Big news from Lebanon:
Lebanon's Prime Minister Omar Karimi has announced he and his government are resigning
Lebanese government resigns amid mass opposition protests.
Protesters in Lebanon Cheer Resignation of Government.

Slide show here

Let freedom reign!

"U.S. can sit back and watch Europe implode"
is the title of Mark Steyn's article,

The president, in other words, understands that for Europe, unlike America, the war on terror is an internal affair, a matter of defusing large unassimilated radicalized Muslim immigrant populations before they provoke the inevitable resurgence of opportunist political movements feeding off old hatreds. Difficult trick to pull off, especially on a continent where the ruling elite feels it's in the people's best interest not to pay any attention to them.

The new EU ''constitution,'' for example, would be unrecognizable as such to any American. I had the opportunity to talk with former French President Valery Giscard d'Estaing on a couple of occasions during his long labors as the self-declared and strictly single Founding Father. He called himself ''Europe's Jefferson,'' and I didn't like to quibble that, constitution-wise, Jefferson was Europe's Jefferson -- that's to say, at the time the U.S. Constitution was drawn up, Thomas Jefferson was living in France. Thus, for Giscard to be Europe's Jefferson, he'd have to be in Des Moines, where he'd be doing far less damage.

But, quibbles aside, President Giscard professed to be looking in the right direction. When I met him, he had an amiable riff on how he'd been in Washington and bought one of those compact copies of the U.S. Constitution on sale for a buck or two. Many Americans wander round with the constitution in their pocket so they can whip it out and chastise over-reaching congressmen and senators at a moment's notice. Try going round with the European Constitution in your pocket and you'll be walking with a limp after two hours: It's 511 pages, which is 500 longer than the U.S. version. It's full of stuff about European space policy, Slovakian nuclear plants, water resources, free expression for children, the right to housing assistance, preventive action on the environment, etc.

Most of the so-called constitution isn't in the least bit constitutional. That's to say, it's not content, as the U.S. Constitution is, to define the distribution and limitation of powers. Instead, it reads like a U.S. defense spending bill that's got porked up with a ton of miscellaneous expenditures for the ''mohair subsidy'' and other notorious Congressional boondoggles. President Ronald Reagan liked to say, ''We are a nation that has a government -- not the other way around.'' If you want to know what it looks like the other way round, read Monsieur Giscard's constitution.

But the fact is it's going to be ratified, and Washington is hardly in a position to prevent it. Plus there's something to be said for the theory that, as the EU constitution is a disaster waiting to happen, you might as well cut down the waiting and let it happen. CIA analysts predict the collapse of the EU within 15 years. I'd say, as predictions of doom go, that's a little on the cautious side.

and speaking of Oscar night, Steyn says,

The old Europe is dying, and Mr. Bush did the diplomatic equivalent of the Oscar night lifetime-achievement tribute at which the current stars salute a once glamorous old-timer whose fading aura is no threat to them. The 21st century is being built elsewhere.

Larry Kudlow was discussing in his blog and in his program Europe's Flagging Economy

But virtually no one is discussing the widening gap between Europe's economy and America's. For Europe it is a serious problem. According to the free market editorial page of Investor's Business Daily, since 1991, output has grown 27% faster in the U.S. than in the E.U. According to the U.S. Labor Department, real per capital GDP in the U.S. stands at nearly $35,000 in 2003, a full 24 percent higher than the near $27,000 average in Europe's biggest economies. EU unemployment is now 9 percent. On a tax basis, it costs 11.5 percent more to bring on a new job in the EU than in the U.S., according to OECD data.

On TV, Kudlow pointed out how France, for instance, whose economy doesn't generate revenue, has to resort to weapons sales to China in order to receive revenue. That's only one instance where crippling domestic economic policy has enormous international repercussions.

Update Victor Davis Hanson:

The United States should ignore all this ankle-biting, praise the EU to the skies, but not take very seriously their views on the world until we learn exactly what is going on inside Europe during these years of its uncertainty. America is watching enormous historical forces being unleashed on the continent from its own depopulation, new anti-Semitism, and rising Islamicism to Turkish demands for EU membership and further expansion of the EU into the backwaters of Eastern Europe that will bring it to the doorstep of Russia. Whether its politics and economy will evolve to embrace more personal freedom, its popular culture will integrate its minorities, and its military will step up to protect Western values and visions is unclear. But what is certain is that the U.S. cannot remain a true ally of a militarily weak but shrill Europe should its politics grow even more resentful and neutralist, always nursing old wounds and new conspiracies, amoral in its inability to act, quite ready to preach to those who do.

We keep assuming that Europeans are like Britain and Japan when in fact long ago they devolved more into a Switzerland and Sweden--friendly neutrals but no longer real allies. In the meantime, let us Americans keep much more quiet, wait, and watch--even as we carry a far bigger stick.

It's Monday, so Arthur has
Good news from Iraq, Part 22!

In other security successes: the capture of Al Zarqawi's military advisor Abu Waleed; the capture of another two members of Al Zarqawi's organization, brothers Hutheyfa and Mohammed Abdul-Jabbar; detaining of 53 suspected insurgents in one day's sweep around Latifiyah, Baghdad, and Mosul; the capture or killing of three terrorists within the Al Zarqawi organization responsible for producing websites depicting execution of hostages; the recovery of a huge cache of weapons stored under the house in the International Zone in Baghdad; the discovery and disarming of five improvised explosive devices by the US troops throughout Baghdad during four separate patrols in the city on February 12 alone; and a car bomb is located and defused in Mosul thanks to a tip from a local resident.

Read also this story of Faouzi Hamade, American of Lebanese descent working as s translator in Iraq, who stopped and disarmed a woman in Baghdad as she was about to throw a hand grenade into the crowd.

See Arthur for links.

Eminent Domain
comes up before the Supreme Court. Betsy writes,

The more I read about the eminent domain case that was before the Supreme Court last week, the scarier the thought is that the Court would allow a city to take someone's homes simply to give the land to private developers to build stores or houses that would provide a stronger tax base.

Betsy has reason to be scared. In the 1960s large numbers of houses and businesses in downtown Johnstown, PA, were vacated and their owners relocated. The town was turned over to a hotel and hospital. The net result was that downtown Johnstown is a ghost town. The hotel and hospital are still there. The rest of downtown is acres of empty parking lots, a steel mill that closed and for which there is no use, and completely void of pedestrians.

It can happen anywhere.

We're at war, but Chris Rock thinks we're at The Gap
no wonder Hollywood's in La-la-land.

Update Roger:

Jeremy Irons is actually funnier than Rock, never thought I'd say that.

I also found out from Roger that Santana was "in a cornball Che t-shirt", which propmtly earned him a Useful Idiot Award from Val

I looked at some of the photos and have one question, couldn't Antonio Banderas get his hair washed and cut on time for the ceremony?

Sunday blogging on the Ship of Fools
I'm baaack! Sorry for the prolonged absence. This has been the worst flu I've had in years, and, if there's a flu vaccine shortage again I'll make sure to travel overseas to get a flu shot. The memory of days of bone-rattling chills followed by drenching sweats will be more than enough motivation.

I haven't been up to reading for the past few days, but could only lie there and doze through hours of HGTV (yes, an unfortunate addiction). I did manage to watch most of Ship of Fools, the 1965 film version of the play, where, as the IMDB tells us, "Passengers on a ship traveling from Mexico to Europe in the 1930s represent society at large in that era." Black and white cinematography is a lost art, and I enjoy watching it, plus I was in the mood for melodrama.

The cast starred not one, but two, top-rank, hard-living, hard-drinking, hard-smokin' divas, Vivien Leigh and Simone Signoret. Along with Leigh & Signoret there were at least two other Oscar winners in the cast, José Ferrer and Lee Marvin, but my favorites were Oscar Werner and Michael Dunn. The Signoret-Werner scenes at once passionate and tender (albeit in a neurotic sort of way), unlike any of the other couples, who ranged from self-destructive to mercenary. Michael Dunn, a brilliant actor who was a dwarf, lights up the screen in a performance that more than matches that of his co-stars -- according to his IMDB bio, he was nominated for an Oscar for this part. Flamenco dancer José Greco danced and played a pimp in a surprisingly amusing performance. Amusing, perhaps because his character didn't pretend to be anything other than a flamenco-dancing pimp, just as Dunn's character could not pretend to be anything other than what he was.

SOF is the kind of movie they just don't make any more, not only because it's in B&W and because of the double-diva dilemma (Simone said, Nostalgia isn't what it used to be, and well, neither are top-rank, hard-living, hard-drinking, hard-smokin' divas), but also because its intense melodrama nowadays isn't found outside of horror movies starring Oscar winners like Halle Berry. Oscar Werner managed to have the granddaddy of all on-screen existential middle-age crisis, but Dunn got the final word,

"You might ask, What does all this have to do with us?
Nothing!"

Later on I watched the last 45 minutes of Sense and Sensibility, where Ang Lee got a fantastic performance out of Alan Rickman. Unfortunately, that was the apex of Rickman's film carreer and he hasn't come up to that level since. The same day I watched S&S Netflix sent the made-for TV Something the Lord Made, where Rickman played Alfred Blalock and Mos Def played Vivien Thomas, the pioneer heart surgeons. Both performances were very good but the movie belongs to Mos Def.

Netflix also sent the first disc of the first season of 24. If I'm up to it, I'll watch that instead of the Academy Awards. Years ago I saw Chris Rock in the awful Dogma, and that will do, thanks. Otherwise it'll be tylenol and benadryl for me.

I'm down with a cold again
and will blog when better. Thank you for your patience.

The EU Constitutional referendum in Spain
is the subject of Barcepundit's round-up and a prior post

The most remarkable thing is that the low turnout seems to be confirmed, and it's very significant: even if, say, 75% of people voted "yes", it would be a 75% of a 40% turnout, meaning roughly that the European "Constitution" would be actively supported by only 30% of eligible voters. That's extremely, extremely low, and against what Zapatero was hoping: an example of Europeanness to other countries that have planned a similar vote. If the most pro-European country -according to all polls- manages to get a 40% turnout only, what will happen, say, in the much more Euro-skeptic UK? I'm sure Zapatero will spin this result as a triumph (one of his party's deputies has just said so), but actually it's almost a death blow continent-wise.

Charles Moore explains Why the EU Constitution is bad for Britain and bad for the US:

If one had to point out only two aspects of the treaty to Mr Bush, I would first draw his attention to Article 1-16, which commits all member states to a "common foreign and security policy". "Member states," it goes on, "shall actively and unreservedly support the union's common foreign and security policy in a spirit of loyalty and mutual solidarity and shall comply with the union's actions in this area." That would seem, at a stroke, to prevent Britain (or any other member country) from acting unilaterally in military or political alliance with the United States ever again. In his interview with Alec Russell in today's paper, the President expresses his objections to the EU as a means of projecting global power and supplanting Nato: that is exactly what the European Constitution is trying to bring about.

Second, I would draw attention to the opening words of the two documents. The US Constitution begins, famously, "We the People…". The European Constitution begins, "His Majesty the King of the Belgians…". That gives you a fair idea of the different spirit of each document.

So far there's no referendum scheduled for the UK. Moore suggests,

Soon, probably next year, we shall be asked to vote on the constitution ourselves. The No campaign has been arguing for quite a long time that every household should be sent a copy of the European Constitution. The Government is proving rather evasive on the point, but what possible objection could there be, apart from the health-and-safety threat to our postmen's spines?

It would weigh scarcely anything extra to throw in the US Constitution with each envelope, thus offering the most instructive possible comparison.

Richard of EU Referendum blog finds Chirac in a panic, and says

The erosion of support for the constitution does not seem to be the result of the population's increased familiarity with the document or the issues. Rather, the question has become infected by other issues, ranging from Turkish membership of the EU to the unpopularity of prime minister Raffarin's centre-right government.

However, there is a distortion in the campaign in that the "no" campaign has been in full swing for several weeks; the "yes" campaign has not begun. How this might be affecting polls had not been recorded.

The French Socialist Party's leader went to Spain to campaign with the Spanish Socialist Party (Zapatero's party) for a "SI" vote. My grandparents must have been turning in their graves, since they despised the French, as many Spaniards have since before Napoleonic times. That might account for the low turnout. All the same, as Moore quotes, "According to the Spanish justice minister: "You don't have to read the treaty to know it's a good thing." Will the French big-poohbahs say the same in their "OUI" campaign?

IF France votes NON for the referendum, the EU Constitution would be dead in the water.

Or would it?

Fun with Jacques and George
The meeting went well

During a photo opportunity, Mr. Bush refused to be pinned down on whether relations had improved to the point where Mr. Bush would be inviting Mr. Chirac to the United States or even to Mr. Bush's ranch in Texas.

"I'm looking for a good cowboy," Mr. Bush joked, dodging the question. He did not say whether he considered Mr. Chirac a cowboy. Mr. Chirac did not seem to get the joke.

However, Mr. Chirac, a former agriculture minister, prides himself as an expert on cows.

Yippi kay yeh, for now.

Cristo's Gates are the talk of the town
and I'd love to see them. Hopefully we'll get there as soon as the whole family is over their cold/flu.

I love Cristo's stuff. It's playful, it's not supposed to be an allegory/metaphor/whatever on the human condition yaddayaddayadda, and it's not payed with taxpayer dollars.

It reminds me of giftwrap, which is something I can't do to well, since the giftwrap gene skipped me and went to my sister. My sister can make a brown paper bag, some string and a cinnamon stick look like something in Martha Stewart Living, but when I do the same it looks like last night's leftovers, wrapped for the garbage. Cristo's siblings, if he has any, maybe feel the same way.

Cristo's art is really large scale, and it speaks to the possibilities of the human spirit to see what a guy with a whole lot of fabric and plenty of time on his hands can do. I do wish I'd had a chance to travel to Berlin and see the Reichstag bundled up and ready for shipping.

The Gates are Home Depot orange, which appeals to my inner HGTV addict. And, as Scott said,

The Christos (as I shall refer to them) are essentially offering us a gift at their expense, one which the public is free to either enjoy (directly, or by writing snarky articles about it) or ignore.

Now that I wrote my snarky article, I look forward to enjoying the Gates directly.

Update While on a frivolous vein, it looks like the Hillary Clinton action figure wasn't selling well, so the manufacturers decided to use the surplus outfits for the Condoleezza Rice action figure, pearls and all.

"I've been patronized by smarter people than you, and it didn't work for them, either"
is what ran through my mind while reading this article on books about snobs. One of the books, "Snobs", was written by a guy that plays the lord in a BBC soap I've never watched, and he also wrote "Gosford Park". I wonder if he knows Clive Owen.

Another book mentioned in the article, "French Women Don't Get Fat", got a rise from Jessica Seigel. Ms Seigel, whose article was on the op-ed page, and who in her earlier life was an excahnge student in France, knows the reason why "French Women Don't Get Fat": because they smoke like fiends.

None of the reads are appealing. I'm more of a Trollope and Glasworthy type. Does that make me a snob?

New Jersey tax hikes, and more tax hikes
Lest we forget as the reason I named the blog, let me remind you by listing a few newspaper articles:
John Farmer's Jersey's shell game on taxes
Tax rebate may face trim, says governor. Codey says budget gap could force a rollback
Codey still exploring deficit options

Not surprisingly, NJ bloggers discuss taxes.

Roberto has a NJ Budget Update. Just taking a look at the numbers makes my hair stand on end.
Enlighten-New Jersey finds out that the State Threatens Not To Pay For Local Roadwork, and starts by saying,

It will be interesting to see Acting Governor Codey‘s priorities in the budget he unveils for the state of New Jersey next month. Be prepared because it won’t be pretty and the usual battle between the taxpayers versus the tax receivers will truly get underway.

Patrick says NJ Keeps Getting Better, while Mark Feffer's asking Rebates Are Supposed To Make Sense?. SmadaNek's looking at Pay-to-Play Reform

An incremental approach to this reform simply invites further abuse of the system. As was made abundantly clear during the very short campaign to sew up the Democratic nomination for Governor, the real power in New Jersey resides at the county level. If we cannot prevent these corrupt practices across the board, then the money will simply flow through the unrestricted offices.

Sluggo posts on Hague Rules, commenting on New Jersey Democrats, institutional corruption and Jon Corzine, while Jim sees some humor regarding NJ's favorite plutocrat

What New Jersey needs is a realization that "government money" comes from you, the taxpayer, and that it is not a well from which springs an infinite amount of funds. Serious budget cuts would be only a start, but the best possible start.

Now, if only the politicians would listen.

Bloggers who like people
are always looking for ways to draw them to their blogs. Some, like myself, are shameless about emailing others and asking for links. Others, more talented and creative (and more subtle!) come up with better ideas.

Kathleen of Unsettled just tished me. She was referred by Welcome to my world, so of course I had to look, and sure enough,

And with that, I introduce the "You've been TISHED" game.

It's simple, fun, and calorie free.

Just choose five of the blogs on my blogroll and/or the Homespun Bloggers and read their current post.
Leave a comment ending with the phrase "You've been TISHED".
Come back to this post and let me know who you found.
Let's see just how far apart and small the blog world really is.

Turns out there's a Daily Comment game over at Michelle's, so of course I'll have to participate.

Blogger par excellence Dan, however, is writing about the Ink fight at the CPAC Corral, with great humor and style. Dan (obviously a man of good taste and discernment) hits the right note by including me, and cast me in the Miss Kitty part as the saloon owner. The prose is western-perfect,

Coxie pushed open the door of the stables as the crowd rushed in behind him and he faced down Fund, still astride the majestic Apple Grove. Coxie spit. "Taint right fer a man to jest grab up another man's laptop like that, without the askin," said Coxie. Fund just smirked with that "Get away from me, boy! You bother me" sideways smirk he always seemed to be sporting. "That right?" he questioned back as he sort of chuckled. Their eyes locked steadier than the 4:10 train outta Yuma and a hushed, crowded stable waited to see which man would make the first play.

It's great to be a blogger!

Update on yesterday's post re: the Madrid fire
Manel of Hispalibertas commented,

Fausta, lo más probable es que se trate de reflejos obtenidos del edificio de enfrente. Los bomberos han calculado que la temperatura en esa planta estaría entre 300 y 400 grados centígrados (572-752 Fahrenheit), lo que resulta mortal para nadie sin equipo adecuado.
Fausta, the most probably thing is that it was a reflexion from the building across. The firemen have calculated that [by that time] the temperature in that floor would have been between 300-400C (572-752F), which would be lethal to anyone without adequate equipment

I agree with the theory of a darkened building's windows reflecting from across the street. Anyone working in an area where the buildings have mirror-glass windows has seen the effect, which at times can be quite disconcerting.

Additionally, in an office building the greatest hazard is paper. Offices generate huge amounts of paper. Paper combusts at 451F (as Ray Bradbury can tell you), but before it bursts into flames it produces a smoldering smokey fire that would have obscured from outside view any figures standing in a room, and killed anyone in there.

Patriot Act observations
from Roberto,

This whole Patriot Act controversey was nothing but a lame attempt by liberals to attack the Bush administration and their favorite bogeyman, former attorney general John Ashcroft. As Fausta notes, the Patriot Act was voted into law by a 98-1 margin (the no vote was Wisconsin democrat Russ Feingold). A little bit of civics here. The Justice Department doesn't create the law, the legislative branch (i.e. Congress) creates the law and the Justice Department interprets it. During the countless appearances in front of congressional democrats, Ashcroft should have told them "You morons gave me all this power, I have barely used it!!"

Roberto's right.

Not only were the laws already existing, the Act was even named after the Democrat's choice of names.

And, BTW, Prof. Dinh did mention the Sopranos, and the Unabomber.

We'll be hearing a lot about anti-americanism this week
since Pres. Bush will be visiting Europe. In their report on the subject, France2 news last evening had a report from a German village (pop. 2,000 or so) named Busch, where a few of the people thought the Pres.'s visit meant he'll be groveling. Looks to me the people interviewed don't share my opinion that Mr. Bush isn't the groveling type.

But back to anti-americanism,The Economist writes,

Why, anyway, should America care if a bunch of foreigners dislike it, or affect to? Maybe, as a military and economic power without rival, it should not be too worried. Yet America needs the co-operation of other governments if it is to conduct trade, combat drugs, reduce pollution and fight terrorism. Moreover, Mr Bush is now committed to spreading “freedom” across the Middle East, indeed across the world. If foreigners, disillusioned with America, believe this is merely a hypocritical justification for getting rid of regimes he dislikes, the task may be harder. It is striking that Mr Bush’s 49 mentions of liberty or freedom in his inaugural address last month do not seem to have struck the sort of chord round the world that Jack Kennedy’s quixotic commitments did in the 1960s.




Shining city loses lustre
That may reflect the greater cynicism of the worldwide audience 40 years on. But the polls suggest it also has something to do with Mr Bush. Last month’s BBC poll found that opposition to Mr Bush was stronger than anti-Americanism in general, and that the particular had contributed to the general. Asked how Mr Bush’s election had affected their views of the American people, 42% said it had made them feel worse towards Americans.

That is the, perhaps short-term, view of some non-Americans. It is accompanied by another view, increasingly common among pundits, which holds that America is losing its allure as a model society. Whereas much of the rest of the world once looked to the United States as a beacon, it is argued, non-Americans are now turning away. Democrats in Europe and elsewhere who once thought religiosity, a belief in capital punishment and rank hostility to the United Nations were intermittent or diminishing features of the United States now see them as rising and perhaps permanent. Such feelings have been fortified by Mr Bush’s doctrine of preventive war, Guantánamo, opposition to the world criminal court and a host of other international agreements. One way or another, it is said, people are turning off America, not so much to hate it as to look for other examples to follow—even Europe’s. If true, that could be even more insulting to Americans than the rise in the familiar anti-Americanism of yesteryear.

Roger L. Simon has another perspective,

In the end, however, I think what Europe thinks of us is far less important than Asia -- China and India particularly. They're the future and, hey, the food's not bad there either.

Jack looks at the current state of Europe,

Europeans have sacrificed everything -- economic growth, freedom of contract, fluid labor markets, national sovereignty, their own fertility -- all in the service of stability. It would be ironic if the greatest threat to that costly stability weren't the United States with its muscular foreign policy and Darwinian economy, but the uncontested ascendency of Islamic fascism. Not that it makes a difference.

Mark Steyn (via Jack) is more blunt,

What does all this mean? Nothing. In victory, magnanimity – and right now Bush can afford to be magnanimous, even if Europe isn't yet ready to acknowledge his victory.

Expect to hear much more on the subject in the upcoming days.

More on the Madrid fire
I wasn't able to transcribe and translate the video from Barcepundit, but he's linked to this article

On the tape, which was aired by Spanish television stations on Friday night, two figures in silhouette are seen inside the blazing Windsor Tower more than two hours after the building was supposedly evacuated.

The figures appear to be moving about eight floors below the core of the gigantic fire, according to Carlos Just, a lawyer who took the amateur video from a building about 200m away from the tower at around 3:00 am (02:00 GMT) last Sunday.

Just called the emergency services who said at first that the figures were firefighters. But an evacuation of the fire crews had been ordered earlier for fear that the building might collapse,

Madrid's mayor has called for an investigation to find out if anyone was inside the 106m building when the fire broke out. No dead or missing have been reported.

Officials last week said they believed the office tower was vacant as it was a weekend night. Some speculated that the silhouettes could have been an optical illusion.

No optical illusion lasts that long.

The authorities should be able to verify the time of the phone call to the emergency services. As Barcepundit said,

The images were taken between 3 and 6 am, and the really suspicious thing is that the fire department has officially declared that at 1 am -that is, two hours before the first images were taped- all firemen had evacuated the building because they saw that there was nothing they could to to put it out.

At that point, the fire was raging in full force.

My husband can attest to the contrary
I was reading TigerHawk just now and came across Gender Genie. Of course I entered one of my blog entries and whoa!

Female Score: 86
Male Score: 490
The Gender Genie thinks the author of this passage is: male!

The Husband can attest to the contrary.

Three interesting round-ups
Arthur Chrenkoff does an excellent job of news round-up and analysis in his Lebanon Update

What does it all mean?: The crisis currently unfolding in Lebanon offers a rare spectacle of the United States and France sitting politically on the same side of the fence. France, of course, maintains a keen interest in Lebanon as its former colony. In fact, some French analysts think that their country's involvement provides the international dimension to the assassination
. . .
And some pro-Syrian Lebanese politicians seem to agree (without mentioning the assassination, of course): "Information Minister Elie Firzli accused French President Jacques Chirac, who attended Hariri's private funeral... of having a direct hand in the opposition's campaign. 'Chirac made himself a direct party to lead the battle on the Lebanese scene,' Firzli charged.
. . .
West is certainly trying to take the advantage of the situation, according to K Gajendra Singh: "The US attempt to organize a franchised 'Cedar' revolution in Lebanon, like the Orange revolution in Ukraine and the Rose revolution in Georgia, is to counter Moscow’s return into Middle East. Russia would be soon delivering short range missiles to Damascus, to ease US pressure in Ukraine, Georgia and elsewhere."

From the very day of the funeral, France2 news has shown "man on the street" interviews in Beirut where several people were saying there will be an Orange Revolution.

The Anchoress reports on the latest trend, Not liking Greenspan's report, DemoBrat threatens to Vomit I don't know about you but I've had it with women who get the vapors, threaten to vomit and the such, because they hear something they don't like. Learn to take bad news like a man, girls!

Not a round-up per se, but a stroy I'm sure will get around the blogs, is Bloggers abused twice - FUND STRIKES AGAIN.... LaShawn looks at the bright side.

More on the Spanish office building fire
Barcepundit asks, FOUL PLAY in the Madrid office tower fire?

Well, it turns out that a home video taped by one of the neighbors who was watching the tower on fire has surfaced, and it shows what seems to be some people, with a torch, several floors below at the very same moment when the upper floors were burning spectacularly. The images were taken between 3 and 6 am, and the really suspicious thing is that the fire department has officially declared that at 1 am -that is, two hours before the first images were taped- all firemen had evacuated the building because they saw that there was nothing they could to to put it out. The video has been shown by all TV networks, and you can see it by yourselves here (link and information in Spanish, from Tele 5, one of the broadcast TV networks: on that page, click on "ver video" and a popup player will start).

If times allows, I'll translate the TV broadcast from the newscast.

UNScam today
I haven't posted on the Oil-For-Food subject for a while because of disgust and frustration. The story is not in the front pages of the papers. Only Fox News and people like Kudlow and Rosett are talking about it.

It's not like there isn't plenty of material to talk about. Loook at the companies that might be involved, such as Saybolt Eastern Hemisphere BV of the Netherlands, Cotecna, BNP Paribas of France, Lloyd's Register Inspection of Britain; the UN functionaries involved, such as former Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, former director of the OFF program Benon Sevan, UN official Joseph Stephanides, and Kofi Annan's own son Kojo. The UN inspectors 'spent their days drinking' back when they were in Iraq.

This is no simple list of petty grievances from a discontent minor blogger (i.e., me). The sums of money ($20+ billion and counting) makes this the biggest fraud in the story of mankind. As Friends of Saddam asks,

Volcker's recent interim report--there is another interim one expected soon and a final report due out this summer--does not even begin to address the true dimensions of Oil-for-Food, in which the United Nations oversaw more than $110 billion of Saddam's business transactions while Saddam racked up sanctions-busting illicit income estimated at anywhere from $9 to $17 billion. The emerging picture is that Oil-for-Food was the largest scam in the history of humanitarian relief. And the big questions are: Who at the United Nations might be to blame? And what needs fixing?

To cover its costs for overseeing the program, the Secretariat collected 2.2 percent of the revenue on every barrel of oil sold, amounting to $1.4 billion over the life of the program (plus another 0.8 percent, or $500 million, to pay for weapons inspections that ceased in late 1998, when Saddam stopped cooperating with them). This meant that Annan--who was secretary-general for all but the first month.

The scandals don't stop there, with the U.N. Refugee Chief May Be Forced Out because of sexual harassment, and the many articles referring to rape and prostitution carried out by UN forces.

Meanwhile the US is the largest financial contributor to the UN, which is housed in prime Manhattan real estate and is planning a total refurbishing of its existing facilities plus a brand-new building, at America's expense,

The GAO report says it assumes the federal government will pay 22% of the $1.2 billion loan principal, because America pays for 22% of U.N. operating costs. If the total construction cost reached as high as $2.45 billion, the portion supplied by American taxpayers would be $539 million. In addition, the GAO reported: "The Secretary General anticipates that the United States will provide a no-interest loan to finance the renovation." The United Nations has not yet accepted America's offer of a $1.2 billion loan at 5.5% interest. According to the State Department, the offer expires September 30.

Small wonder then, that one reads this in the headlines, Conservatives Mobilize Against 'Law of the Sea' Treaty

Conservative activists are pressing the Bush administration and Republican lawmakers to reverse their support for an international oceans treaty they claim will limit American sovereignty and empower an international body akin to the United Nations.

They want President Bush to repudiate a treaty called the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, just as he pulled America out of an agreement creating the International Criminal Court and has refused to sign the Kyoto treaty on greenhouse gas emissions. The White House says it wants to see the treaty ratified soon.

Although the oceans treaty may be obscure, it is stirring intense passions among conservatives who see it as internationalism's latest encroachment on American sovereignty.

The treaty has created "another unaccountable, politicized multilateral tribunal," said the president of the Center for Security Policy, Frank Gaffney. The treaty, which came into force in 1994 and has been signed by 148 countries, created an International Seabed Authority to oversee extraction of resources from the seabed. The authority has an assembly, a council, and a secretariat; an International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea was also created to resolve disputes.

Last November The Economist had a special report that ended by saying,

Many believe this could be the UN's last chance of reforming itself for a very long time. But the question goes far beyond the customary meaning of “reform”. The principle at stake is whether the world accepts that its armed actions should be governed by commonly agreed rules of international law. Strobe Talbott, a deputy secretary of state under Bill Clinton, cynically notes the alternative: “The sheer pre-eminence of American power could, in itself, be the ordering and taming principle of a disorderly and dangerous world.”

The poor old United Nations is indeed a flawed and defective organisation: the action, or more often the inaction, of its members, as well as its own intrinsic faults, have made it so. But, as its secretary-general warned the General Assembly last September: “Let's not imagine that, if we fail to make good use of it, we will find any more effective instrument.”

Maybe not. But it's time the US stops funding the UN. At the UN the language of diplomacy is spoken in dollar terms. It's time to make a statement they can understand.

The NY Sun, Kudlow, and the guys
I love Larry Kudlow's show. Ever since Lou's program ended, he's become my financial TV guru. Kudlow's bright, he's cool, he wears natty striped suits, and his program's guests are civilized.

Best of all, he listens to me.

Not to me directly, but he reads the New York Sun, and last night he had Jeff Jarvis and Roger L. Simon (Roger, no fedora?) discussing blogs and bloggers. Just last February 4 I was quoted in the NY Sun deploring CNN's choice of bloggers discussing the President's SOTU address, and suggesting,

Fausta Wertz, a blogger in Princeton, N.J., who runs The Bad Hair Day Blog, weighed in that there are bloggers with greater political experience. "If they want a blogger, why not have Roger Simon [of U.S. News & World Report and Rogersimon.com] or Jeff Jarvis [of Buzzmachine.com]?"

So Larry, if you ever want to have Princeton's only Puerto Rican blogger on your show, email me. I'll be cool, and civilized, and promise to wear a natty outfit. (As for the bright part, one can only try).

USA Patriot Act and Civil Liberties Since 9/11, a lecture
Yesterday I attended a lecture at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs titled, "The USA Patriot Act and Civil Liberties Since 9/11”, given by Prof. Viet Dinh. As stated in this article from the Norton Mirror,

Dinh served as the U.S. assistant attorney general for legal policy from 2001 to 2003, and was the highest ranking Vietnamese American official in the Bush Administration. As the official responsible for developing federal legal policy, Dinh contributed to a number of policies, including eliminating racial profiling in federal law enforcement and reforming civil and criminal justice procedures. After Sept. 11, Dinh conducted a comprehensive review of Department of Justice priorities, policies and practices to ensure that all available resources were dedicated to protecting America against terrorist acts. He played a key role in developing the U.S.A. Patriot Act and revising the Attorney General's Guidelines, which govern federal law enforcement activities and national security investigations. Currently, Dinh is a professor of law and deputy director of Asian Law and Policy Studies at the Georgetown University Law Center.

A refugee from Vietnam, Dinh came to the United States when he was 10 years old in 1978. He attended Harvard University and Harvard Law School, and graduated magna cum laude from both. He was a law clerk to Judge Laurence H. Silberman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. He served as associate special counsel to the U.S. Senate Whitewater Committee, as special counsel to Senator Pete V. Domenici for the impeachment of President Bill Clinton

I have read the Patriot Act, which is available on line, and certainly hope the people in the audience had. There were some 95 people in the audience, and, as can be expected for that hour of day (4PM), most (50) were retirees, and the rest (40) were students. The remaining 5 were people my age, old enough to be a student's parent, but young enough to be a retiree's daughter.

Prof. Dinh started by talking about the thinking at the Justice Department on the days after September 11, 2001. Pres. Bush had stated to US Attorney General John Ashcroft, "Make sure this does not happen again". This was a momentous task, and a defensive task that could mean a change in the nature of our society by increasing the role of government in a pervasive and asymmetric way, but detention doesn't work; instead the Dept. of Justice looked for ways in which to "aid the hand of fate" to prevent terrorism. Prof. Dinh explained that our Constitution's 4th Amendment requires probable cause for detention, while European countries recognize the state's right to detention.

Therefore, as a counterterrorism strategy, the Justice Department saw their task as one of domestic law enforcement with probable cause, and the avenue would be to develop a strategy to discover information on terrorist plans, while making sure there's proper judicial supervision.The means for this would be

• to exact the same level of judicial supervision and probably cause,
• de-anonimize internet and virtual communications,
• and the use of multi-jurisdictional efforts for search warrants.

The law passed 98-1 in the Democrat-controlled Senate.

Prof. Dinh discussed Section 213, where a Judge can delay notice to a recipient of a search warrant, with reasonable cause. He then talked of Section 215 (the one pertaining library records), which attaches to the Foreign Intelligence Service Act (FISA), and by which national security investigators get the same authority as criminal investigators, and it's classified and confidential. To offset potential abuse of this "classified and confidential", Congress put in as protection a review authorized by a court, that it can not target First Amendment activities, and that every six months the Dept. of Justice must tell Congress how many times this provision has been used. Section 215 applies to all businesses. Finally, Prof. Dinh discussed Section 218, where the reasonableness clause applies to FISA even when you don't need a warrant.

He then concluded by stating that this is a profoundly important debate.

There were four questions from the audience, the first one on non-citizens' rights. Prof. Dinh replied that immigration law applies to all non-citizens, and that non-citizens in US soil should be granted constitutional protections. US citizens abroad have all the rights as when being in the USA, not foreigners abroad. As to the detention of enemy combatants in Guantanamo (which are under Dept of Defense jurisdiction), it is under review by two judges.

Question 2 pertained to Section 213 regarding drug seizures but not terrorism, and whether should it be made permanent? Prof. Dinh wants it permanent, and to tighten its provisions, and also said that a lot of the brouhaha over the Patriot act has come about because it has made people realize how much power the government has. The questions he asked during the writing of the Act were,

• Is it operationally necessary
• Is it wholy consistent with the Constitution
• What unintended consequences can be mitigated

all within our commitment to liberty.

A man who stated he's a criminal lawyer asked a very lengthy question, which he started by saying he was concerned by the rapid drafting of the legislation. He saw the want to access libraries and use something other than judicial review as an attack on the Warren Court and serving conservatives and neoconservatives' purposes. Prof. Dinh explained the derivation and process by which the Patriot Act was formed. The process was quick and deliberate because after 9-11 it was "the only game in town", and everybody wanted to get it done, and to get it done right. The name came as a compromise; the PA was first called the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001, while Sen. Lahey of the Senate Judiciary Committee was developing a USA act, and another senator (sorry I missed the name in my notes) was working on the PATRIOT Act*. The Senate version was led by Democrats -- the Democrats had majority.
Prof. remarked that terrorism is a crime and it makes no sense to draw an artificial wall between terrorism and crime.
As to the preconceived aspect of the question, he stated that some ideas were pre-existing and had been proposed under Janet Reno, but hadn't passed due to opposition from conservatives.
The terrorism investigation's deliberate strategy is to interdict and prosecute early, and that no one has a constitutional right to violate the laws of this country.

The final question was from a student who had heard that the PA was breaking up families. Prof. Dinh stated that on January 2004 he had testified before Congress and before, during and after his testimony he had asked if there were any documented cases of this, and no one could come up with any. He then talked of Section 1011, a provision regarding civil liberties, and emphasized that liberty and safety are necessary and essential; the question is how to protect both.

The lecture ended at 5:45. It was worth attending.

* Rick Ballard tells us (in Roger L Simon's blog) the acronym stands for, the `Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001'. My notetaking was not up to that many words in an acronym.

Update on the Armanious murders
From Exit Zero

In any case, the Armanious family's trip to Washington appears to have shamed the local press into devoting more coverage to the story. The Jersey Journal had two stories about it today - one about how children reacted to the horrific death of their classmates, another about the calming influence of Bishop David on the Coptic community.

More details and links at Exit Zero.

Thank you Jacques
Yesterday Charles Johnson posted this article, HARIRI MURDER WAS SYRIAN WARNING TO FRANCE, SAY COMMENTATORS: A month after it was passed, Syria strong-armed a change to Lebanon's constitution to extend the mandate of pro-Syrian president Emile Lahoud - - the move which prompted Hariri's resignation as prime minister

“I am convinced this attack — the most significant since the end of Lebanon’s war — was a message directed at Chirac, who was a personal friend of Rafiq Hariri,” said Antoine Sfeir, director of the Cahiers de l’Orient newsletter.

“The evidence suggests that the murder is a response to UN security council resolution 1559 voted in September at the initiative of France and the US. It was Jacques Chirac who was the real architect of the resolution,” he said.

Resolution 1559 calls for the withdrawal of Syria’s estimated 15,000 troops from Lebanon and the re-establishment of full Lebanese sovereignty.
. . .
Writing in the Liberation daily, analyst Jean-Pierre Perrin said the fact Chirac had called for an international enquiry to identify the killers "is a way of casting doubt over any Lebanese-Syrian enquiry" and showed Paris also suspects Damascus.

"Chirac is all the more furious because he did so much to get (Syrian president) Bashar el-Assad known outside his country," Perrin said.

Going by last evening's France2 newscast, this sounds like an accurate appraisal.

Chirac has made a very public display of his feelings. Jacques, may I remind you, is very fond of the symbolic gesture, and most particularly, of the symbolic grand gesture. He's in his element when in front of the media.

Rafic Hariri's family turned down the Lebanese government offer for a state funeral, and instead held a public funeral where nearly 200,000 people demonstrated against Syria. It was a massive public display of grief and anger. Most importantly, as reported in the NYT

The procession drew white turbaned Druse religious leaders, Sunni clerics, Christians and Shiites, plus thousands of women, whose presence broke with Islamic tradition that normally allows only men to take part in funeral marches.

Chirac and his wife flew in the official state airplane to Beirut. At the airport, looking sincerely distressed, he held a press conference, where he said,

"I came to tell the Lebanese people how much today, more than ever before, I feel solidarity with them and share their grief and destiny," Chirac told reporters upon his arrival at Beirut airport accompanied by his wife, Bernadette.

"The horrendous crime from another era which claimed the life of Rafik Hariri evoked the anger of the international community," Chirac said.

"It is a great loss for Lebanon and today's world ... Hariri embodied the democracy, sovereignty and independence of Lebanon."

Then, bypassing any official state visit, or any visit at all to any of the current Lebanese governemnt officials, he and Mrs. Chirac held Mrs. Hariri's hands and shared her grief. Chirac left Lebanon immediately after this personal visit.

Frequent visitors to this blog know I'm no friend of Jacques, but this one time he's done the right thing.

For related posts on Lebanon, check out Jane's excellent blog, Armies of Liberation.

Dating advice to MoDo
Today MoDo's writing on last week's tempest in a teapot, so today, Thursday, I'm writing on MoDo's Sunday column.

I've been blogging for many months now and never have given advice on matters of the heart, but this column from MoDo is too good to resist. She says,

I decided to adapt the idea for Valentine's Day, and get some lucky guy the books from A to Z that would help him better understand me

MoDo would include Deepak Chopra's cookbook (does Chopra have a cookbook? I don't watch PBS anymore so I didn't know.) Three things. MoDo:
1. Any guy that reads your column will get a really good idea of what you're like. Any guy who doesn't want to read it doesn't deserve you.
2. Any reading list that includes Deepak Chopra's cookbook says "S-T-A-Y A-W-A-Y F-R-O-M M-E".
3. When is your brother writing a column again?

Son of Allah?
Allah's not posting any more (but apparently God is), and he is greatly missed. Back during the electoral primaries and campaign thousands of people enjoyed Allah's take on Dean-o and others. Dan, however, may be Allah's worthy successor. Look at the evidence.

Welcome Kerry Spot readers
Via Roberto,

You also got a mention (by name!!) on The Kerry Spot at National Review On-Line

Here's the Kerry Spot item,

PLEASE NOTE TODAY'S NEW YORK SUN

How do I link to this brilliant New York Sun article without looking like I'm motivated by jealousy? As soon as I heard Wonkette and Andrew Sullivan were CNN's picks to represent "the blogosphere" in their State of the Union coverage, I was grumbling. Sure, I'd love to appear as a TV pundit. But even more important than my fragile ego is the fact that there are dozens of bloggers who could probably give more interesting and substantive SOTU reaction – Mickey Kaus, Roger L. Simon, the guys who write for the Belmont Club, Austin Bay, Diplomiad, (although they just went on hiatus) Gregory Djerejian, Bill from InDC Journal , — and that’s not even counting other big guns of the blogosphere – LGF, PowerLine, Hugh,
Glenn. (And I know there are more. Offense not meant towards anyone I forgot.)

Sullivan had taken a leave of absence from blogging the day before, and Wonkette is… well, as Fausta Wertz put it, “the Paris Hilton of the blogosphere.”

Wait, it quotes Kathryn!

Ladies and gentlemen, please note the comment by NRO editor Kathryn Jean Lopez at the end of this New York Sun article.

I'm sure guys in radio get irritated when someone suggests Howard Stern is representative of all talk show hosts. I'm sure there are television show hosts who don't like the idea that Bill O'Reilly represents the face of prime-time cable news.

I think that's the way a lot of bloggers feel when they see Wonkette offered as the face of the blogosphere.

UPDATE: Cam: "Apparently the Andrew Sullivan/Wonkette Mandatory Mention Act of 2005 somehow managed to sneak through Congress."

UPDATE, AGAIN: TKS reader KJ (not Lopez) makes a good comparison: To read many folks in the mainstream media, there are only two leaders of evangelical Christians - Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. To many folks, Wonkette and Sullivan are the bloggers.

Thank you Kerry Spot.

By now even Wonkette's using the Paris Hilton analogy.

Paul Johnson on democracy
Why Millions Say, Softly, God Bless America

Despite all these false friends and hidden enemies, however, democracy is taking its first faltering steps in the Arab-Muslim world. It may well be that in history's long perspective, America's success in turning Afghanistan and Iraq away from tyranny, fear and murder toward the peaceful rule of the ballot will seem a historic turning point. Other successes may well follow, and the chariot of democracy will gather momentum.

Just as the appalling 20th century was the age of the totalitarian state, the Gulag and Auschwitz, so the 21st may come to be seen as the age of government "of the people, by the people, for the people." If so, the U.S., by its courage and persistence, will be able to take primary credit. It has certainly led from the front, and it has shown that it knows how to use its position as the world's sole superpower with judgment, honor and unselfishness.

I think Abraham Lincoln would be proud of what George W. Bush and the U.S. forces have done. After the freeing of the slaves, what more logical and benevolent step could there be than to free millions of Arabs from the slavery of terror? So I say, God Bless America. And I'm confident that countless millions throughout the world say so, too, even if they do not dare--yet--to say so aloud.

Just last week I posted Mario Vargas Llosa's wonderful article, where he said,

No matter what the result of the elections might be, they have been, just from the huge participation of voters, a huge success of large consequences in the entire Middle East. The elections show that it is perfectly possible for a country with a large Arab and Muslim majority to opt for a democratic system where power alternates, where the right to disagree is respected, and where a vertical and horizontal decentralization of powers guarantees autonomy to the religious and ethnic minorities.

It wouldn't have happened if it weren't for America and the Americans.

Gringo's looking at journalistic standards

In short, here's where I see a major issue that is crying out to be addressed: Mexico's journalistic ethics will, at the very least, heavily influence U.S.-based Spanish-language media's ethics. Certainly things like American libel law can and should apply here--it's still a defamatory lie, even if it's said en español--but SLM will, I submit, emulate Mexican media out of habit and necessity. And if we've got two separate media systems in the same country that speak two separate languages with conflicting ethical standards, I'd say we have a major-league problem on our hands.

Spanish-language radio is even worse. And don't get me started on how awful the radio ads can get.

Big bog/small blog and "the headless mob"
Dan's thoughts on Insta-Power: Blogging Myths and Media Hype

All it takes is for Instapundit, Powerline, Malkin and or a few other large blogs to shed light on some issue and, yes, you’ll likely see that issue highlighted on many blogs. But to what extent that comes from die hard conviction versus a quest for readership is grossly over-estimated in my opinion. If there is anything I know about bloggers, it is that they are as disparate of opinion as any other large group of individuals, and often just as in need and want of individual recognition, site traffic, and buzz for their own particular viewpoint. Consequently what might appear as a gathering of the like minded might in fact be one; but it could just as easily be a collection of smaller fish with a slightly different viewpoint clamoring for attention within a greater mass.

I see pundits and large bloggers talk about power, the new media and change – small bloggers often have to content themselves with wondering how much they want to continue blogging given the relative lack of interaction, traffic and recognition, unless, of course they want to play the big blog, MSM Insta-Power game. Given the relative immaturity of the medium, it really is just that – a game. And to some extent it’s being played by powerful people with new pawns – only these pawns can actually talk, if anyone ever asks them. But then, this is only the opinion of one right wing blogger. What the hell can any one of those guys really know?

This post has generated several thoughtful comments, including this one from Beth

Dan, you must have been reading my mind when you wrote this one. Today--or should I say yesterday?--I fumed all day about how there are dozens of us small to mid-size bloggers and ONE biggie (LB) all staying on message with the Terri Schiavo blogburst, with little to no help from those who direct the fuckin' traffic. While the biggies are patting themselves on the back for "their" success in taking down Eason Jordan (they weren't the ONLY voices) and fighting with those assholes over stupid shit like Jeff Gannon, of all things, we smaller bloggers are actually trying to effect POSITIVE change--trying to save a life, for Chrissakes.

I've emailed all the biggies and the only response I've gotten so far is from La Shawn Barber, who is a rare exception to what you've said above despite her enormous success. She knows what blogging is about and knows that we all have something to say. Other than that, David Limbaugh--a "real" media person of sorts, not even a "real" blogger--was the only other big voice to bother responding or acting. Maybe the others don't agree with our cause, fine. But I SERIOUSLY doubt it in some of their cases.

Jonathan notices the MSM's trying to perpetuate a fallacy

While I don't think pure blogging can be strictly defined to exclude any particular type of blogs, I'm pretty certain that Eason Jordan did NOT resign just because the blogosphere called for it. The myth perpetuated by the MSM, playing the victim, is that the blogosphere is a lynch mob that always gets its way.

The MSM might want to picture bloggers as a lynch mob in order to justify dismissing bloggers' opinions, or to somehow try to find a way to control bloggers' content. Like Betsy yesterday, I see the MSM/blogger dichotomy as a partnership, particularly in view of how many large blogs have working relationships with the MSM.

Small blogs are in a situation similar to independent fimmakers. Thousands of people all around the world make films, but only a small percentage recover their financial investment. Those who get picked up by the better-marketed film festivals (i.e., large linking blogs, such as Instapundit) find a distributor. Some find an agent (as some bloggers have). Some films are made as "independent" films even when heavily sponsored by distributors, such as Miramax -- just as some blogs list "team" of a dozen people, like Wonkette (a team underwritten by ?)-- and get broad publicity in the MSM.

I blog because I want to write my opinions on a variety of subjects (and it improves my writing, too). I read small blogs exactly for the same reason: because people like Dan write what they (not someone else) have to say. I'm grateful that I can do both. If a large blog links to me, that's enjoyable. If I write it (and, in my case, it's a matter of what not to blog about, since there's always a lot to blog about), and the readers come, that's even better. But, to paraphrase the (tennis-playing) philosopher, "the journey's the thing".

Obligatory Westminster Dog Show blogging
German Shorthaired Pointer Wins Westminster Dog Show

No bassets were in the final round. Maybe next year.

Maybe I should get an agent
On Thursday February 3d I told Pia Catton of the NY Sun that "Wonkette is the Paris Hilton of blogging".

Now "Wonkette's saying of Joshua Marshall

Apparently, Mr. Marshall is an internet geek version of Paris Hilton. What. The. Fuck. Joshua?

What. The. Fuck. Wonkette?

Update Yikes, Instapundit linked to her!
Clarification: Since kl, commenting at Jeff Jarvis's blog asked, "Hey! What did Hilton do to you?" I must clarify that no offense is intended to Ms Hilton.

Marriage, arranged by Blair?
Melanie Phillips, in The third-way monarchy wonders whether the timing of Charles & Camilla's wedding was planned by Tony Blair.

Consider first of all the timing. The wedding is to be held on April 8. The general election is expected to be called for May 5. Mr Blair has reportedly decided to fire the election gun in the week of the wedding and dissolve Parliament the day before, thus milking it to his advantage.

But an event of this significance would have been planned for some time, and the Prime Minister was certainly aware of it.

The timing of this marriage, so close to the election, is highly suspicious because it is so much in Mr Blair’s interests. It means that for him, much of the heat will be off because a firecracker — a major event of extraordinary constitutional significance and controversy — is being tossed (notwithstanding the leak) slap bang into the middle of the campaign.

Possibly so. I expect expert politicians not to miss the opportunities a "monarchy-in-its-pocket" would bring.

The WSJ's transactional analysis
Those of us who remember the 1970s will probably remember the pop-psychology best-seller, I'm Ok-You're Ok by Thomas Harris. If you may recall (or for those readers much to young to know), the book explained transactional analysis,

"Happy childhood" notwithstanding, most of us are living out the NOT OK feelings of a defenseless CHILD wholly dependent on OK others for stroking and care. By the third year of life, says Dr. Harris, most of us have made the unconscious decision I'M NOT OK-YOU'RE OK. This negative Life Position, shared by successful and unsuccessful people alike, contaminates our rational ADULT potential -- leaving us vulnerable to the inappropriate, emotional reactions of our CHILD and the uncritically learned behavior programmed into our PARENT.

In personal Transactions, NOT OK people resort to harmful withdrawal, rituals, activities, pastimes, and games for getting needed strokes while avoiding painful intimacy with people they see as OK.

Transactional analysis had its day in the sun, but like ponchos and Frye boots went out of fashion. Like ponchos and Frye boots, it now seems to be making a comeback. I realized as much when I read yesterday's Wall Street Journal editorialThe Jordan Kerfuffle: Did he really have good reason to quit CNN?

No doubt this point of view will get us described as part of the "mainstream media." But we'll take that as a compliment since we've long believed that these columns do in fact represent the American mainstream. We hope readers buy our newspaper because we make grown-up decisions about what is newsworthy, and what isn't.

I'm OK, they're OK?

Speaking of transactional analysis,

The strip refers to this,

Is the rise of crusading bloggers a healthy development, as many media analysts maintain, or the creation of a new Wild West with no rules or responsibilities? Hours after Jordan stepped down, Steve Lovelady of Columbia Journalism Review e-mailed his verdict to New York University professor and blogger Jay Rosen: "The salivating morons who make up the lynch mob prevail."

You can read Jay Rosen's post Eason Jordan Resigns; also don't miss his Closing Thoughts on the Resignation of Eason Jordan.

I say, Rosen's OK. Lovelady's not OK.

Betsy's definitely OK:

I think it is becoming more and more clear that journalism is not a profession that demands specialized training like being a lawyer or doctor. Mostly, you need to know how to write and write quickly. You need research skills. And you need access to stories. "Amateurs" blogging from home can have the first two skills. And, as Jeff Jarvis said on CNN this weekend, whereever the public can appear at functions, they can blog. The circle of stories that only journalists can report is becoming more limited. I would like to picture the interrelationship between bloggers and journalists as an unspoken partnership. They can go out there and do the reporting where bloggers can't or won't go. Bloggers can add their own bits of research and use their memories to make connections to previous stories such as Captain Ed finding the previous quote that Eason Jordan had made alleging that the military had tortured journalists. And people will benefit from having more information available to them than they had previously.

A partnership it is.

Reason for joy
The crocus are coming out!

France2 is not CNN
Not by a long shot.

John Rosenthal's Transatlantic Intelligencer blog has been following up on the story of The Fake, but Accurate Intifada

On September 30, 2000, the nightly news program of the French public television channel France2 shows images apparently depicting a Palestinian boy and his father caught in the crossfire of a clash between Palestinian militants and Israeli troops in the town of Netzarim in the Gaza Strip. The voice-over of the France2 reporter, Charles Enderlin, explains the situation as follows: "Here are Djamal and his father. They are the target of fire coming from the Israeli position. The child signals, but...there's a new burst of fire....The child is dead and his father is wounded."
. . .
France2's September 30, 2000 report of the Israeli shooting of the Palestinian boy Mohammed Al-Dura (or "Djamal", as he was called in that report) was unfounded. Or as Denis Jeambar and Daniel Leconte said in unison when interviewed on Tuesday on the Parisian radio station RCJ [Jewish Community Radio]: it is "false".
. . .
It should be noted that Charles Enderlin [the France2 correspondent] published a response to Jeambar and Leconte [link in French] in the January 27 edition of Le Figaro. He did not deny the facts cited by Jeambar and Leconte. But he noted that even if the claim that the Israeli soldiers shot and killed Mohammed Al-Dura should not be true, "for me, the image corresponded to the reality of the situation not only in Gaza but also in the West Bank." Americans will be familiar with this style of argument from some of their own supposed news organizations

In a follow-up post, Rosenthal wrote, [emphasis mine]

The Times/IHT report, however, fails to mention what all three of the independent French journalists who have viewed the rushes – Luc Rosenzweig, Denis Jeambar, and Daniel Leconte – have confirmed and emphasized: namely, that the bulk of the material contained in these rushes consists of obvious “stagings” or “mise-en-scène” of Palestinians being shot and wounded. It is, above all, this fact - hitherto unknown, since France 2 has refused to release the complete rushes - that lends support to the Metula News Agency’s longstanding charge that the Mohammed Al-Dura footage, reportedly comprising just some 3 minutes of the total, is also staged.

In yesterday's post Transatlantic Intelligencer discusses the France2 nightly news program of last Wednesday, February 9. I have been following the story of the al-Doura video, and imagine my surprise when France2 pops the fake video, again, this time in a story about

a televised encounter between Jamal Al-Dura, the supposed father of Mohammed, and Shmuel Biri, the father of an Israeli soldier killed three days before the alleged Netzarim incident . . . . (As an aside, though France 2 presents the meeting between the two “fathers of victims” as a hopeful sign of reconciliation in the Middle East, in fact Jamal Al-Dura’s discourse – demanding that Israel return to “us” what is “ours”, including, n.B., Jerusalem – is anything but conciliatory.)
. . .
Now, it will be recalled from my earlier posts on the Mohammed Al-Dura affair that the images broadcast “around the world” of Mohammed Al-Dura have in fact never included the boy’s death throws. Charles Enderlin has long maintained that he intentionally cut the images of the boy’s death throws from the report because they were “intolerable”. Speaking to the French magazine Télérama and using the same French word agonie, Enderlin said: “I cut the child’s death throws [agonie]. It was intolerable....It would not have added anything.” Contrary to Enderlin’s declarations, however, Luc Rosenzweig, Denis Jeambar, and Denis Leconte – the three French journalists who were recently permitted to view the complete rushes in the presence of France2 news director Arlette Chabot – have revealed that the rushes do not contain any such scene of the boy’s death. To quote again Jeambar and Leconte: “These famous ‘death throws’ [agonie], which Enderlin claims to have cut from the report, do not exist.”

The absence of any scene documenting the child’s death in the rushes represents one of the major grounds that have emerged from the three journalists’ viewing of the rushes in support of the hypothesis that the alleged killing of Mohammed Al-Dura was staged. The other major revelation supporting this hypothesis is, of course, the presence in the remainder of the rushes of what Rosenzweig, Jeambar, and Leconte all concur were obviously staged episodes – or “mise-en-scène” – of other Palestinians being wounded.

TI concludes with the statement, "the use made by France2 of the Mohammed Al-Dura footage on its February 9th newscast constitutes an act of remarkable bad faith."

Allow me to remind you that France2 is government-funded.

Update A friend emailed me this: Charles Johnson was interviewed by France2 last Thursday, and posts as follows, LGF vs France2

I did an interview with France 2 today, to tell the saga of LGF and our involvement in Rathergate. It was a friendly session for the most part. The subject of the occasional anti-French remarks that appear in our comments was brought up, and I pointed out that French media had more than a little anti-Americanism as well. (There’s even a magazine called “The Anti-American.”)

At the end, I asked Florent (the interviewer) about the Muhammad al-Dura controversy, in which France 2 is alleged to have deliberately helped promote Palestinian propaganda; at first, he seemed not to know what I was talking about, but then the cameraman chimed in and said, “Oh yes, the Israeli envoy has admitted there is no controversy, it’s all over.” All over! Everyone relax now. No problem. Everything’s patched up.

The interview will be broadcast in the Envoyé Spécial show.

The MSM, "a news industry in the midst of a stunning revolution"
From the NY Sun editorial,

Not long ago, the columnist Mark Steyn wrote, "Remind me never to complain about 'liberal media bias' again. Right now, liberal media bias is conspiring to assist the Democrats to sleepwalk over the cliff." It was a typically prescient observation. For it certainly seems that it's not just honest-liberal editors, like Mr. Keller, who are waking up. In the Eason Jordan affair, it was an honest-liberal politician, congressman Barney Frank, who confronted CNN's Mr. Jordan for his remarks in Davos accusing American troops of deliberately killing journalists.

Via Hispalibertas, Boston Herald reporter Jules Critteden says,

I am also alarmed that the editor of a major media watchdog publication's web spinoff would cite a report titled Two Murders and a Lie (Reporters Without Borders, and apparently without standards) to support Jordan, as well as the similarly flawed Permission to Fire, (Committee to Protect Journalists) both of which offer selectively reported and distorted views of the Palestine incident that are peppered with inaccuracies and speculation. There is no evidence to support accusations of either murder or lying in the Palestine incident.

Critteden was actually at the Hotel Palestine. Mudville Gazette interviewed Critteden, who explains,

JC: Yes. I was quoted in the reports, selectively and/or inaccurately, and had RWB remove my remarks, which they reported inaccurately and without permission. CPJ, while casting aspersions on the soldiers based on speculation, neglected to include remarks I made on the character of Gibson and CO Capt. Phillip Wolford, whom I knew as professionals who went to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties. I lived with them, rode with them into a series of actions and have great respect for them. The Palestine was an accident by well-intentioned men who had been under fire, some of it intense, since dawn the day before.

All of us who went to Iraq, embedded and non-embedded press, knew we could be killed. Many of us narrowly avoided it, but others weren't so lucky. It is part of the deal. What happened at the Palestine underscores the fact that there is no safe place in a war zone. That point also is illustrated by what happened to two European reporters embedded with 2nd Brigade of the 3rd ID, who they chose not to join the assault on Baghdad on April 7 due to the danger. They stayed back at the brigade TOC, where they were killed by an Iraqi missile. So much for second guessing one's safety options.

Mudville Gazette will have further posts on this subject.

Coincidences?
I'm not one to look for conspiracy theories, but news reports for the last 24 hours are enough to give one pause -- and to awaken laten paranoia, too. Listed in order of more-recent-to-less-recent:

Beirut Car Bomb Kills 9; Politician Targeted

The front of the famous St. George Hotel (search) was devastated in the blast, with several balconies blown off. Along the Mediterranean corniche, at least 20 cars were in flames or destroyed, and the fronts of several other bulidings were heavily damaged, including a British bank and the landmark Phoenicia Hotel.
. . .
The explosion near the city's waterfront shortly before noon shook buildings in the city center and was heard in outlying hills overlooking the Lebanese capital.

Rash of Bombings Jolts Philippines; 3 Dead

The brutal Muslim extremist group Abu Sayyaf claimed responsibility in a call between the explosions.

One blast, outside the Gaisano Mall in southern General Santos city, could be heard a mile away around 6:30 p.m., witnesses said. Police said at least three people were killed and at least 15 others were injured.

Seven injured in Paris theatre blast

"The explosion took place without a fire towards 0700 (0600 GMT) on the bottom floor, and the structural damage is significant," a police spokeswoman said.

The seven injured were taken to hospital for tests, she said. Two of them were theatre watchmen, LCI television said.

The facade of the building's lower front collapsed in a heap of rubble, shattered glass and wood panelling. The basement, bottom and first floors were destroyed. The facade of the theatre's upper floors though appeared intact.

The avenue where the theatre is located was closed to traffic.

An initial inquiry by workers from French gas company Gaz de France appeared to rule out a gas leak.

"The building is not supplied with gas, and there was no call because of the smell of gas," a Gaz de France spokeswoman said. "Measurements taken at the theatre did not detect any trace of gas."

Justice Minister Dominique Perben told Radio J it was too early to determine the cause of the blast

Fears of collapse as fire ravages huge Madrid office block

pall of brown smoke dominated Madrid's skyline early on Sunday as officials said that a 31-floor office building in a central neighbourhood could collapse after the biggest fire in the Spanish capital's history.

With the exception of three firefighters who were affected by fumes, nobody was known to have been hurt in the fire at the Windsor Tower, which broke out around 11:00pm Saturday (local time) when the building was empty.

The fire was believed to have been started by a short circuit on the 21st floor.

Barcepundit has comprehensive links to the Spanish media, and his own comments,

More seriously, it will be impossible to know until the fire is 100% extinguished and forensic experts go in. They'll have to investigate not only the cause of the fire, but why hydrants and fire-extinguishing automatic systems didn't work; even though there were renovations, the offices were working just the same. Hmmm.

Yes, you could say I'm paranoid.

The NYT, Clint, Canterbury trendies, Dame Edna, and Jane
Frank Rich got himself tied in knots over a Baby:

Rush Limbaugh used his radio megaphone to inveigh against the "liberal propaganda" of "Million Dollar Baby," in which Mr. Eastwood plays a crusty old fight trainer who takes on a fledgling "girl" boxer (Hilary Swank) desperate to be a champ. Mr. Limbaugh charged that the film was a subversively encoded endorsement of euthanasia, and the usual gang of ayotallahs chimed in. Michael Medved, the conservative radio host, has said that "hate is not too strong a word" to characterize his opinion of "Million Dollar Baby." Rabbi Daniel Lapin, a longtime ally of the Christian right, went on MSNBC to accuse Mr. Eastwood of a cultural crime comparable to Bill Clinton having "brought the term 'oral sex' to America's dinner tables."

If there's a running theme in Clint Eastwood's movies, I would say it would be that "actions have consequences", a concept that Rich might consider right-wing. Aside from that, Clint has made movies I really enjoyed, and movies that I hated, almost to the point, as Mr. Medved put it, where "hate is not too strong a word". However, Million Dollar Baby's million-dollar publicity (at least in this part of the country) has focused almost entirely on its being a boxing story -- with Hilary Swank's shoulder muscles bulging out of her sports bra -- instead of allowing for the possibility of a different theme. Perhaps that might explain why some people are upset: they went in looking for Rocky and instead got The Sea Inside. That could be a bummer.

It probably doesn't help to have the on-line version of the article sponsored by Teen Suicide Prevention, Suicide Thoughts?, and Suicide Information.

Rich mentions Michael Medved. Medved, who seems a likeable enough guy, got a good review in the NYT Books review for his book Right Turns,

Even many of his readers who hold to very different political and social views will concede, grudgingly, the quality of Medved's intellect. But in a time when we prefer to draw our ideological foes in caricature, they will have a harder time acknowledging the qualities of heart and conscience that, for him, matter far more.

Maybe Rich would do well to read Medved's book and learn about "respectful pluralism".

Also in the book review, a lengthy essay on that famous real-life dysfunctional couple of the Middle Ages (not the only famous real-life dysfunctional couple -- Henry and Eleanor come to mind), Abelard and Heloise. For those who've missed out on A&H's doings, the article starts with a brief summary,

Almost a thousand years ago, a teacher fell in love with his student. Almost a thousand years ago, they began a torrid affair. They made love in the kitchens of convents and in the boudoir of the girl's uncle. They wrote hundreds of love letters. When the girl bore a child, they were secretly married, but the teacher was castrated by henchmen of the enraged uncle. At her lover's bidding, the girl took religious orders. He took the habit of a monk. They retreated into separate monasteries and wrote to each other until parted by death.

Nearly parted, I should say, since they are buried together in a beautiful grave at the Père-Lachaise cemetery in Paris. Legend has it that "when Heloise was buried in 1164, 22 years after Abelard, he reached out from the grave to embrace her". When I first heard that, I didn't think it was a good thing -- after all, "until death do you part" might open possibilities -- but that's just me.

The NYT Sunday Magazine has Dame Edna on the cover, but imagine my disappointment when the article (written by Melanie Thernstrom) was about matchmakers, not about the Dame. Dame Edna looks a lot like my parents' next-door neighbor in Puerto Rico. The neighbor was an actual woman, not a man dressed as a woman and didn't wear rhinestones, but aside from that, they share a shocking resemblance. This resemblance makes the Dame funnier, an opinion The Husband and other family members don't quite share since they never met my former neighbor. (Both the neighbor and my parents moved in the 1990s, in case you wanted to know.) But I digress.

Back to the theme of the Middle Ages, the Beeb recently had four episodes of their idea of The Canterbury Tales. In my modern eyes, Chaucer had an arguably nearly-democratic theme (if you could allow me such an anachronism) in having people from all walks of life sharing together their lives' stories under the same roof, in a common goal -- that of a pilgrimage. Democratic instincts aside, this setting points to man's common experience of existence. To me, this is a most important part of the Tales. The Beeb totally left that out, and their Tales aren't even loosely connected. The Beeb's Tales were also woefully lacking in appeal. The Wife of Bath, who in Chaucer's version is a powerful rich woman who fell in love with the wrong (and much younger than her) guy, ends up a pathetic plastic-surgery mask of a woman keeping toy boys. By the end of the episode she would have felt right at home with the AbFab fashionistas. The Knight's Tale was depressing and totally lacking in a Knight's ethic. The Beeb's Sea Captain's Tale and Miller's Tale were totally unrecognizable, each sharing with the original Tale only its title and a few sparse details. The Miller, for instance, should have been titled the Karaoke Bar Owner but the TV episode did get the mooning scene. In all, this was no TV Forsyte Saga (neither the old nor the new version). The 2001 movie A Knight's Tale (which begins with the medieval attendees at a jousting match singing Queen's "We Will Rock You") was a great deal more accurate in conveying a Medieval ethic than any of the Beeb's trendies.

Possibly, a common thread to Million Dollar Baby, Medved's book, Abelard and Heloise's story, and the Canterbury Tales is that a moralizing theme runs through their stories.

Conveying a moralizing theme to a contemporary audience is very tricky, as James Bowman explains in his article The Inexhaustible Adaptability of Jane Austen. I want to see the updocoming Bride and Prejudice (a title pun that brings to mind Shaun of the Dead). I loved A&E's Pride and Prejudice, and Bridget Jones, and not only because of Colin Firth, but James Bowman's (and my own) favorite Austen film adaptation is Sense and Sensibility:

Above all, the movie shows an almost Janean sense of decorum. Like the morality which it champions, such filmmaking puts the highest value on passion as contained by reticence and restraint, and so it brings us as close as we are ever likely to get to experiencing in the movies what Jane Austen intended us to experience in her novels.

It also suggests that behind the spate of Austenian adaptations there may lie a certain nostalgia for a time in which the jungle of feelings and expectations that marriage has become for us was contained within social and customary boundaries.

A jungle of feelings and expectations it is. As Melanie Thernstrom explains,

I believed that I would spend my life with my ex-fiance. But we didn't marry, and although that is poignant and complicated, my ex-fiance and I still value our engagement because it was a beautiful thing at the time, and now we are friends.

This, at any rate, is the way I understand my life. But this is not the way Samantha understands life, and in part, you are hiring her for her understanding -- for suspending your own worldview and adopting hers. And in her view, a broken engagement is like skidding off the road when you were en route to the only place that matters: marriage. I can see from her face (and the horror with which she asks, How close was it to the wedding?) that for her the idea of valuing a trip that ended before the altar is as bizarre as sentimentalizing a bloody car wreck.

It seems to me that Jane's work would speak to the NYT Sunday Mag matchmakers' clients. May I recommend Pride and Prejudice for starters?

--------------------------

As you may or may not already be aware, members of the Watcher's Council hold a vote every week on what they consider to be the most link-worthy pieces of writing around... per the Watcher's instructions, I am submitting one of my own posts for consideration in the upcoming nominations process.

Here is the most recent winning council post, here is the most recent winning non-council post, here is the list of results for the latest vote, and here is the initial posting of all the nominees that were voted on.