Highway 99
Thursday, July 24, 2003
THE BEST EXPLANATION YET
Steven Den Beste has given the most closely reasoned and thorough explanation I have yet seen for why we are engaged in a War on Terrorism in general and a war in Iraq in particular.
If you have friends and family who are still skeptical about why we're fighting, especially about why we're fighting in Iraq, try this: Print out this essay/outline of Steve's as well as the text of Tony Blair's speech before Congress (see my link below).
To your loved ones who operate on a very dry, logical level and become suspicious when emotion enters an argument, give Steve's essay. To your loved ones who are more moved by a moral argument than by an argument based on rational self-interest, give Blair's speech.
If you're not sure of your loved ones' preferred style of debate, what the hell, give them both Den Beste and Blair -- they're both excellent pieces of writing and if your people have even a mild interest in this subject, they'll be hooked within the first few sentences.
If the arguments of Blair and Den Beste can't convince your friends that we have both might and right on our side, I doubt that anything can.
CALL 911. ANDREW IS STRESSED
The story just keeps getting stranger. Now the BBC claims that releasing the transcript of the Parliamentary inquiry session in which Andrew Gilligan supposedly changed his story right in the middle of things (according to the MP heading up the session) would endanger Gilligan's health! And the Parliamentary committee is buying that idea enough to postpone making the transcript public.
As the Financial Times puts it:
"Although the committee had pledged to publish the evidence this week, it reluctantly decided not to do so after Gavyn Davies, the BBC chairman, privately contacted Donald Anderson, the committee's chairman.
"According to a committee member, the FAC had no choice but to heed Mr Davies' concern. 'There appear to be compassionate grounds to not publish the evidence. We're in a situation here where if we publish the evidence and something happens to Mr Gilligan we'd be in a very difficult situation,' said a committee member.
"Mr Davies' office said the BBC chairman had told Mr Anderson in a letter that Mr Gilligan was 'stressed'."
I suspect they're actually gun-shy after the apparent suicide of Dr. David Kelly. I can just imagine them picturing Gilligan found with his own wrist slit. If that happened, large sections of the media and the public would probably blame the government for this second death, too, just as the idiots seem intent on groundlessly blaming Kelly's death on the government.
It's interesting that even the pro-BBC, left-wing Guardian makes the point that only a few days ago Gilligan himself was baying for the transcript to be published, claiming it would exonerate him:
"Gilligan's request, which only emerged today, appeared to contradict his insistence last week that the transcript of his FAC hearing be published to show what he claimed was the 'deliberate misrepresentation' of his evidence by MPs on the committee. . . .
"Following the hearing Mr Anderson described Gilligan as an 'unsatisfactory witness' who had 'changed his mind in the course of the evidence, in particular in relation to serious allegations concerning Mr Campbell'.
"Gilligan hit back immediately, accusing the Labour MP of presiding over an 'ambush by a hanging jury' and claiming he would be vindicated when the transcripts of the session were published."
Andrew Gilligan complaining that his evidence had been deliberately misrepresented! The pot calling the kettle black!
And now the Beeb says that publishing the transcript would add dangerously to their man's stress level. Funny that. You'd think such a vindicating document would alleviate a person's stress, wouldn't you?
Sunday, July 20, 2003
Notwithstanding the fun I had with Bush and Blair in my last post, I hope it's clear to anyone reading this blog that, when it comes to the War on Terrorism and related issues, I'm on their side all the way.
It's hard to come up with anything fresh to say about Blair's speech before Congress last Thursday (rerun today on C-SPAN). Forceful? Inspiring? Churchillian? They're becoming cliches already and the speech is only a couple of days old. Suffice it to say that it was one of the best speeches I've ever seen given and possibly, because of my own emotional investment in this particular issue, the single most moving speech I've ever seen given.
Quite a few blogs have been quoting from the speech or linking to the whole text, but if you missed seeing it televised, you really should see the video itself. The text should certainly be read -- and you can do that here --
Text of Blair Speech
-- but it's the performance that makes it complete, and you can see that here:
C-SPAN Video of Blair Speech
Is anyone getting as sick as I am of seeing the fruits of victory continually snatched away from Blair?
He was visiting Iraq on a sort of benevolent victory tour, basking in well-deserved appreciation from the locals and getting photographed being hugged and kissed by little Iraqi kids, when back home the whole WHERE ARE THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION? YOU LIED YOU LIED YOU LIED! nonsense mushroomed, and what should have been a triumphant return home to Britain was more like walking into a minefield.
Now he gives a glorious speech before Congress, receives standing ovation after standing ovation, gets a reception from the Americans worthy of the statesman he has gradually become, gets George Bush to (evidently) hand over the two British citizens facing military trials at Guantanamo to be tried in Britain instead -- and he wakes up the next morning to find a Parliamentary witness/weapons inspector dead of an apparent suicide and his own government being convicted in the media of more or less killing the man.
Has any politician done so much right under such difficult circumstances, and taken such unremitting crap for it? Why the hell does this poor bastard seem so unable to catch a break? God knows he deserves one.
If you'd like to send a message of gratitute to Blair, there's apparently a very simple and convenient way to do it, via a website called ThankYouTony.com, which you can link to here:
ThankYouTony.com
The website says that (as of the time I write this) 8,231 people have sent messages. The messages are printed out and sent on a weekly basis to Downing Street. Something to consider, if you've been feeling appreciative of what Blair has done, but just haven't gotten around to putting it down on paper.
THE ODD COUPLE
Winds of Change has posted a link to a music video of George Bush and Tony Blair which a lot of people who like Bush and Blair are finding quite entertaining, even though it's pretty apparent the video was made by people who do not like Bush and Blair. (Hint: The song's title is 'Gay Bar.') Winds of Change got it from OxBlog. Here's the post from WoC:
Winds of Change Gay Bar Post
And here's the link to the actual video:
Gay Bar Music Video
But I think I've got a music video on the same theme that's even funnier, courtesy of The Economist magazine:
Bush Blair Music Video
See which video you prefer; I think you will get a kick out of both.
BIASED BBC WATCH
Those of you who closely follow the slanted/biased/prejudiced reporting of the BBC should be aware of two relevant websites. The first,
BBC Watch,
concentrates on the Beeb's coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The second,
Biased BBC,
keeps a skeptical eye on BBC doings across the board.
Both are useful, but Biased BBC in particular is up-to-date, highly informative, punchily written, and a lot of fun to read if you don't trust the BBC as far as you can throw it.
NEW READER POLL FOR SKY NEWS
Yesterday the homepage of Sky TV News offered its readers a chance to register their opinion of who they thought should resign as a consequence of the death of Dr. David Kelly. I didn't write down the names listed, and I can't find that poll today; however, I'm pretty certain that the four choices on offer were Tony Blair, Alistair Campbell, Geoff Hoon, and "no one." Today there was a new question, asking whether people believed Parliament ought to be recalled as a result of Kelly's death.
Let me suggest another possibility: Keep yesterday's question of who should resign; but update the list of potential resignees to read Greg Dyke, Gavyn Davies, Richard Sambrook, and Andrew Gilligan. I'd be interested in seeing those poll results.
By the way, there's a good summary on the Sky site of what some prominent media/political people are saying about the BBC after today's sensational confession:
MPs Round On Corporation
I AM SHOCKED, SHOCKED . . .
. . . to learn that the BBC has confessed to lying about their source for the 'sexed-up dossier' report being, in fact, Dr. David Kelly. I don't mean I'm shocked that the Baghdad Broadcasting Corporation bastards lied; I'm just shocked that they've actually owned up to it. As far as I know, they haven't yet owned up to any of the other stinking lies they've told about the Iraq war.
This, of course, shifts the advantage in the blame game quite a lot. Until this morning, it was primarily the government that was on the defensive. Now, from what I can tell, it's very definitely dear old Autie Beeb that's running scared. For the past thirty-six hours or so, the media (especially the BBC) went into overdrive to make it look as though the Parliamentary committee that "grilled" Kelly had hounded a poor, innocent, unsophisticated, shy scientist to his grave. Now it appears that both Andrew Gilligan and Dr. Kelly himself lied while giving testimony, and that the Blair government was entirely justified in (1) suspecting Kelly as the main source for the Gilligan report and (2) claiming that Gilligan more or less fabricated the accusation that Alistair Campbell had pressured intelligence agencies to "sex up" the dossier.
I couldn't believe that the so-called "grilling" the Parliamentary committee gave Kelly could lead any normal innocent person to commit suicide, because I saw the video of Kelly's testimony courtesy of C-SPAN. I thought that the committee members were actually remarkably gentle in their questioning of Kelly. Here's the link -- watch the video and decide for yourself:
Dr. David Kelly's testimony to Parliament on July 15
C-SPAN also broadcast Friday's edition of the BBC program 'Newsnight.' I watched that too, of course, and thought it was a classic of corporate ass-covering. Throughout the program, the hosts do virtually nothing but blame the death on the Blair government.
I went to the BBC's 'Newsnight' homepage to see if I could find a link to the program itself. I did. I also found this program description:
"18 July 2003 Police say that a body found matches the description of Dr David Kelly. If there is an inquiry, how serious might the political fall out be for the government? Plus a report on Guantanamo."
Plus a report on Guantanamo. Of course.
Of course it never dawned on them to ask how serious the political fallout might be for the BBC. At least, it never dawned on them to ask publicly.
Oh yes -- in addition to Kelly and Guantanamo, the July 18 'Newsnight' broadcast was described in the next entry as including a discussion of the upcoming movie 'Buffalo Soldiers,' which portrays American GIs as criminal lowlifes and which I believe we'll all be hearing a lot more about.
God, I love that objective, nonpartisan BBC journalism.
If you would like to watch the 'Newsnight' report on Kelly's death, here it is:
Newsnight from Friday, July 18
And if you'd like to hear the May 29 audio report in which Andrew Gilligan made the claim about his senior intelligence source saying the dossier had been "sexed up" by the government, here it is:
Original Andrew Gilligan report on sexed-up dossier
And one more item. As the headline ever-so-gently puts it, 'BBC under fire over Kelly.' It sure is:
BBC under fire over Kelly
This one is worth reading for many reasons, not least of which is the delicately-worded photo caption: "Several people say the BBC faces tough questions."
Heh.
Saturday, July 19, 2003
SIGN OF THINGS TO COME
David Kelly's body is hardly cold yet, but the conspiracy theorists are already getting warmed up. Check out that subtle use of scare quotes in this morning's U.K. Daily Mirror front-page headline:
"SPUN TO DEATH: Iraq expert driven to tragic 'suicide': BLAIR GOVERNMENT'S BIGGEST CRISIS: Pages 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 9"
In case you're unfamiliar with the Mirror's rabidly anti-Blair editorial policy, it might be instructive to give you a look at yesterday's headline as well:
"CLAPTRAP: Yankee Poodle Blair's 18 standing ovations from Congress . . as he says he may be WRONG on WMD"
For a lot of sane people, scanning the front pages of the Daily Mirror inspires the sort of sick fascination that earlier generations might have felt when viewing the inmates at Bedlam. It provides a double-barreled blast of undiluted left-wing madness. If you've never been exposed to the British tabloids, you owe it to yourself to check this one out.
www.mirror.co.uk/frontpages/
Until you've read the Mirror, you haven't really lived.
Tuesday, July 15, 2003
Several blogs have commented recently about libertarian themes showing up in the latest Harry Potter novel, but I haven't seen any outside reference yet to the most extensive and detailed examination of this subject that I've come across, an article entitled Back to the Future
in the July issue of Reason magazine, accessible at www.reason.com
and still on the newsstands. In the article, Reason contributing editor Michael Valdez Moses looks at political issues that crop up in the Potter books and movies as well as in the Lord of the Rings and Star Wars series.
While you're over at Reason Online, be sure to check out Tom Peyser's article Will Epater les Bourgeois For Food: Peter Sellars In Search of Buyers, a very funny deflating of the theatrical would-be genius. I must be getting old -- I can still remember when Sellars was taken quite seriously. The entertainment value and insight you won't find in Sellars's work, you will find in Peyser's.
Monday, July 14, 2003
DEADLINE FOR THE FREE STATE PROJECT
Of interest to those of you following the Free State Project, the planned exodus of thousands of libertarian-minded people from all over the U.S. to one particular state in order to make their philosophy felt in state-level politics: The tentative deadline to sign up is August 15 if you want to be among those choosing the Project's state.
For those of you who haven't yet heard about the FSP but are intrigued by the concept and want to learn more, here's the address of their website: www.freestateproject.org
Tuesday, July 08, 2003
NOT-SO-STRANGE BEDFELLOWS
Quote from "All that Jazeera," an article in the June 21 issue of The Economist:
"Thanks to its backing from Qatar, al-Jazeera still has ambitious plans. . . . Next year, it will set up a media training centre in Doha with the help of the BBC and the Thomson Foundation, a Cardiff-based media-training charity."
It appears that -- unless there's some important detail The Economist left out, such as the BBC staff involved volunteering their own time to this project -- the British taxpayers are actually funding this exercise in international cooperation via the license fee that supports the Beeb. Not that there was all that much difference between the BBC's coverage of the Iraq war and al-Jazeera's anyway; but this does seem to be taking things a significant step further. Those crewmen aboard the British navy ship Ark Royal who refused to take any more BBC reports because of their anti-British, anti-American bias will no doubt be thrilled to learn that their tax money is now being donated to al-Jazeera: Future reports depicting the Brits as heartless maurauders out to steal Iraq's oil and slaughter its citizens for fun will probably have greatly improved production values.
