As for your previous post, I like your very original Bush = Hitler comparison. You come up with that on our own, or did your steal it from Koz et al? The comparison demonstrates both a lack of a moral compass (but then again you are a communist sympathizer so that's expected) and astounding historical ignornace. A mind is terrible thing to waste, Straw. Try college.
Posted by: Blu at September 07, 2006 01:29 PM (j8oa6)
9
"The Clintonistas were/are/and always have been hopelessly self-serving, thus incapable of acting in the interest of the nation."
And that doesn't describe virtually every politician (including those of the Bush ilk)...? Come on, politics hasn't remotely been about statesmanship since probably the mid-nineteenth century (with rarer and rarer exceptions). At this point in the game it's just holding our breath and praying that whatever party-line clone is in power, doesn't step on the wrong land mine (literal or otherwise) and blow the whole country to bits. Really, can you justify putting trust into even one modern politician, and, if so, how? If all you have to go on is the person's *earnest assurance* that he/she cares about you, the citizen... well, the world sure must look pretty all decked out in rose like that.
Posted by: The Law Fairy at September 07, 2006 01:31 PM (XUsiG)
10
It's not 911. It's a date not a telephone number. At least get that much correct in your inane ramblings, strawman.
Posted by: ccs178 (Chris) at September 07, 2006 02:10 PM (B5UVm)
11
CCS178,
Thanks, I didn't know. I knew it had something to do with some sort of emergency and I just guessed 911. So it's what? 9-11 or 9/11 or 9\11. Please Chris just put up a finger 1,2 or 3.
Blu Boy,
I do think its germain. If this conflict is the "most important" of the 21 century and (I have this on good authority) anybody fit and able can join the fray, why aren't the able bodied daughters wearing fatigues? If my dad had told me about the incredible threat to the world , my way of life and the security of my nation Nazism presented and i was of age, you bet I'd join up, just as he did in '42
The Nazi=Bush only nearly as stupid as BinLaden=Hitler speach the dim wit gave earlier in the week.
I suppose Blu, you haven't noticed how the bullshit has been ramping up as the elections near. Fear, fear, and more fear to keep the sheep in their corral.
Posted by: strawman at September 07, 2006 02:44 PM (tuy00)
12
Give it up guys you can't actually have a debate with a left wing dipshit like Straw. You see, no matter what you say he already thinks your stupid, brainwashed, and living in fear.
His insistence that Bush is stupid is just part of his whole life. You see, it makes him feel so much better about himself to be so smart and cool and with it, and we poor plebes just don't get it.
It is comforting for him, except that the idiot Bush has this uncomfortable way of always handing his left wing buddies their ass, Just like that other dunce Reagan used to do.
His is that make believe world where socialism is great, it just has never been tried correctly.
Wars can all be avoided if you only have smart liberals in charge. All people who have any sort of spirituality are the enemy, probably because they trust in something other than omnipotent government. And one day they will be so few of them left, He and his buddies can just round them up and put them into re-education camps.
I'll bet he thinks that Mother Jones and The Nation are the epitome of high-brow reading. He probably thinks that Paul Krugman is the greatest living economist. And He never misses Jon Stewart, or Bill Mahr, (Oh! aren't those guys funny!)
I have known many jackasses like him, all puffed up with their own intellect, but in reality they are all a bit unsure of themselves, that is why they prefer big government over the rough and tumble of the free market.
Posted by: kyle8 at September 07, 2006 03:12 PM (QtKKY)
13
Good job twisting my words, and meaning LF... or is that an example of your ability to reason?
Posted by: Casca at September 07, 2006 03:14 PM (2gORp)
14
Kyle,
FWIW, I have owned and operated a business in the "free Market" for over 30 years. Tell me what you know from your experiences in the "free market?
Posted by: strawman at September 07, 2006 03:19 PM (tuy00)
15
casca... not sure how I'm "twisting" your words... you didn't mean to imply the Clintons are untrustworthy/money-grubbing politicos? If not, my apologies.
Posted by: The Law Fairy at September 07, 2006 04:39 PM (XUsiG)
16
Of course I did, that's the half you got right. However if you see no difference between these two administrations, you're either a fool, or intentionally obtuse.
Posted by: Casca at September 07, 2006 06:32 PM (2gORp)
17
Well there is a third option. You may simply be ignorant of current events, which in this busy world I understand, but don't excuse on the part of the pseudo-intelligent.
Posted by: Casca at September 07, 2006 06:36 PM (2gORp)
18
"You see, no matter what you say he already thinks your stupid, brainwashed, and living in fear."
I'm afraid political debate is like this on both sides, and especially the further one gets away from the center.
"A Democratic Congress will be bad, no question about it."
I can't embrace this opinion, though it may be valid for the potential changes to the causes you support. I'm ready for more balance to our government. If I had my way, 1/3 would be Right Wing, 1/3 would be Moderates/Independents, and 1/3 would be Left Wing. That way, cooler heads would prevail in virtually every situation. It appears we may yet be headed for that mix.
Posted by: will at September 07, 2006 07:22 PM (h7Ciu)
19
The only good thing about the G.O.P. losing a house is that they might finally become limited gov't/fiscal conservatives again. Unfortunately, this would lead to gridlock on national security and foreign policy issues.
Regarding Iraq, the Dems have no real alternatives on how to fight the war and achieve victory there. Between the foreign policy realists and the "to Hell with them" hawks, the only potentially successful options to win, or at least to salvage the effort, are coming from the Right.
Posted by: reagan80 at September 07, 2006 08:00 PM (dFOlH)
20
"The Nazi=Bush only nearly as stupid as BinLaden=Hitler speach the dim wit gave earlier in the week."
Oh really? Bin Laden and Hitler actually shared the same dream of world domination and annihilation of the Jews. I suspect they also share the same views about homosexuals and religious sects (e.g. Jehovah's Witnesses). It's actually quite easy to compare these two in a number of ways. So, no, it is not a stupid comparison. It is rather appropriate. Your Bush = Hitler/Nazi, however, is very, very stupid without a shred of support. Do you have even an inkling of what Nazi Germany was like, Straw? To compare America 2006 to Germany in the 30's and 40's is unworthy of a serious, thinking person.
Posted by: Blu at September 07, 2006 09:30 PM (TVuWZ)
21
Blu,
Please, stop whipping me with the lash of serious and thinking, I just can not abide it any longer.
I do know a great deal, since I have met and been aquainted with many who lived in Germany in the thirties (have you figures out my cohort yet?), as opposed to you who went to college and studied the history second hand. How many hands with numbered forearms have you shaken Blu? How many of your friends parents were guests of Dachau or Thereiesenstadt? A friends father died last week who was an escapee during the war and ran a band of Jewish resistors in the woods of Poland that broke Jews out of camps
It (fascism) didn't happen over night. It is a creeping sort of thing full of rationalizations about how necessary it is to constrict personal freedom to protect and perserve the order and security of the nation. It may not continue to its conclusion in America as it did in Germany, but it surely has opened the back door and is sitting at the kitchen table. Fear is the great annihilator of freedom. And our president and his cabal are oblivious to the trend they have started.
Posted by: strawman at September 08, 2006 06:59 AM (tuy00)
22
Straw,
With the due respect your age and experience grant you, none of what you wrote changes anything. You weren't in Germany during the time-period. You've heard second-hand stories - just like me. You don't like Bush, so you write a lot of silly things to prop up your anger with him. Sometimes it's even interesting stuff that you write. But, again with due respect, it's not serious. It's just the anger of a political Lefty who has a losing streak on important matters of national security. So, you keep pretending America is going the way of Germany circa 1930, and the rest of us will pray that people living in the real world can keep another 9/11 from occuring.
Posted by: Blu at September 08, 2006 08:54 AM (TVuWZ)
23
Clinton had the ability to engage in and lead the process of government..
Straw - my experiences and observations from the Pentagon and NSC through the latter end of the Clinton administration gives me pause on your comment - at least with respect to foreign policy and national security. Clinton had a weak SecDef in Cohen (who basically was building up the networks for his private sector company) and a weak Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. The result was the balance of civilian control tilted dangerously toward the Service Chiefs. In exchange for accepting reduced budgets and force structure, Clinton/Cohen essentially gave those Gen/Adms free rein on how to mold the post-Cold War military. The result was the intellectually bankrupt 97 QDR and resulting force development that was at odds with Clinton's own larger National Security Strategy.
Sandy Berger was as adept as managing the NSC as he was removing documents from the national archives. Madeline Albright did Clinton no real favor as Secretary of State. The initiatives Condi Rice is advocating (see her 18 Jan 06 speech at Georgetown) are ones Albright should have started a decade ago based on Clinton's Security Strategy and foreign policy.
I think Clinton did have the ability to engage, but not the ability to lead. He disadvantaged himself even more with his inability to manage his own libido, especially given his party didn't control the legislative branch.
Annie - I think in some aspects, Clinton did see the light..unfortunately, he couldn't get his cabinet and staff for the most part to realize the vision he had. I think the current President suffers from a similiar, although not quite the same, problem..
Posted by: Col Steve at September 08, 2006 10:01 AM (pj2h7)
24
Steveo, you don't know these guys. Clinton couldn't bring thought to action because he didn't really care. They were only words to him.
Bush on the other hand cares deeply, but has to fight the bureaucracy, the MSM, the D's, AND the enemy. So, I don't hold him to a standard of perfection.
Posted by: Casca at September 08, 2006 01:44 PM (2gORp)
25
Interesting comments.
I have only once or twice in my life seen "the tattoo," and it stopped me short each time. I think one time happened way back when I worked in retail and I was helping an old lady, who up until that point was just another old lady. But then, you catch a glimpse of that number, and wow. It's like you get a lump in your throat and everything changes. Every stranger you meet has their own story, and most of the time you don't get to know what it is. But when you see the tattoo, you suddenly know something about the person, that they've experienced a thing you only studied in school and can never fully understand the way that person standing in front of you does.
We're losing holocaust survivors every day, the same as WWII veterans. I hope someone's writing down their stories too, before they're all gone.
Posted by: annika at September 08, 2006 04:01 PM (qQD4Q)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 06, 2006
The Path To 9/11
The Path To 9/11 starts Sunday Night. I plan to watch it not only because it has been
pissing off all the right people, but also because I want to see how
Sherry Palmer fits into the conspiracy.
Posted by: annika at
10:04 PM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.
1
i think she's sexy, good actress
Posted by: Scof at September 07, 2006 05:57 AM (a3fqn)
2
i think she's sexy, good actress too
Posted by: Scof at September 07, 2006 05:57 AM (a3fqn)
3
Serious people understand that nearly all blame for 9/11 falls on Clinton and his merry band of light weights. (Every time, I see Albright I am reminded that Bill Clinton was responsible handing responsibility of the State Dept to an unqualified and amazingly stupid person.)
Until now, Clinton has successfully used his cronies in the media and government to hide his responsibility. (I doesn't help that Republicans led by Bush are unwilling to play hardball and place blame where it ought.) I'm glad these idiots are getting what the deserve for their inept foreign policy. Next, I'd like to see a mini-series on his admins responsibility for a nuclear N. Korea; or perhaps his fake economic expansion.
Posted by: Blu at September 07, 2006 09:17 AM (j8oa6)
4
Scof, time for your medication. Your second of multiple personalities is coming out again.
Posted by: elmondohummus at September 07, 2006 09:18 AM (xHyDY)
5
"Until now, Clinton has successfully used his cronies in the media and government to hide his responsibility."
They are still hidden in Sandy Berger's undies.
Posted by: reagan80 at September 07, 2006 10:29 AM (dFOlH)
6
It's odd that primarily rightwing commentators/bloggers were the ones who got preview privileges. Does that mean Oliver Stone also accurately portrays world events?
Posted by: will at September 07, 2006 07:28 PM (h7Ciu)
7
Forget Sherry Palmer.
What we REALLY need to worry about is how we're gonna catch Michael Scofield, T-Bag, and the rest of the Fox River 8.
Lastly: Much as I didn't like President Clinton, 9/11 wasn't his FAULT. It was the fault of Mohammed Atta and the rest of the hijackers.
Posted by: fatass the conqueror at September 07, 2006 09:14 PM (TNYfW)
8
Will,
Please provide your proof that mostly conservatives were given preview privledges. It's not true. Both liberals and conservatives viewed the film. The liberals are the only ones upset because somebody finally told the truth about the Clinton administration. Clinton is consumed with his legacy - or what legacy he actually has besides banging interns. You are just hearing the squeaky wheels. The film also takes shot at the Bush admin. But the 9/11 was the result of the 90's and a disinterested President Clinton - not a few months of Bush.
The difference between the Right and the Left is that the Right is willing to admit that Bush wasn't perfect and clearly reacted to 9/11. The Left acts as if The Pervert was on top of things from Day 1 which is quite obviously BS.
Posted by: Blu at September 08, 2006 12:52 AM (TVuWZ)
9
The difference between right and left is that when the left feels slighted by a movie the studios fall all over themselves to keep them happy.
When the right feels slighted, it's up to blogs and talk radio to set the record straight. They get no help from hollywood (that RR movie being the one exception that proves the rule).
Posted by: annika at September 08, 2006 01:35 AM (qQD4Q)
10
Oh, and when the Dems feel slighted by a movie, they
call out the big guns and threaten to pull ABC's license. How's that for free speech fuckazzz!!!
Posted by: annika at September 08, 2006 01:43 AM (qQD4Q)
11
This shouldn't surprise anybody. This is typical of the Stalinist Left. Hmmm, it's also very similar to the control of information in Nazi Germany. This is an example of "fear" - this is the buzz word of the week for Dems - being used in modern America that actually deserves to be compared to Nazi-like tactics.
Good points above Annika. Remember that travesty of a film about the Reagans? I don't recall any Rep Senator sending letters with implicit threats to yank broadcast licenses. This shit is truly Orwellian.
What are the odds of anybody on the Left standing up and calling a spade a spade? Don't hold your breath.
Posted by: Blu at September 08, 2006 01:34 PM (TVuWZ)
12
If people are too out of touch to read the 9/11 Commission report and instead believe what they see in a mini-series, they will probably still vote the way they had before. ABC states, "The Path to 9/11 is a dramatization, not a documentary", so I'll just put this in the Oliver Stone category until I see it for myself and compare it to the 9/11 Commission report.
The writer of the movie is an unabashed conservative named Cyrus Nowrasteh. Last year, Nowrasteh spoke on a panel titled, “Rebels With a Cause: How Conservatives Can Lead Hollywood’s Next Paradigm Shift.” He has described Michael Moore as “an out of control socialist weasel,” and conducted interviews with right-wing websites like FrontPageMag.
The problem isn’t that Nowrasteh is conservative. The problem is that Nowrasteh and ABC are representing “The Path to 9/11" as an unbiased historical drama. Promos for the movie say it is “based on the 9/11 Commission Report.” Nowrasteh claims he “wanted to match the just-the-facts tone of the report,” and describes the project as “an objective telling of the events of 9/11.”
From Sourcewatch:
'Nowrasteh said that he "was provided an incredible amount of research materials and high-level advisors from the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, Diplomatic Security, etc." '
How did he get such access? I wonder how many tax dollars were spent giving him pro-Administration spin. Perhaps because he is a right-wing film producer and the administration knew that they would spin things to attempt to take the heat off GWB.
The movie's account directly contradicts the 9/11 commission report (http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm), however, which states that it was CIA Director George Tenet that called off the operation, which itself never got off the ground:
"Tenet told us that given the recommendation of his chief operations officers, he alone had decided to 'turn off' the operation. He had simply informed Berger, who had not pushed back. BergerÂ’s recollection was similar. He said the plan was never presented to the White House for a decision.
"The CIAÂ’s senior management clearly did not think the plan would work. TenetÂ’s deputy director of operations wrote to Berger a few weeks later that the CIA assessed the tribalsÂ’ ability to capture Bin Ladin and deliver him to U.S. officials as low." [11]
Posted by: will at September 08, 2006 02:46 PM (h7Ciu)
13
"...until I see it for myself and compare it to the 9/11 Commission report."
Good for you, Will. At least, you are willing to see it before passing judgement - unlike most of the Left who hasn't seen it and it passing around misinformation.
Posted by: Blu at September 08, 2006 05:33 PM (TVuWZ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
My Not So Subtle Attempt To Influence The Sidebar Poll
Just my opinion, but I think the answer to "Who's the World's Greatest Australian?" goes without saying.
Exhibit A in the extended entry.
more...
Posted by: annika at
09:47 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 59 words, total size 1 kb.
1
My own AC/DC tribute is
here.
Kevin
Posted by: Kevin Kim at September 07, 2006 09:16 AM (1PcL3)
2
Fuck yeah! Rock on, Annie!
I've got big balls
I've got big balls
They're such big balls
And they're dirty big balls
And he's got big balls
And she's got big balls
But we've got the biggest balls of them all
Posted by: Matt at September 07, 2006 09:50 AM (10G2T)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Final Jeopardy With Annika
Here it is, the Final Jeopardy clue. Players have until the 11:59 p.m. Pacific time on Thursday, September 7th to email your responses to me. Remember, you must have already emailed me your Final Jeopardy wager to be eligible to play.
You can email your responses to me by clicking here.
The clue is in the extended entry. Good Luck!
more...
Posted by: annika at
12:46 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 68 words, total size 1 kb.
September 05, 2006
Wednesday Is Poetry Day
You might have seen the new poll on my sidebar. If not, go look and vote. One of the names, Captain Thunderbolt, might be unfamiliar to you. He was an Australian outlaw of the Nineteenth Century and the following poem, by Graeme Philipson, tells his story.
The Last Bushranger
Just below Uralla stands New England's southern gate
A mighty granite boulder that tells of one man's fate.
Of the bushranger called Thunderbolt, the last of that rare breed
Of desperate men without the law joined in a common creed.
Thunderbolt was Frederick Ward. The story of his life
Begins they say in Windsor town, in eighteen thirty-five.
His early life was tough and cruel, the times back then were hard
His school was on the horse's back, and in the breaker's yard.
He didn't learn to read or write, but he sure knew how to ride
Jimmy Garbutt showed him how to steal, he took it in his stride.
They took sixty head from Tocal Run, but the Troopers caught them cold
Frederick Ward was twenty-one, with ten years to rot in gaol.
They put him on to Cockatoo, an island made in hell
He set to work to work to get away, he nearly did as well.
But they caught him and they put him in a hole without the sun
Alone he waited for the day when he could make his run.
He swam one night, he got away, he went back to the bush
Across the range, to back of Bourke, he joined the westward push.
He took to the road, he learned the life of a bushranger at large
He robbed the coaches, stole the mail, while riding at the charge.
But life was hard in the sunburnt scrub, he moved back to the range
To relieve the squatter of his horse, the traveller of his change.
Thunderbolt lived outside the law, but he was honest in his way
There's a famous tale of a famous deed at Tenterfield one day.
He went boldly to the races, and looked folk up and down
He saw who won and he saw who lost, and he waited out of town.
He robbed three German bandsmen, but to show his kind concern
He left them some to get to town, and he promised he'd return.
TheyÂ’d get it back if he could find the man that won the most
And by his word the very next day he lived true to his boast.
Nick Hart was the man, he was travelling north, a hundred pounds he'd won
Ward bailed him up on the border line and relieved him of the sum.
The Germans got their money back, they'd not believed their ears
WardÂ’s word became a legend, passed down through the years.
When a hawker came by the Rock one day the outlaw bailed him up
But he got to Uralla and raised the alarm, the constables saddled up.
Trooper Walker caught him there that day, outside of Blanche's Inn
And shot at him in the valley where Kentucky Creek begins.
Our man was on a borrowed horse, he could not outrun the law
So he left the saddle and climbed the bank, with Walker firing more.
He was cornered fair and square, but he was brave until the last
Walker cried: “surrender, man!” The outlaw saw his chance
He charged the mounted trooper, he was firing as he came
But his pistol jammed, and the trooper's final bullet found its aim.
He fell into the creek but rose again to fight his foe
He died when Walker struck him with a god-almighty blow.
That afternoon outside of town, more died than just a man
He was the last to live that outlawÂ’s life upon this lonely land.
All had gone before him: Morgan, Gilbert and Ben Hall
Frederick Ward, called Thunderbolt, was the last one of them all.
When he died they all died with him, it was the ending of an age
A curtain dark was drawn across that now far distant stage.
When Thunderbolt still rode the range, from Mudgee to the Downs
When Thunderbolt his name still rang, in country and in town
When Thunderbolt outrode the law, from Bourke clear to the sea
This land was very different then, from what it came to be.
Now life, they say, is civilised, there's none can do again
What Thunderbolt did years ago, when he strode across the land.
They say that life is better now the bushrangers are dead
But they like to recollect the days the squatters lived in dread.
He's buried in Uralla, where his name is famous yet
The Rock still stands, the creek still runs, where he met his death
You can have a beer and toast him in the pub that bears his name
You can stop awhile and ponder on the reasons for his fame.
And though heÂ’s dead these hundred years, his memory still remains
Of how he rode the mountains, and how he strode the plains.
His name will live for ever more beneath those cold dark skies
The last bushranger may have gone, but the legend never dies.
Posted by: annika at
11:20 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 870 words, total size 5 kb.
1
George Lazenby?
George Lazenby?
GEORGE LAZENBY?
Really scraping the bottom of the barrel for this one, weren't you? And who won the last poll?
Posted by: Victor at September 06, 2006 07:29 AM (L3qPK)
2
That was a toughie, Angus Young, or Nicole Kidman. Talent Vs Beauty...
Nicole is pretty to look at—Nicole’s a loving lass,
But the prettiest cheeks must wrinkle, the truest of loves must pass.
Posted by: Casca at September 06, 2006 08:56 AM (Z2ndo)
3
bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt!!
Who is PeeWee Herman?
Posted by: will at September 06, 2006 10:32 AM (h7Ciu)
Posted by: Tuning Spork at September 06, 2006 09:28 PM (js5kT)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Insufferable Pricks Party Election Guide
Just so you'll be able to tell the difference between the two major parties on the big issues, Cranky Neocon at 6MB has prepared an informative and handy
Election Issues Comparison Chart. It's suitable for printing, so you can take it into the voting booth with you on November 7th!
Posted by: annika at
09:45 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 60 words, total size 1 kb.
Final Jeopardy At Last!
It's time for Final Jeopardy with Annika. Thanks to everyone who participated in this game. Last year we had twelve visitors on the board, and this year we had fifteen, so that's pretty cool.
Last year's winner was Trevor, and we will definitely have a new champion this year since Trevor didn't play. (Unless he was the fake Law Fairy.)
Final Jeopardy will be open to anyone who has money in the game.
That would be:
Leif $1900
D-Rod $1600
Tuning Spork $1500
Shelly $1000
Victor has $700
Law Fairy $500
Maximum Leader $300
KG $300
Blu $300
Kevin Kim $300
Matt of Overtaken By Events $200
Trint $200
Drake Steel $100
TBinSTL $100
SkippyStalin $100
Just like on tv, you can wager from $0 up to the entire total of what you've earned in the game, or any amount in between.
Rules will be a little different this year, to conform more closely with the tv show. First, the players will email me their wagers, based on the category, without knowing the clue. All wagers must be in to me by Tuesday night, September 5, 2006, at 11:59 p.m. Pacific time.
After I get the wagers, I'll post the clue and there will also be another time limit for the responses.
Comments will be closed, so wagers and responses must be e-mailed to me. The correct response must be phrased in the form of a question. There's no need to buzz in for Final Jeopardy.
The Final Jeopardy category is "Heroes." Think about your wagers and send the amounts to me by clicking here.
Posted by: annika at
10:37 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 284 words, total size 2 kb.
September 04, 2006
Countdown To Kiki
The horror...
VIOLET: Dessert? Here it comes. Blueberry pie and cream!
It's the most marvelous blueberry pie that I've ever tasted!
CHARLIE: Look at her face!
MR. BEAUREGARDE: Holy Toledo, what's happening to your face?
VIOLET: Cool it, Dad! Lemme finish.
MR. BEAUREGARDE: Yeah, but your face is turning blue!
Violet, you're turning violet, Violet!
VIOLET: What are you talking about?
WONKA: I told you I hadn't got it quite right yet.
MR. BEAUREGARDE: You can say that again. Look what it's
done to my kid!
WONKA: It always goes wrong when we come to the dessert.
Always.
MR. BEAUREGARDE: Violet, what are you doing now?!? You're
blowing up!
VIOLET: I feel funny.
GRANDPA JOE: I'm not surprised.
VIOLET: What's happening?
MR. BEAUREGARDE: You're blowing up like a balloon!
WONKA: Like a blueberry.
MR. BEAUREGARDE: Somebody do something! Call a doctor!
MRS. TEEVEE: Stick her with a pin.
CHARLIE: She'll pop!
WONKA: It happens every time! They all become blueberries.
MR. BEAUREGARDE: You've really done it this time, haven't
you, Wonka. I'll break you for this.
WONKA: Oh, well, I'll get it right in the end.
VIOLET: Help! Help!
(Wonka plays the pipe whistle.)
MR. BEAUREGARDE: We've got to let the air out of her, quick!
WONKA: There's no air in there.
MR. BEAUREGARDE: Hmm?
WONKA: That's juice.
MR. BEAUREGARDE: Juice?!?
WONKA: (to an Oompa Loompa) Would you roll the young lady
down to the juicing room at once, please.
MR. BEAUREGARDE: What for?
WONKA: For squeezing. She has to be squeezed immediately
before she explodes.
MR. BEAUREGARDE: Explodes?!?
WONKA: It's a fairly simple operation.
Posted by: annika at
10:01 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.
1
LMAO, Fucking Fabulous!
Posted by: Casca at September 05, 2006 07:12 AM (Z2ndo)
2
For some reason my browser at the office won't play animated gifs. So my early morning WTF is now an evening LOL.
Very nice.
Posted by: Gordon at September 06, 2006 05:13 PM (YrwYk)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Crazy Lithuanian Rabbit
This is good for about three minutes out of your day. No more than that.
Give it a try.
Posted by: annika at
08:40 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 25 words, total size 1 kb.
MNF Schedule
This week is finally here. Thursday is the start of the NFL regular season. Yay!
Because I'm a masochist, I will revive the infamous feature known as Annika's Monday Night Football Picks.
The schedule is in the extended entry.
more...
Posted by: annika at
09:59 AM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 205 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: jjjet08 at September 04, 2006 02:21 PM (iwXLn)
2
The rules are simply to marvel at her awesomeness, admire her beauty, and root for the Raiders.
Posted by: Scof at September 04, 2006 02:42 PM (deQ2d)
3
This is nice, but we'll be celebrating Bears/Packers week at my place, because nothing else matters.
Posted by: Pursuit at September 04, 2006 02:46 PM (n/TNS)
4
My favorite team is whoever the Raiders are playing that week.
Posted by: shelly at September 04, 2006 04:32 PM (ZGpMS)
5
Speaking of Bears, it seems to me that the golden ones had a rough time back in good ole Tennessee.
Posted by: shelly at September 04, 2006 04:33 PM (ZGpMS)
6
won't let it go, will you Shelly!?
Posted by: annika at September 04, 2006 05:19 PM (qQD4Q)
7
Sorry Annie; it's just that I get so much grief when USC loses that I need to dish out a little when I can...
Posted by: sjelly at September 05, 2006 07:23 AM (ZGpMS)
8
USC losing is a pretty rare event, though...
Posted by: annika at September 05, 2006 09:22 AM (zAOEU)
9
Last Rose Bowl was enough to last a year or more. We won't be happy until we get our hands around the Horns again and crunch them...
Posted by: shelly at September 05, 2006 03:42 PM (ZGpMS)
10
If you want to see the horns get whipped, you'll have to tune in Saturday night.
Posted by: Casca at September 05, 2006 04:15 PM (2gORp)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
118kb generated in CPU 0.0306, elapsed 0.0901 seconds.
77 queries taking 0.0704 seconds, 311 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.