Saturday, September 28, 2002

Turkish police capture more than 33 pounds of Uranium!

Friday, September 27, 2002

For some more Rall action, go to this guy. The second part of my take down will be around very soon.

Thursday, September 26, 2002

My God. Instapundit, the biggest blog in the universe, has linked to me!
Just for you people, I trudged through the open, weeping sores that are Ted Rall's essay on Afghanistan and the message board where he tries to defend his piece. In case you don't know, Ted Rall is an idiot journalist that maintains that Bush invaded Afghanistan because of oil. The whole essay is little better than the rants of old confederate veterans on how Lincoln was the devil. There are a lot of things that are dead wrong in the essay, but let me point out a few:

Flaw 1: A huge amount of Rall's sources are very shady indeed.
A. He uses the now-debunked Marc Herold essay on civilian deaths in Afghanistan. The study is infamous for double-counting, simple lies, and trusting acceptance of Taliban news sources. For a complete debunking, go here.
B. About 5 different articles in the footnotescome from a man named Patrick Martin. The overreliance on one author would itself be shady, as no writer should use a source too many times. But this guy, Patrick Martin, writes for a website called World Socialist Web Site, which in its information page, talks about how it takes as its starting point the international character of the class struggle. Hardly what one would call a unbiased source about America and Afghanistan.
C. In 10 different footnotes, he doesn't cite any source besides himself. None. Zip. Zero.
D. He cites newspapers like Pravda, the former official newspaper of the U.S.S.R, and Dawn, a Pakistani newspaper that is owned by the Pakistani government, neither of which has a great reputation for quality, accuracy, or readability.
And I havn't even touched upon the conclusions that he reaches, his paranoid ideas, or his back round. Part Two will be here tomorrow.

UPDATE: Dawn is not owned by the Pakistani government. Sorry for the mistake.

Wednesday, September 25, 2002

Christopher Hitchens has just written an extremely well-written article that demands war with Iraq.
Wow. A human interest story that actually is good, and meaningful.
Link via Vodkapundit.
Christopher Hitchens, one of my favorite "lefty" writers, is leaving The Nation, a very leftist magazine that has been publishing his column for a very long time.
This article in Salon talks about how people are recording their own DVD commentaries makes me want to record DVD commentaries of my own. What do you guys think about me doing something like that?
A article in Blogcritics examines (and destroy's) the marxist theory that true communism has never been tried.
Big News in Iran;
The president of Iran has introduced a bill that would give him the power to actually reform Iran. For the past year, the hardliners in Iran have been blocking attempts by "moderates" to reform the government. This has resulted in a feeling of anti-government feeling in Iran that has has not been seen since the first Iranian revolution. The situation can go down in one of several ways. First, the hardliners could let this bill go through, creating an oppurtunity for the government of Iran to reform in a orderly manner. I don't see that as very likely, because the priests and clerics in Iran have never allowed any power to flow before, and it would be surprising for them to start now. Second, the priests can shoot down this bill, or ignore it after it is passed. This will certainly result in a counter-revolution lead by the students in Iran. I think this option is more likely, because the level of tension in Iran right now is supposedly extremely high, and it will be let out sometime.
Steven Den Beste, retired engineer, examines alternative power sources here, and here. Myself, I would love for the U.S. to use nuclear power, but that won't fly politically, thanks to an enviromental movement that is ignorant about the benefits of nuclear power.

Tuesday, September 24, 2002

This chap wants the blogging world to remind everyone that Clinton had a chance to get Bin Ladin, and he declined it. Can do, sir!
A federal judge has ruled the death penalty unconstitutional. Since I don't know enough about the case, I can't make a judgement on it yet.
The disaster of state health care is revealed yet again
Family doctors who return to work in the National Health Service (NHS) after a break could receive a payment of up to 10,000 as part of an effort to increase generalist practitioner (GP) numbers in Britain's hard-pressed health system, the government said on Tuesday.
Again, I'm wondering if anybody who advocated a public health care system is interested in changing their opinions, since both the Canadian and the British systems are headed for disaster. Anyone?
Irony bites with a vengeance
Two ETA terrorists blow themselves up while preparing a car bomb. That just made my day.

Monday, September 23, 2002

The headline for this Salon piece is Bush to the Arab World: Drop Dead.
The author makes it sound like a bad thing. Why?
Some other gems:
...the Bush administration has apparently decided that it doesn't need to reach out to the Arab world by pushing for Mideast peace before a possible invasion of Iraq.
Why exactly is that neccesary? Why is that bad?
They do not buy the argument that they could make it easier for themselves by paying attention to the Israel-Palestine confrontation to buy more space and maneuverability with the Arab world. They just resist it. I can't explain it, but they just don't buy it."
Maybe because the middle east will get a whole lot more calm when Iraq is gone. And maybe it is the fact that Arafat has proven himself to be a liar many times over. And maybe it is the fact that the Arab world doesn't really want peace. Ever thought about that?
It's not as if the vital strategic importance of resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a secret.
Sure is to me. Last time I checked, the "Palestinians" did not have a strong conventional military, they don't help us with any military actions, and they have a economic value of zilch.
It was also because it became clear once again that the U.S.'s Middle East policy is barely distinguishable from Ariel Sharon's.
That's because Sharon is right about the situation. Bush is smart enough to recognize that fact.
One U.N. official commented, "If anything, the U.S. is backpedaling -- after all, the International Conference was their idea, but they don't seem in any hurry to have it now. The idea that you need to promise anything about Palestine to get Arab cooperation seems to have gone out of the window."
Yes, that idea has been thrown out the window. And the problem is?
The Arab ambassadors came away irate as well. Echoing a complaint heard througout the Arab world and Europe, El Kidwa charged that America was guilty of hypocrisy for threatening to invade Baghdad while ignoring "Three decades of Israeli defiance [of the U.N.]."
Note: The resolutions concerning Iraq were mandatory, meaning that they mandated action. The Israeli resolutions were just that, resolutions. Meaning that they did not have the power to mandate any action. Besides, I don't think any Arab country has the right to criticise Israel for their alleged human rights violations, considering the fact that most of the Arab nations are totalitarian states.
Trying to find some reason why the President is not taking the obvious diplomatic steps, such as reassuring the allies he needs to mount a successful military operation, Murphy suggests, "Being obsessed may be why he's not interested in the tactics of building support with Iran or with the Saudis. He's done a little bit to smooth them over -- but they are in a pretty fussed state."
Remind me again why a two totalitarian states that both enforce the worship of one religion, both funnel huge amounts of money in terrorist groups, and neither of which has a military that could even delay ours if they wanted to deserve or require "attention."
Is the president's policy based on a series of deeply felt but disconnected prejudices in which Yasser Arafat, Saddam Hussein, Iran and Osama bin Laden metamorphose into one single evil entity, and Ariel Sharon and the USA are together on the side of the angels?
Note: Prejudice is a pre-conceived notion made without any evidence. This, however, is a judgement made with quite substantial evidence. Specifically, two towers and 3000 souls that were murdered in New York a year ago. I don't know how you missed it. It was all the news. Plus, nobody (not even Salon) has been able to deny that all of the named groups in the evil category participate in terrorism. Sounds like a good basis for judgement to me.

There is a mini-blog debate going on right here, in which I participated in.
In this not so intelligent Denver Post article about the homeless in a public park, one sentence in particular stands out:
Around them, a battle is raging about the future of their beloved park. It is, at its core, an economic dispute: To whom does the park belong?
Well gee, I always thought that the park belongs to taxpayers and the city, since they were the people that bought the park, built the park, maintained the park, and generally used the park first. The other people would technically be squatting on property that isn't theirs. Any questions?
Note: This post is not meant to attack the homeless. It is meant to attack stupid newspaper articles. Dig? Thanks to Ben Mann for pointing out the article.
David Hogberg has a obituary for his friend on his site.
Hey, extreme leftists! Since when is the fascist government of Iraq more trustworthy then our elected government? Anybody care to enlighten me?
A swastika has been drawn on a sukkah in the University of Colorado. The ACLU's first concern is whether the sukkah's are "promoting religion". Typical.

Sunday, September 22, 2002

Condoleezza Rice says that the U.S. is "fully commited" to build democracy in Iraq. Good news on the whole.
The Kauster has a very good article that makes a clear connection to welfare and terrorism. Read all of it before making a judgement. I am very well aware that linking welfare and terrorism sounds bad, but you still need to read the article.
Holy shit! Michael Chabon, author of the The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay, is writing the script for the Spiderman sequel! The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay is one of the best books I have read about superheroes and comics. I was already excited about the Spiderman sequel, but now it has reached the coolness level of a ninja with a jetpack.