Powered by Blogger

Ethel the Blog
Observations (and occasional brash opining) on science, computers, books, music and other shiny things that catch my mind's eye. There's a home page with ostensibly more permanent stuff. This is intended to be more functional than decorative. I neither intend nor want to surf on the bleeding edge, keep it real, redefine journalism or attract nyphomaniacal groupies (well, maybe a wee bit of the latter). The occasional cheap laugh, raised eyebrow or provocation of interest are all I'll plead guilty to in the matter of intent. Bene qui latuit bene vixit.

The usual copyright stuff applies, but I probably won't get enraged until I find a clone site with absolutely no attribution (which, by the way, has happened twice with some of my other stuff). Finally, if anyone's offended by anything on this site then please do notify me immediately. I like to keep track of those times when I get something right.

Google!


How to blog?

METABLOGGING

Blog Madness
Blog Portal
linkwatcher
Monitor

BLOGS (YMMV)

abuddhas memes
alamut
apathy
arms and the man
baghdad burning
bifurcated rivets
big left outside
boing boing
booknotes
bovine inversus
bradlands
bushwacker
camworld
cheek
chess log
cogent provocateur
cool tools
counterspin
crooked timber
delong
digby
drat fink
drmike
d-squared
dumbmonkey
electrolite
eschaton
estimated prophet
ezrael
fat planet
flutterby!
follow me here
geegaw
genehack
ghost
glare
gmtplus9
hack the planet
harmful
hauser report
hell for halliburton
honeyguide
hotsy totsy club
juan cole
kestrel's nest
k marx the spot
kuro5hin
lake effect
lambda
large hearted boy
leftbanker
looka
looking glass
macleod
maxspeak
medley
memepool
metagrrrl
mike's
monkeyfist
more like this
mouse farts
my dog
norbizness
off the kuff
orcinus
pandagon
pedantry
peterme
philosoraptor
pith and vinegar
plastic
portage
q
quark soup
quiggin
randomwalks
rip post
rittenhouse
see the forest
shadow o' hegemon
sideshow
simcoe
south knox bubba
slacktivist
smudge
submerging markets
sylloge
synthetic zero
talking points
tbogg
twernt
unknownnews
vacuum
vanitysite
virulent memes
whiskey bar
windowseat tv
wood s lot

TECH

Librenix
use perl
rootprompt
slashdot
freshmeat
Ars Technica
32BitsOnline
UGeek
AnandTech
Linux Today
Tom's Hardware
DevShed


"When they say, 'Gee it's an information explosion!', no, it's not an explosion, it's a disgorgement of the bowels is what it is. Every idiotic thing that anybody could possibly write or say or think can get into the body politic now, where before things would have to have some merit to go through the publishing routine, now, ANYTHING." - Harlan Ellison



JOLLY OLD PALS
Old pals Rumsy and Saddam


Other stuff of mild interest to some:
unusual literature
scientific software blog
physical oceanography glossary
computer-related tutorials and texts

Thursday, April 04, 2002

ANOTHER NEST OF RATS
MSNBC tells of a law firm that collaborated with Enron in setting up all those partnerships that hid their losses.
As lawyers and investigators attempt to unravel the tangle of controversial partnerships set up by Enron Corp. executives, their attention is being drawn to a thus far untapped repository of secrets: Kirkland & Ellis.

THE CHICAGO LAW FIRM was retained by former Enron Chief Financial Officer Andrew Fastow to represent at least some of the partnerships that contributed to the collapse of Enron late last year and that are being investigated by federal prosecutors and regulators for improprieties and possible illegalities.

Now, the law firm is being besieged with requests for information from Enron's creditors, a congressional committee and other parties. Some documents tucked away in Kirkland & Ellis's offices may provide clues about the partnerships' structures and how they were used to bolster Enron's financial results.

And what star performer do we find under this legal rock?
Kirkland & Ellis, with 850 lawyers, has four offices in the U.S. and one in London. The firm represents many blue-chip clients, including General Motors Corp., and is the home of former Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr, a partner in the firm's Washington office.
Maybe they can work out some kind of plea bargain where they can have all charges dropped and in turn blame Clinton for the controversial partnerships.
posted by Steven Baum 4/4/2002 03:45:16 PM | link

DEMOCRACY FLOURISHES IN AFGHANISTAN
The
IHT tells us how Hamid Karzai is distinguishing himself from the evil, evil Taliban.
Afghan security officials said Wednesday that they had arrested more than 200 of their political opponents in the last 48 hours, claiming they had broken up a conspiracy to mount a terror campaign against the government of Hamid Karzai and the former king, Mohammed Zahir Shah.

The officials said the conspiracy was linked to Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a longtime warlord known for his anti-Western views and ruthlessness on the battlefield. Those arrested were said to traveled recently to Pakistan and Iran, where Mr. Hekmatyar was last seen.

Mr. Hekmatyar, who is blamed for more as many 50,000 civilian deaths in his rocket attacks on the capital in the mid-1990s, was reported to have left Iran earlier this year after he vowed to expel foreigners from Afghanistan and topple the American-backed government.

Details on the alleged plot were sketchy, but the fact that the roundup focused on well-known opponents of Mr. Karzai's government seemed certain to prompt allegations that the alleged conspiracy was fabricated by the government to crush its political opponents.
...

Note that Hekmatyar is not a member of the Taliban, but one of the warlords whose viciousness allowed the Taliban to seize power in the 1990s. But hey, at least Al Qaida has been destroyed ... or at least driven into Pakistan or something.
posted by Steven Baum 4/4/2002 02:48:32 PM | link

ANOTHER USEFUL QUOTE
"He who is not with us is against us."

Vladimir Lenin

Well sure, he said it, too, but he meant it in a bad way.
posted by Steven Baum 4/4/2002 02:38:47 PM |
link

SO MUCH FOR THAT IDEA
Instead of following my brilliant plan to establish a new state called Kurdistan, the Bush Cabal
is offering the Kurdish territories in Iraq to Turkey. That is, the Kurdish problem isn't going to be solved by giving the Kurds their own nation. Rather, it will be swept under the rug by ceding the Iraqi Kurdish territories to Turkey, which will be "shocked" to discover that the Iraqi Kurds have suddenly gone "marxist", after which it will take up the slaughter where Saddam leaves off. Well, at least they'll be slaughtered by a democracy rather than a despotic police state. I'm sure they'll die much happier.
Many countries have spoken out against the Bush administration's plans to overthrow Saddam Hussein, but it would be a mistake to suppose that they will in fact cause trouble if the bombs start to fall. Washington has a long record of bringing its allies into line.

Take Turkey. Its prime minister, Bulent Ecevit, continues to oppose publicly the idea of attacking Iraq. But there is every reason to believe that the US has already offered control of Iraq's northern oilfields to Turkey in return for its support in Afghanistan and Iraq. This is what informed sources in Washington tell me; and it is confirmed by press reports of what Richard Perle, an influential adviser in the Bush administration, said while he was in Ankara with the vice-president, Dick Cheney.

The oil-rich Mosul area has been disputed since the collapse of the Ottoman empire at the end of the First World War. The British drew the maps and invented the states that exist today. Turkey disputed the British decision to give the Mosul province to the new Kingdom of Iraq, but finally accepted it in a treaty signed in 1926.


posted by Steven Baum 4/4/2002 02:33:15 PM | link

ISRAEL BLOCKS MORE WITNESSES
The Israelis are keeping
the Christian clergy as well as the media out of their private hunting reserves. They're smart enough to realize that other Christians will probably believe the clergy before they believe the Jews that their doctrines tell them, in no uncertain terms, are hell-bound.
Some 200 Christian clergymen were blocked by Israeli forces on Wednesday from entering Bethlehem where Israeli forces declared the birthplace of Jesus Christ a "closed military zone."

The clergymen, representing all the churches in the Holy Land, had come to demonstrate solidarity with local residents after the invasion by Israeli tanks and armoured vehicles early on Tuesday.
...


posted by Steven Baum 4/4/2002 02:18:07 PM | link

U.S. VETOS U.N. OBSERVERS
So what's the Bush Cabal doing to alleviate the situation in the Middle East, besides giving Sharon and his army free rein? It's also helping things by
vetoing a UN proposal to send observers to the Palestinian territories. That is, it's ensuring that there are no witnesses to the marauding IDF other than Palestinians, and we know how they all lie.
The United States rejected Tuesday the proposal from the United Nation's top human rights official to immediately send observers to the Palestinian territories to obtain information and make recommendations about the "severe deterioration" of the situation there.

US Ambassador Kevin E. Moley disagreed that any such action, under the auspices of the UN Commission on Human Rights, could contribute towards improving the situation in the Middle East.

The United States questioned the possible intervention of the UN commission in the Middle East and demanded its support for the diplomatic efforts being conducted from Washington and New York, the UN's main headquarters.

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, presented the initiative for sending a humanitarian mission to the occupied Palestinian territories and a report on the situation there during debate by the Commission on Human Rights, the UN's highest body dedicated to the issue, based in Geneva.

The Washington delegation once again has come down against Robinson and the resolutions the Commission has adopted in regard to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

To be fair, perhaps the Cabal is just concerned that the U.N. might run out of observers for those areas that really need them, e.g. the Kurdish territories in Iraq and Iran (but not in Turkey), etc.
posted by Steven Baum 4/4/2002 02:05:30 PM | link

ANOTHER TRIUMPH FOR THE HWOD
Remember the "scandal of the week of the century" involving oxycontin, i.e. "hillbilly heroin"? The braindead idiots running the Holy War on Drugs have instituted
predictable measures with predictable results. Well, at least we don't live in a police state where those in incredible pain are denied not only the suicide option but also pain relief by the benevolent czars running the state. But if Jesus could take a little pain, then so can you, so SHUT UP AND GRIT YOUR TEETH, DAMMIT!! Just sing along with a special tune Unca Ashcroft wrote to ease your suffering, and all will be fine.
After three decades of chronic, searing pain, Marie Dabrowski was finally able to sleep. She was able to think. And sometimes, thanks to her new pills, she could almost forget about her fibromyalgia, a mysterious nerve disorder characterized by fatigue, migraine headaches and full-body aches.

But Dabrowski's respite did not last. The medication responsible for her two-year break from daily misery was OxyContin. And about a month ago, Dabrowski's doctor cut her off. The move had nothing to do with callousness or lack of concern, says Dabrowski, who asked that her doctor remain anonymous. Instead, the doctor was spooked by a proposed Virginia law designed to intensify scrutiny of physicians who prescribe the drug. In the end, says Dabrowski, it was the prospect of police interrogation that pushed her doctor over the edge.

"When I went in [to her office], her receptionist explained to me that it was the DEA that was the problem and that my doctor was scared of getting in trouble," she says. "I told them that this was dangerous. People on [OxyContin] finally have something that keeps the pain away, and if the pain comes back they're going to commit suicide."

Widespread abuse of OxyContin, a painkiller made by Purdue Pharma LP, was first reported in the media about a year ago. Called "hillbilly heroin" because early cases of addiction surfaced in Appalachia, the pills were being crushed and then snorted or injected by users, who found the drug cheap and easy to obtain. Once touted by its manufacturer as a safe and effective alternative to highly addictive morphine, "Oxy" quickly became the scourge of law enforcement, spreading across the country with lightning speed, leaving hundreds of addicts in its wake.


posted by Steven Baum 4/4/2002 01:52:35 PM | link

IT'S TIME FOR KURDISTAN
Given that the Kurds have been nothing much more than target practive and/or expedient political pawns for the rest of the planet since political machinations in 1920 prevented the establishment of a separate Kurdistan, isn't it about time the nation builders did something right? That's right, it's time to establish a separate Kurdistan. First a little 20th century history from a
1987 Atlantic Monthly article by Robert Kaplan (yes, *that* Kaplan, the current fire-breathing saber-rattler favored by the Bush Cabal).

... Bad luck has abetted disunity. In the aftermath of the First World War the Kurds came close to winning a state of their own. The 1920 Treaty of Sèvres, whose purpose was to carve up and distribute the Ottoman Empire, provided for a Kurdish homeland in eastern Turkey. The following year, however, Kemal Ataturk defeated an invading Greek army and, by laying the groundwork for a new, cohesive Turkish state in the Anatolian heartland, was able to demand the treaty's revision. After the Second World War the Soviets, who had occupied northern Iran, allowed for the establishment of a small pro-Moscow Kurdish republic around the city of Mahabad. But as a result of Anglo-American pressure and an increasing preoccupation with Eastern Europe and the Balkans, Stalin abandoned his Iranian holdings at the end of 1946, leaving the Kurds at the mercy of Reza Shah, the late Shah's father, who crushed the fledgling regime and executed its leader, Ghazi Mohammed. To this day photos of Ghazi Mohammed occupy a prominent place in Kurdish redoubts in Iraq and Iran.

Another influential figure in Mahabad, Mulla Mustafa Barzani, lived in exile in the Soviet Union for more than a decade. Barzani later returned to lead several rebellions in northern Iraq -- supported covertly this time by the United States, Israel, and Iran. The most serious of these rebellions broke out in March of 1974, when the Iraqi regime had to use tanks and planes to repel Barzani's forces. Following an agreement between Iraq and Iran in 1975, the Shah withdrew his support from the Kurds and the revolt collapsed. The pesh mergas retreated to their caves in the mountains, and Barzani went into exile in the United States, where he died in 1979, in Washington, D.C.
...

Kaplan goes on to see how many times he can use the word "marxist" in connection with the Kurds being butchered by the Turks. After all, this was 1987, when street cred amongst that crowd was obtained by labeling the evil of the week as "marxist" rather than the currently favored "terrorist."

Basically, the splitting up of the Ottoman Empire caused what was an area called Kurdistan to be split into parts of four countries: Iran, Iraq, Syria and Turkey. A map of major deportation episodes of the 20th century attests to the brutal history of Kurds in each of these countries, whether the leadership of any country at any given time was labeled as democratic or despotic by either supporters or critics, or whether the Kurds were labeled as rebels or terrorists or democratic or marxist. The results have been uniform: forced deportation and mass slaughter, which continues to this day in all four of those countries. (The entire Kurdish map gallery is most interesting, by the way).

So how do we stop it? Since an invasion of Iraq is inevitable given the slippage of favorable poll results for the Bush Cabal, and since Iran has been inducted into the "evil axis" club, and since Bush just recently blamed Syria (amongst others) for the Israel/Palestine problems, grab a chunk of each country and build a Kurdistan. The problem is Turkey, which would have to give up a pretty big chunk of oil-rich land as its contribution to a new Kurdistan. But guess what? Damned near all of Turkey's military aid comes from the U.S. and Israel, so all the Cabal has to do is say "give up the land or no more guns or protection" and Turkey will start seeing things a bit more clearly. And Turkey has to give up something if chunks are going to be taken from the other three countries. Just because they allowed U.S. missiles pointed at the USSR to be based in Turkey during the Cold War doesn't give them a permanent free pass to commit ethic cleansing in the name of fighting "marxism."

Creating a Kurdistan will even be beneficial to the true aim of foreign policy in the Bush Cabal, i.e. oil. There's a lot of oil in northern Iraq and southern Turkey which, upon the creation of Kurdistan, would be owned by what would be a bunch of pretty goddamned grateful Kurds. And if they're insufficiently grateful, then we can just invade and install a puppet government. Sure, it'll probably cause more problems down the road, but that's why we're building bigger, better and more weapons.

A big upside will be that if anyone's going to be slaughtering Kurds after the creation of Kurdistan, it'll either be the Kurds themselves or us. No more target practice for the Turks, the Iraqis, the Iranians, or the Syrians.

If you want a precedent for this try Israel. As David Ben-Gurion himself said, the land for Israel was stolen from its previous owners (although he did produce an air-deed from his magic happy deity in the sky as justification), but since the splitting up of the Ottoman empire by France, England, Turkey, etc. was basically theft and thuggery in the first place, creating Kurdistan will be righting a historical wrong.

It's a win-win proposition. The continuing slaughter of the Kurds will be stopped and a grateful and oil-rich country will be formed. Where's the downside?
posted by Steven Baum 4/4/2002 10:58:00 AM | link

QUOTE OF THE WEEK
"Why should the Arabs make peace? If I were an Arab leader, I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we came here and stole their country. Why should they accept that?"

David Ben-Gurion


posted by Steven Baum 4/4/2002 09:35:10 AM |
link

IRAQ, IRAN AND HALABJAH
I've gone a bit overboard in assuming that anything the Cabal says is propaganda and probably a lie. As
this item points out, there is credible evidence that Saddam Hussein used gas on the Kurds. I've seen numbers ranging from 5000 to 50,000, but as with the number of children harmed or killed by the U.N. sanctions, one is too many and all debates about quantity are basically ideological squabbles in statistician's clothing.

The author is writing about the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s, a conflict whose bloodiness and viciousness reminded many of WWI. In 1982, it looked like Iran was going to win. It had pushed Iraq back across its own border and was preparing to advance.

Eventually backed by all the permanent Security Council members except China, a major international exercise in realpolitik was set in motion after Iran drove the Iraqis back across the international border in 1982 and spurned a multibillion-dollar reparation package in exchange for ending hostilities. That international community’s pro-Iraq tilt successfully denied Khomeini's dream of an Islamic Republic in Iraq and of spreading his revolution further afield. Involved was crucial military aid, sometimes overt, more often clandestine, ranging from openly "loaned" French Super Etendard fighter-bombers to covert American jamming of Tehran's radar and furnishing of spy-satellite photographs that pinpointed Iranian targets. Even so, Iraq barely outlasted Iran. Far from "behaving" just two years after the war an unchastened Saddam invaded Kuwait.

Creating the stalemate to save Saddam from his own folly was not without terrible human cost. The war's free-wheeling cycle of human rights violations multiplied with ever more deadly innovative twists and turns. These violations were regularly denounced by human rights organizations, but to no avail.

Over the years one side or the other, sometimes both, violated the 1949 Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols of 1977 prohibiting the targeting of civilians and civilian objectives, forbidding the use of children in combat, and protecting prisoners of war, as well as the 1925 Protocol banning the use of chemical weapons.

Countless waves of untrained Iranian boy-soldiers armed only with plastic keys purportedly guaranteeing entry to heaven blew themselves up by the tens of thousands clearing mine fields or died charging into artillery barrages worthy of Verdun or Stalingrad. Iraqi missiles crashed through the night to spread terror among Iranian city dwellers hundreds of miles from the front. Relentless Iraqi and Iranian shelling destroyed each other's cities and towns near the international border.

Particularly troublesome for the ICRC [International Committee of the Red Cross] was both sides' penchant for interfering in its usually cut-and-dried procedures. Both Iran and Iraq frustrated the ICRC's tracing of prisoners of war and the identification of the missing and dead, thus enormously complicating postwar efforts to sort out who had survived and delaying repatriation.

Iraq repeatedly complained its prisoners of war were "liquidated", kept incommunicado, or, in the case of Shia soldiers, brainwashed and compelled to join the "Badr Brigade", special turncoat military units organized at Iranian instigation to fight one day for an Islamic Republic in their motherland. The ICRC had trouble with Iran in registering prisoners and persuading Tehran to allow prisoner interviews without witnesses.

Tehran protested that its prisoners in Iraq were prevented from praying together, which Baghdad justified on security grounds. Iraq prevented the ICRC from visiting some twenty thousand Iranians captured starting in 1987.

Even after the fighting ended in 1988, no significant prisoner repatriation took place for two more years despite the cease-fire's provisions for their immediate return and persistent ICRC prodding. (In 1990 Saddam relented to improve relations with Iran as Iraq braced for the U.S.-led coalition to wrest back Kuwait.) When finally some forty thousand men from each side were sent home, the exchanges violated ICRC regulations against such one-for-one prisoner releases.

A decade after the war's last shot was fired, all prisoners were still not back home. But in April 1998 Iran, in a fresh bid to improve relations with the Arab world and break out of two decades of isolation, repatriated some six thousand Iraqi prisoners of war. ICRC officials who visited prisoners of war in Iran reported many of the remaining twelve thousand official detainees looked twenty years older than their actual age. Many had long since joined the Badr Brigade and feared that going home would entail reprisal.

Underpinning Iranian refusal to observe ICRC obligations was not ignorance, as was initially true with Iraq, but the Islamic revolution's rejection of any undertakings by the Shah and his Pahlavi dynasty, which Khomeini had overthrown eighteen months before Iraq started its preemptive war. The ICRC, its rules, regulations, and persistent officials with their claims of objective behavior were all suspect as Western and Christian and disregarded as nonbinding on a revolution burning with its own militantly self-righteous vision of universality.

No such ideological explanation easily springs to mind in trying to understand Saddam's rationale for breaking the taboo against using chemical weapons, first against Iranian troops, then against his Kurdish fellow citizens. But his decision was in keeping with his long established penchant for the jugular in punishing anyone who dared cross him. (Gassing Kurds, or the reprisal killing of eight thousand civilian members of Kurdish guerrilla leader Massoud Barzani's tribe in 1983 was all the same to Saddam.) He shrewdly gambled the outside world would tolerate almost anything to stop Khomeini.

After all, during the war Western companies wittingly sold Iraq "dual use" chemicals and equipment for purported "fertilizer" plants, which they knew full well could produce a variety of treaty-banned gases and nerve agents. These weapons still cause problems for UN inspectors now tasked with removing them from Saddam's arsenal. It strains credulity to believe Western governments were not aware of the dangers of such chemicals before Iraq's occupation of Kuwait in 1990.

But it was only then, with pressure on to demonize Saddam and with their own troops exposed to his chemical weapons, that Western governments overcame their amnesia and started denouncing Iraq's use of these proscribed arms. To this day the UN is shielding the Western firms involved. Rolf Ekeus, the former chief UN arms inspector in Iraq, has confirmed privately that the Security Council cut a deal in 1993 with UN inspectors, Baghdad, and the International Atomic Energy Agency not to reveal the companies' identities.

They dropped mustard gas, a World War I favorite, as well as tabun and sarin, both nerve agents developed by the Nazis but never before deployed, and VX, which Iraq was testing for the first time. At least three thousand Kurdish civilians died.

For once the obscene effects of chemical weapons were graphically recorded. Iranian helicopters ferried in foreign correspondents, television teams, and photographers. Their reports, and especially images of corpses frozen in Pompeii-like poses in Halabjah streets, shocked the world.

There is an interesting long footnote about chemical weapons which explains, among other things, why the author calls the 1925 Geneval Protocol a "toothless" agreement. For instance, a state gassing its own citizens is technically not a violation of that treaty.
A UN investigation of several such instances concluded that chemical weapons, including mustard gas and the nerve agent known as Tabun, had been used. By the end of the war, Iran claimed tens of thousands of chemical weapons casualties. There was no doubt that Iraq had broken the 1925 Geneva Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use of Asphyxiating, Poisonous, or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, nor that Iran had retaliated in kind, albeit briefly and less effectively.

Since then, Saddam Hussein has apparently stockpiled chemical and biological weapons, and there have been uncorroborated allegations of the use of such weapons by other States: the use of gas by South African-backed forces in Mozambique, by contestants in the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia, by Turks against Kurds, and in the Sudan civil war. More recently, there have been unverified claims by a Soviet-era defector that the Russians may have developed super-strains of germ weapons, and some of these may still exist in the Russian arsenal [Ken Alibek in his book Biohazard].

For the observer at the front line, accusations of the use of chemical and biological weapons are almost impossible to verify on the spot. Only after a prolonged investigation that involves examining the corpses of the victims, interviewing survivors, and searching for residues of the weapons ingredients and products of chemical reactions involving such ingredients, can the truth be known - and sometimes not even then.
...
Put together over the years, these reports of the use of banned weapons underscored the urgency of tightening international controls. The 1925 Geneva Protocol, eventually ratified by 149 states, prohibited only the "first use" of chemical and biological weapons. Countries were allowed to develop and stockpile chemical weapons for "defensive" purposes: the law did not prohibit reprisals with chemical weapons. The ban did not apply against a country's own nationals, nor tear gases, including CS gas. The 1972 Biological Weapons Convention renounced germ weapons totally, including their development and stockpiling. In 1993, the new Chemical Weapons Convention was opened for signature in Paris. It entered into force on April 29, 1997, and 111 states have ratified it, including the U.S. and Russia.

The essence of the fifty-thousand-word treaty is that each State party undertakes never, in any circumstances, to develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile, or retain chemical weapons, or transfer them directly or indirectly to anyone; never to use chemical weapons or engage in any preparations for doing so; and never to assist, encourage, or induce, in any way, anyone to engage in any activity prohibited by the treaty.

By "chemical weapons", the treaty means munitions or other devices using toxic chemicals to cause death, temporary incapacitation, or permanent harm to humans or animals. The treaty does not prohibit the development of toxic chemicals for industrial, agricultural, research, medical, pharmaceutical, or other peaceful purposes, or purposes related to protection against chemical weapons, and law enforcement including domestic riot control. Riot control agents, such as CS gas, cannot be used as a method of warfare, a distinction not always easy to make. (In a move to which no other party to the convention took exception, President Bill Clinton pledged to Congress that the United States will not be restricted in the use of riot control agents in two circumstances: conflicts to which the United States is not a party but is playing a peacekeeping role, or locations where U.S. troops are stationed with the approval of the host State.)


posted by Steven Baum 4/4/2002 09:32:56 AM | link

Wednesday, April 03, 2002

THE POLLS
One of candidate Bush's favorite lines was how, unlike evil and flip-floppy Clinton, his White House wouldn't be a slave to polls. He continued with that chant even after Antonin Scalia elected him president, with his string-pullers making sure to stage-manage around that theme on at least one occasion, as reported by the
Washington Monthly. At a post-9/11 press conference, the following occurred:
At this point, former Clinton press secretary Dee Dee Myers piped up, "What do the poll numbers say?" All eyes turned to Bush. Without missing a beat, the famous Bush smirk crossed the president's face and he replied, "In this White House, Dee Dee, we don't poll on something as important as national security."
So, as with everything else concerning the Cabal, what's the reality behind the dog and pony show?
Announcing that one ignores polls, then, is an easy way of conveying an impression of leadership, judgment, and substance. No one has recognized and used this to such calculated effect as Bush. When he announced he would "bring a new tone to Washington," he just as easily could have said he'd banish pollsters from the White House without any loss of effect. One of the most dependable poll results is that people don't like polling.

But in fact, the Bush administration is a frequent consumer of polls, though it takes extraordinary measures to appear that it isn't. This administration, unlike Clinton's, rarely uses poll results to ply reporters or congressional leaders for support. "It's rare to even hear talk of it unless you give a Bush guy a couple of drinks," says one White House reporter. But Republican National Committee filings show that Bush actually uses polls much more than he lets on, in ways both similar and dissimilar to Clinton. Like Clinton, Bush is most inclined to use polls when he's struggling. It's no coincidence that the administration did its heaviest polling last summer, after the poorly received rollout of its energy plan, and amid much talk of the "smallness" of the presidency. A Washington Monthly analysis of Republican National Committee disbursement filings revealed that Bush's principal pollsters received $346,000 in direct payments in 2001. Add to that the multiple boutique polling firms the administration regularly employs for specialized and targeted polls and the figure is closer to $1 million. That's about half the amount Clinton spent during his first year; but while Clinton used polling to craft popular policies, Bush uses polling to spin unpopular ones---arguably a much more cynical undertaking.

Bush's principal pollster, Jan van Lohuizen, and his focus-group guru, Fred Steeper, are the best-kept secrets in Washington. Both are respected but low-key, proficient but tight-lipped, and, unlike such larger-than-life Clinton pollsters as Dick Morris and Mark Penn, happy to remain anonymous. They toil in the background, poll-testing the words and phrases the president uses to sell his policies to an often-skeptical public; they're the Bush administration's Cinderella. "In terms of the modern presidency," says Ron Faucheux, editor of Campaigns & Elections, "van Lohuizen is the lowest-profile pollster we've ever had." But as Bush shifts his focus back toward a domestic agenda, he'll be relying on his pollsters more than ever.

An example is given of a Bush speech on privatizing social security that was almost completely crafted from poll results.
On the last day of February, the Bush administration kicked off its renewed initiative to privatize Social Security in a speech before the National Summit on Retirement Savings in Washington, D.C. Rather than address "Social Security," Bush opted to speak about "retirement security." And during the brief speech he repeated the words "choice" (three times), "compound interest" (four times), "opportunity" (nine times) and "savings" (18 times). These words were not chosen lightly. The repetition was prompted by polls and focus groups. During the campaign, Steeper honed and refined Bush's message on Social Security (with key words such as "choice," "control," and "higher returns"), measuring it against Al Gore's attack through polls and focus groups ("Wall Street roulette," "bankruptcy" and "break the contract"). Steeper discovered that respondents preferred Bush's position by 50 percent to 38 percent, despite the conventional wisdom that tampering with Social Security is political suicide. He learned, as he explained to an academic conference last February, that "there's a great deal of cynicism about the federal government being able to do anything right, which translated to the federal government not having the ability to properly invest people's Social Security dollars." By couching Bush's rhetoric in poll-tested phrases that reinforced this notion, and adding others that stress the benefits of privatization, he was able to capitalize on what most observers had considered to be a significant political disadvantage. (Independent polls generally find that when fully apprised of Bush's plan, including the risks, most voters don't support it.)

posted by Steven Baum 4/3/2002 03:58:48 PM | link

ELLA AND FRANK
In the past couple of weeks, I've snagged (on the cheap via eBay) both
The Complete Ella Fitzgerald Song Books and Sinatra's Concepts, both of which contain 16 CDs worth of some of the finest pop and jazz singing of the last century. Fitzgerald's songbooks were a series of album sets originally recorded between 1956 and 1964, with each set containing performances of the works of a single songwriter, e.g. Cole Porter, George Gershwin, Jerome Kern, Harold Arlen, Rodgers and Hart, Johnny Mercer, Irving Berlin and Duke Ellington. The story goes that when her manager Norman Granz first brought up the idea, Ella wasn't at all pleased with it. It's a good thing Norman was persistent.

The Song Books CD set was released in November 1993 and won a lot of awards. I can see why, seeing how the inner and outer sleeves of the original vinyl releases are faithfully reproduced, albeit at CD size so you'll go blind trying to read the backs of the outer sleeves. The CDs also contain extras such as various false starts and conversations between Ella and the engineers. One very good thing is that each original album is transferred to CD in its original format, whether that was mono or stereo. Phony stereo processed from a mono mix is not an enjoyable listen and, besides, the mono recordings made until around 1960 were done damned well by very good engineers, most of whom weren't opposed to stereo but who waited until they thought the stereo technology had reached the quality of the mono technology.

The "Concepts" box contains remastered versions of the albums Sinatra did for Capitol between 1953 and 1961. The albums, variously arranged and orchestrated by Nelson Riddle, Gordon Jenkins, Billy May and Axel Stordahl, represent the peak of Sinatra's career. (Well, as a singer at least. He peaked as a public asshole a couple of decades later.)

You can't go wrong with either box, although if you don't want them in their entirety the contents of each are available separately. I'd highly recommend starting out with the Fitzgerald songbook for Duke Ellington and perhaps Sinatra's "Come Swing with Me" or "In the Wee Small Hours". Be forewarned that most of the Sinatra albums require the application of some alcohol for full appreciation.
posted by Steven Baum 4/3/2002 03:46:03 PM | link

AL-AQSA CORRECTION
An old friend corrects me on yesterday's Al Aqsa item. I think he's just peeved because I'm only a couple of hours away from Luckenbach while he's now about 2000 miles away, i.e. a native Texan stuck in the City by the Bay. Maybe I'll send him a case of Pearl Lite to tide him over.
1- the Israeli forces had enforced a semi-quarantine of the Al-Aqsa mosque for several months prior to Sharon's visit. Typically about that time the Israeli forces would only let men over 40 into the area for prayers (no women allowed by the Muslims). Israeli forces had decided that men over 40 were less likely to leave prayers and start a stone throwing incident. prior to that policy, muslim clerics had been exhorting the younger men at prayers. these youngsters would leave prayers full of fightin' words and take to the streets in force and with force.

2- Sharon actually visited the wailing wall, or western wall of king solomon's temple, the holiest site to a jew.

3- the Al-Aqsa mosque is built on the site of king solomon's temple. the wailing wall is the last standing remains of the 2nd king solomon's temple. the two places are literally just a few yards apart.

Now I agree with you, Sharon knew that he would be picking a fight if he (as an israeli politician) went to the wailing wall. But the Israeli forces were not a one time thing, and Sharon did not approach the Al-Aqsa mosque other than officially being a good jew and going to pray at the wailing wall.


posted by Steven Baum 4/3/2002 02:06:07 PM |
link

HOW THE CARLYLE SYSTEM WORKS
Tim Shorrock
writes about my favorite shadow government's insider trading tactics.
...
A good analogy to the Carlyle system is a Japanese tradition known as amakudari (literally, "descent from heaven"). Under this system, senior officials from Japanese ministries retire, only to be instantly hired as senior advisers by the companies and industry groups they were paid to regulate. "What we're really talking about is a systematic merging of the private and public sectors to the point where the distinctions get lost," said Chalmers Johnson, president of the Japan Policy Research Institute and author of two acclaimed books on the Japanese system of governance. "The Carlyle Group is a perfect example. It's the use of former government officials for their access to government bureaucracies to determine contractual relations. It's inside knowledge--knowing where the government is going to spend money and then investing in it."
...
A classic example of how Carlyle's political connections work was the Pentagon's decision last year to develop United Defense's Crusader mobile artillery system. The decision to fund the Crusader, which could eventually cost $11 billion, came after years of strenuous objections from senior military planners, who said it was outdated, too heavy and of little use in contemporary warfare. But United Defense's modifications to the system--and a lobbying campaign by a handful of lawmakers who received a total of $300,000 in donations from a United Defense political action committee--apparently made the difference.

Then came September 11 and its aftermath. With the Crusader contract in hand and President Bush's war in Afghanistan well under way, Carlyle decided the time was ripe to sell some of its United Defense holdings on the stock market. The initial public offering on December 14 raised $237 million for Carlyle. In January United Defense, whose board of directors includes Carlucci and John Shalikashvili, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said its fourth-quarter profits had risen 62 percent, due in large part to sales of the Crusader, which received $472 million in the Pentagon's latest budget.

Those events raised a few eyebrows, particularly at a time when the media were dishing out daily revelations about Enron's political influence in Washington. Columnist Paul Krugman described the Pentagon's policy switch on the Crusader as a "very nice gift" from Rumsfeld to Carlucci, whom Rumsfeld brought into government, and an example of "crony capitalism," the Asian model of capitalism scorned by US economists and the International Monetary Fund [for more on Carlucci, see "Company Man" at www.thenation.com]. Conway, who is chairman of United Defense, scoffed at the speculation. "Frank [Carlucci] is not going to lobby somebody in the Defense Department about a program for Carlyle," he said. As for the timing of the IPO, which was organized after the hijack attacks, "no one wants to be a beneficiary of September 11," he said.
...
By hiring enough former officials to fill a permanent shadow cabinet, Carlyle has brought political influence to a new level and created a twenty-first-century version of capitalism that blurs any line between politics and business. In a sense, Carlyle may be the ultimate in privatization: the use of a private company to nurture public policy--and then reap its benefits in the form of profit. Although the fund claims to operate like any other investment bank, it's undeniable that its stable of statesmen-entrepreneurs have the ability to tap into networks in government and commerce, both at home and abroad, for advance intelligence about companies about to be sold and spun off, or government budgets and policies about to be implemented, and then transform that knowledge into investment strategies that dovetail nicely with US military foreign and domestic policy.


posted by Steven Baum 4/3/2002 10:42:09 AM | link

HA'ARETZ ON THE MEDIA
A
Ha'aretz editorial doesn't mince words about the current Israeli Defense Forces' total control of the media in Hamallah and other areas they've invaded.
...
On Arab TV stations (though not only them) one could see Israeli soldiers taking over hospitals, breaking equipment, damaging medicines, and locking doctors away from their patients. In one interview, a doctor was whispering on a phone, explaining that he had to lower his voice lest the soldier in the next room cut off the conversation. Foreign television networks all over the world have shown the images of five Palestinians from the National Security forces, shot in the heads from close range; one was apparently the manager of the Palestinian Authority orchestra. Some of the networks have claimed they were shot in cold blood after they were disarmed.

The entire world has seen wounded people in the streets, heard reports of how the IDF prevents ambulances from reaching the wounded for treatment. The entire world has heard Palestinian residents saying they can't leave their homes because "they shoot anyone in the streets." The entire world has heard testimony by Palestinian families who have been imprisoned in their homes for 72 hours, in some places without electricity or water, and the food is running out. There are also reports of vandalism and looting.

Maybe it's all mendacious propaganda (though in some cases, the pictures speak for themselves) but Israeli journalists have no way to investigate to find out the truth, whether to deflate the stories, or confirm them. In the absence of that kind of reporting, instead, over and over, we hear the worn out mantras about how "the civilian population is not our enemy," and reports on how the army takes such strict care not to harm civilians.

Israelis love to compare the American hunt for Osama bin Laden in the mountains of Afghanistan to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. At least on one level, Israel indeed managed to create a parallel: since Thursday night, the IDF has created an Afghanization of the Ramallah area. First, the Israeli media was neutralized, and then the IDF Spokesman "recommended" to the foreign press that it leave the city, making clear that those who remained would be doing so at their own risk. Some reporters feel the IDF has opened war against them, not Yasser Arafat.

On Saturday, a TV France 2 team tried to reach Ramallah. At first they tried going through Psagot, and they ended up at the Qalandiyah checkpoint. When they were forbidden to pass, they pulled out their equipment to photograph the checkpoint. Just so there would be something to show. It's allowed. But one of the soldiers - a reservist, according to the crew - ordered them to stop. They told him that he had no right to prevent them from filming and asked him to produce a written order from the Central Command that proved the area had been designated a closed military area. He had no such order. Instead, he began shouting at them and throwing things at them. Finally, when they turned their backs and began to go back to their car, a bullet sliced through the air between the cameraman and the reporter, Shaul Anderline.

Anderline is an Israeli citizen, who has lived here many years. In the wake of the incident he sent a vehement complaint to the IDF Spokesman. The IDF Spokesman said the "affair is being investigated." Unofficially, IDF officers regard the incident as serious. In the last few days, two journalists have been shot in Ramallah, joining a growing list of reporters who have been wounded since the intifada broke out. The intentional shooting at Qalandiyah weakens the Israeli argument that the reporters were accidentally shot.
...


posted by Steven Baum 4/3/2002 10:30:49 AM | link

MORE ON THE HAMAS-ISRAEL CONNECTION
A
UPI article by Richard Sale offers more on the connection between Israel and the Hamas organization.
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, speaking of the Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas recently described it as "the deadliest terrorist group that we have ever had to face." Active in Gaza and the West Bank Hamas wants to liberate all of Palestine and establish a radical Islamic state in place of Israel. It has gained notoriety with its assassinations, car bombs and other acts of terrorism.

But Sharon had left something out.

Israel and Hamas may currently be locked in deadly combat, but, according to several current and former U.S. intelligence officials, beginning in the late 1970s, Tel Aviv gave direct and indirect financial aid to Hamas over a period of years.

Israel "aided Hamas directly -- the Israelis wanted to use it as a counterbalance to the PLO," said Tony Cordesman, Middle East analyst for the Center for Strategic Studies.

Israel's support for Hamas "was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong, secular PLO by using a competing religious alternative," said a former senior CIA official.

According to documents obtained from the Israel-based Institute for Counter Terrorism (ICT) by UPI, Hamas evolved from cells of the Muslim Brotherhood, founded in Egypt in 1928. Islamic movements in Israel and Palestine were "weak and dormant" until after the 1967 Six Day War in which Israel scored a stunning victory over its Arab enemies.

After 1967, a great part of the success of the Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood was due to their activities among the refugees of the Gaza Strip. The cornerstone of the Islamic movements success was an impressive social, religious, educational and cultural infrastructure, called Da'wah, that worked to ease the hardship of large numbers of Palestinian refugees, confined to camps, and many of whom were living on the edge.

"Social influence grew into political influence," first in the Gaza Strip, then on the West Bank, said an administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

According to ICT papers, Hamas was legally registered in Israel in 1978 by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the movements spiritual leader, as an Islamic Association by the name Al-Mujamma Al Islami, which widened its base of supporters and sympathizers by religious propaganda and social work.

Funds for the movement came from the oil-producing states and directly and indirectly from Israel, according to U.S. intelligence officials. The PLO was secular and leftist and promoted Palestinian nationalism. Hamas wanted set up a transnational state under the rule of Islam, much like Khomeini's Iran.

What took Israeli leaders by surprise was the way the Islamic movements began to surge after the Iranian revolution, after armed resistance to Israel sprang up in southern Lebanon organized by an Iran-backed movement called Hezbollah that bore similitaries to Hamas, these sources said.

"Nothing stirs up the energy for imitation as much as success," commented one administration expert.

A further factor of Hamas' growth was the fact the PLO moved its base of operations to Beirut in the 1980s, leaving the Islamic movements to strengthen their influence in the Occupied Territories "as the court of last resort," he said.

When the intifada began, the Israeli leadership was further surprised when Islamic groups began to surge in membership and strength. Hamas immediately grew in numbers and violence. The group had always embraced the doctrine of armed struggle, but the doctrine had not been practiced and Islamic groups had not been subjected to suppression the way groups like Fatah had been, according to U.S. government officials.

But with the triumph of the Khomeini revolution in Iran, with the birth of Iranian-backed Hezbollah terrorism in Lebanon, Hamas began to gain strength in Gaza and then in the West Bank, relying on terror to resist the Israeli occupation.

Israel was certainly funding the group at that time. One US intelligence source who asked not to be named, said that not only was Hamas being funded as a "counterweight" to the PLO, Israeli aid had a more devious purpose: "to help identify and channel towards Israeli agents Hamas members who were dangerous terrorists."

In addition, by infiltrating Hamas, Israeli informers could listen to debates on policy and identify Hamas members who "were dangerous hardliners," the official said.

In the end, as Hamas set up a very comprehensive counterintelligence system, many collaborators with Israel were weeded out and shot. Violent acts of terrorism became the central tenet, and Hamas, unlike the PLO, was unwilling to compromise in any way with Israel, refusing to acknowledge its very existence.

Even then, some in Israel saw some benefits to be had in trying to continue to give Hamas support: "The thinking on the part of some of the right-wing Israeli establishment was that Hamas and the other groups, if they gained control, would refuse to have anything to do with the pace process and would torpedo any agreements put in place," said a U.S. government official.

"Israel would still be the only democracy in the region for the United States to deal with," he said. All of which is viewed with disapproval by some former U.S. intelligence officials.

"The thing wrong with so many Israeli operations is that they try to be too sexy," said former CIA official Vincent Cannestraro. Former State Department counter-terrorism official Larry Johnson told UPI: "The Israelis are their own worst enemies when it comes to fighting terrorism. They are like a guy who sets fire to his hair and then tries to put it out by hitting it with a hammer.They do more to incite and sustain terrorism than curb it."

Aid to Hamas may have looked clever, "but it was hardly designed to help smooth the waters," he said. "It gives weight to President George W Bush's remark about there being a crisis in education."

Cordesman said that a similar attempt by Egyptian intelligence to fund Egypt's fundamentalists had also come to grief because of overcomplication.

An Israeli Embassy defense official, asked if Israel had given aid to Hamas replied: "I am not able to answer that question. I was in Lebanon commanding a unit at the time, besides it is not my field of interest."

Asked to confirm a report by U.S. officials that Brigadier General Yithaq Segev, the military governor of Gaza, had told U.S. officials that he had helped fund "Islamic movements as a counterweight to the PLO and communists," the Israeli official said he could confirm only that he believed that Segev had served back in 1986.


posted by Steven Baum 4/3/2002 09:51:57 AM | link

WHEN IS A CD NOT A CD?
When the blow monkeys in the music industry corrupt it to "protect" their obscenely large house payments and entertainment bills. According to an article on page 17 of the April 2002 "Stereophile":
According to Philips, recent attempts to add playback-restriction technology to new releases is not just a bad idea: Because the "Red Book" recipe has been altered, the discs no longer quality as CDs and should be labeled clearly. In a Reuters interview in January, Philips' Gerry Wirtz comments, "We've made sure they would put a very clear warning that you're not buying a compact disc, but something different. We've been warning some labels to begin with, and they've adjusted their behavior."
And why is making this distinction important? So you can buy CDs to play on a CD player instead of nasty little time bombs masquerading as CDs.
Wirtz said, "What we've seen so far is troublesome and cumbersome. We worry they don't know what they're doing. It's extremely difficult to retrofit the system with copy protection without losing the ability for all CDs to play on all players."

Wirtz adds that even normal use of a restricted CD could render it unplayable over time as the player's error-correction system not only contends with the added restriction distortion, but fights to correct for normally harmless marks and scratches.

A footnote tells of the incidence of data errors on restricted CDs.
Audiophile Systems' Gary Warzin recently looked at the incidence of data errors on a restricted CD with the professional Sony CDL-40 Error Detector. He routinely (approximately every six seconds) saw "correctable" error rates in the triple digits. "For comparison purposes," he wrote, "a quality CD rarely displays any errors. A damaged CD produces occasional errors measured in either single or double digits. On the Universal disc these large bursts of correctable errors frequently resulted in errors flagged by the CDL-40 as 'uncorrectable."

posted by Steven Baum 4/3/2002 09:50:26 AM |
link

NIXON AND THE CHIEFS
Remember the good old days before evil Clinton corrupted the military and deprived them of the honor and integrity that had been their hallmark from time immemorial? How about during the Nixon administration? Now that was a time when you could set your watch to military honor, wasn't it? Not so fast. James Rosen's "Nixon and the Chiefs" in the April 2002 "Atlantic Monthly" tells a slightly different and less rosy tale.
At 6:09 on the evening of December 21, 1971, President Richard Nixon convened a tense and confidential meeting in the Oval Office with his three closest advisors - John N. Mitchell, his Attorney General; H. R. Haldeman, his chief of staff; and John D. Ehrlichman, his top domestic-policy aid. Notably absent was Henry Kissinger, Nixon's national-security adviser. The men had come together to discuss a crisis unique in American presidential history - "a federal offense of the highest order," as Nixon would put it in the meeting. Just days before, Yeoman Charles E. Radford, a young Navy stenographer who had been working with Kissinger and his staff, had confessed to a Department of Defense interrogator that for more than a year he had been passing thousands of top-secret Nixon-Kissinger documents to his superiors in the Pentagon.
That's right, the Pentagon was spying on the White House during part of the Nixon administration. Not the Soviet Union, not Cuba, but the frigging Pentagon.

I've read about this before in Seymour Hersh's The Price of Power (1983), a book that deconstructs the Kissinger myth most thoroughly, but Rosen fills out the tale via further Nixon White House tapes released in October 2000. That's right, 25+ years on they still haven't all been released, and if the Bush Cabal has their way they'll seal everything up tight forever (except of course any documents whose release might prove embarassing to the Clinton or Carter administrations).
posted by Steven Baum 4/3/2002 09:50:01 AM |
link

ISRAEL KILLS CATHOLIC PRIEST
Here's
an item that disproves the myth that the Israeli army only kills Muslims for sport. They were probably proponents of that evil "revolution theology" stuff anyway which, according to the appropriate section of the Reagan Doctrine, makes them okay to kill.
A Catholic priest was killed and several nuns wounded in Bethlehem on Tuesday as Israeli troops stormed into the holy city during a vast offensive to crush the Palestinian uprising.
...
Palestinian security sources said one priest and six nuns had been killed inside the Santa Maria church in Bethlehem, where heavy exchanges of gunfire erupted as Israeli troops battled with Palestinians in the city.
...
By the way, the Israeli army is conveniently keeping the media out of this area as well as out of Ramallah.
posted by Steven Baum 4/3/2002 09:22:49 AM | link

BRAVE SOLDIERS FORGE ONWARD
A
Times of India tells of an Israeli army practice that, if practiced by any other army in the world, would elicit deafening shrieks of outrage. By the way, the media has been ejected from Ramallah by the Israeli army, thus making independent confirmation of such reports conveniently impossible. You know, like in Afghanistan.
The Israeli army used Palestinians as a "human shield" early Tuesday to approach a building housing the headquarters of the Palestinian security service in Ramallah, a Palestinian official said.

Israeli soldiers forced some 60 Palestinians to walk in front of tanks as they approached the building of Colonel Jibril Rajub's preventive security service building, the official told AFP.

More than 400 Palestinians were inside the building.

The Israeli army said several Palestinians wanted for carrying out attacks were among them.

But god-fearin' Americans know better than to believe anything a raghead says. After all, they don't even believe in Jesus.
posted by Steven Baum 4/3/2002 09:22:24 AM | link

A SHOT IN THE FOOT
Charley Reese deconstructs Dick Cheney's doubletalk upon returning from the Middle East.
So when Mr. Bush decided to attack Iraq, he was surprised to find all the Arab leaders saying that they won't support an attack on Iraq as long as the United States continues to allow the Israelis to trample on the rights of the Palestinians. He sends the vice president overseas, and Dick Cheney gets the same message. To save face, Cheney comes back and slyly resurrects the old canard that Arab leaders say one thing in public and the opposite in private. Notice, however, that Cheney did not say that any Arab leader either said or implied that he would support an attack on Iraq in private. No, Cheney, a master of double talk - as all experienced politicians are - said that in private ``they expressed concern about Saddam Hussein.'' Hell, they've been expressing concern about him in public for years. But Cheney wanted to leave the impression that they secretly support the U.S. policy. They don't. Neither, for that matter, do most of the European countries.
He then lists all the rules of behavior to which the Cabal publicly demands adherence before a country can be considered "non-rogue" and civilized ... and the single exception to every one of those rules.
We are in the beginning of payback time for our hypocritical policy of exempting Israel from every one of the ideals that we laboriously reach. Self-determination is a must for Albanians in Kosovo - not for Palestinians. Refugees have a right to return or receive compensation - but not Palestinian refugees. Countries must obey U.N. Security Council resolutions - but not Israel, which sits in defiance of more than 60. Countries that routinely violate human rights deserve sanctions - except Israel. Countries that assassinate political enemies are state sponsors of terrorism - but not Israel.

Countries must not use American-donated weapons for offensive purposes - except for Israel. People who commit war crimes must be put on trial - unless they are Israelis.


posted by Steven Baum 4/3/2002 09:19:54 AM | link

CROSSFIRE JOLLIES
Media Whores Online informs me of an event I'm sorry I missed, i.e. the debut of James Carville and Paul Begala on CNN's Crossfire, although I probably would have sustained massive internal injuries from laughing the first time I heard Robert Novak complain about Carville and Begala being "mean." Another fun thing was Novak taking offense when Begala described Bush's clueless and ruddlerless handling of affairs in the Middle East as "clueless and rudderless." And this from someone who wrote just the day before:
President Bush has continued to look inept in trying to cope with the Mideast. As masterful as Bush has been since Sept. 11 in leading the nation and a global coalition against terrorism, he has seemed lost in coping with the Palestine question. No predecessor in the White House has faltered as badly as Bush.
Back in the days before electricity, Novak was actually a fairly astute political observer, e.g. he was one of very few who actually predicted the results of the 1994 congressional elections. Now he's just a sad, old, bloviating boob who can't even remember what he (or, more likely, an intern) wrote the day before.
posted by Steven Baum 4/3/2002 09:19:03 AM | link

THE TURKISH KURDS
As the Cabal and its supporters speak of large numbers of dead Kurds as a reason to invade Iraq, let's take a look at a large number of dead Kurds openly admitted to by the Turkish government. According to a
Reuters item from Jan. 9, 2001:
Turkey said on Tuesday its security forces had killed more than 23,000 separatist Kurdish rebels since establishing an emergency rule zone in the country's mainly Kurdish southeast 14 years ago.

The Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) rebel group took up arms for Kurdish autonomy in 1984, but scaled back its demands to cultural rights after Turkey captured its leader Abdullah Ocalan and sentenced him to death for treason in 1999.

Now an overview of the Kurdish situation in Turkey, a nation the Cabal wants to use as an ally and staging ground to invade Iraq to ostensibly protect Kurds, or at least the right kind of Kurds.
Despite an estimated strength of over 20 million, the government does not acknowledge Turkey's Kurdish minority. This has been the case since the foundation of the modern Turkish State in 1923. The Kurds and Armenians were promised a homeland and autonomy within the rule of Kemal Attaturk. However, the massacre of the Armenians was conducted and the Kurds were called "Turks of the mountains" and the Kurdish language was outlawed. Since the military coup of 1980, Turkey has been under emergency rule and successive governments have failed to enact any legislation that complies with international human rights organizations. Since the second half of 1993, there has been a dramatic increase in detentions and prosecutions of those voicing their opinions on the Kurds in Turkey. Nobody is immune to this, lawyers, human rights activist members of parliament, writers, and journalists as well. Indiscriminate attacks on towns and villages force deportations and aerial bombardment continue in southeast Turkey. Since 1991, more than 1,500 Kurdish villages have been destroyed and evacuated. Hundreds of Kurdish civilians are internally displaced and homeless. Human rights activists, members of parliament such as Leyla Zana, writers, and journalists are prisoners of conscience for speaking their mind. Currently Leyla Zana, an officially elected Member of Parliament, is serving a 15-year sentence in solitary confinement in Turkey.
Now let's take a look at Kurdish situation in Iran:
Over 7 to eight million Kurds have constantly struggled against oppression of successive regimes. After the 1979 Islamic Revolution, armed clashes took place between Iranian Kurds and the forces of the revolutionary government. Many extra judicial killings, execution of women and oppression based on the ethnic identity of the Kurds is still ongoing in Iran. As a result, many Kurds were forced to flee to Iraq. Today there are several camps where Kurds of Iran live inside Iraq. They are in the south of Iraq and in the northern no fly zone.
But then again, Iran is in the "evil axis" and probably already on the "to be invaded when politically expedient" list.
posted by Steven Baum 4/3/2002 09:18:12 AM | link

GASSING KURDS CIRCA 1920
Here's
an excerpt from Iraq: From Sumer to Sudan a book by Geoff Simons published in London by St. Martins Press in 1994. Churchill and the British not only used gas on the Kurds, but also used the Kurds as a proving ground for new "weapons of mass destruction." Hey, they were convenient, surly and 70 years away from becoming useful enough for the west to realize it's a bad thing to kill Kurdish children. Well, at least it's a bad thing in Iraq. Turkey's another thing.
Winston Churchill, as colonial secretary, was sensitive to the cost of policing the Empire; and was in consequence keen to exploit the potential of modern technology. This strategy had particular relevance to operations in Iraq. On 19 February, 1920, before the start of the Arab uprising, Churchill (then Secretary for War and Air) wrote to Sir Hugh Trenchard, the pioneer of air warfare. Would it be possible for Trenchard to take control of Iraq? This would entail "the provision of some kind of asphyxiating bombs calculated to cause disablement of some kind but not death...for use in preliminary operations against turbulent tribes."

Churchill was in no doubt that gas could be profitably employed against the Kurds and Iraqis (as well as against other peoples in the Empire): "I do not understand this sqeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilised tribes." Henry Wilson shared Churchills enthusiasm for gas as an instrument of colonial control but the British cabinet was reluctant to sanction the use of a weapon that had caused such misery and revulsion in the First World War. Churchill himself was keen to argue that gas, fired from ground-based guns or dropped from aircraft, would cause "only discomfort or illness, but not death" to dissident tribespeople; but his optimistic view of the effects of gas were mistaken. It was likely that the suggested gas would permanently damage eyesight and "kill children and sickly persons, more especially as the people against whom we intend to use it have no medical knowledge with which to supply antidotes."

Churchill remained unimpressed by such considerations, arguing that the use of gas, a "scientific expedient," should not be prevented "by the prejudices of those who do not think clearly". In the event, gas was used against the Iraqi rebels with "excellent moral effect" though gas shells were not dropped from aircraft because of practical difficulties [.....]

Today in 1993 there are still Iraqis and Kurds who remember being bombed and machine-gunned by the RAF in the 1920s. A Kurd from the Korak mountains commented, seventy years after the event: "They were bombing here in the Kaniya Khoran...Sometimes they raided three times a day." Wing Commander Lewis, then of 30 Squadron (RAF), Iraq, recalls how quite often "one would get a signal that a certain Kurdish village would have to be bombed...", the RAF pilots being ordered to bomb any Kurd who looked hostile. In the same vein, Squadron-Leader Kendal of 30 Squadron recalls that if the tribespeople were doing something they ought not be doing then you shot them."

Similarly, Wing-Commander Gale, also of 30 Squadron: "If the Kurds hadn't learned by our example to behave themselves in a civilised way then we had to spank their bottoms. This was done by bombs and guns."

Wing-Commander Sir Arthur Harris (later Bomber Harris, head of wartime Bomber Command) was happy to emphasise that "The Arab and Kurd now know what real bombing means in casualties and damage. Within forty-five minutes a full-size village can be practically wiped out and a third of its inhabitants killed or injured." It was an easy matter to bomb and machine-gun the tribespeople, because they had no means of defence or retalitation. Iraq and Kurdistan were also useful laboratories for new weapons; devices specifically developed by the Air Ministry for use against tribal villages. The ministry drew up a list of possible weapons, some of them the forerunners of napalm and air-to-ground missiles:

Phosphorus bombs, war rockets, metal crowsfeet [to maim livestock] man-killing shrapnel, liquid fire, delay-action bombs. Many of these weapons were first used in Kurdistan.


posted by Steven Baum 4/3/2002 09:16:47 AM | link

Tuesday, April 02, 2002

IMAGES OF AN EXECUTION
A
series of grisly images of an Israeli execution contradicts the official lies about the event.
posted by Steven Baum 4/2/2002 01:10:35 PM | link

AL AQSA INTIFADA
The current or Al Aqsa Intifada started on September 20, 2000. So what is Al Aqsa?
Sabdezar Ilahi tells us:
The Al-Aqsa Mosque is the third most sacred site for the people of the Muslim faith after Mecca, the site of the annual holy pilgrimage and The Mosque of Muhammad (pbuh) in Medina, both of these being situated in Saudi Arabia, and due to their sacred nature, inaccessible to non-Muslims since after the advent of Islam. Every day, during the five daily prayers Muslims around the globe face Mecca while performing the Namaz (A prescribed religious ritual for the Muslims) and Mecca is thus the epicenter of the Muslim faith and is referred to as "Ka'aba" or "Kibla". In the early days of Islam the Al-Aqsa Mosque served as the Ka'aba of the Muslims. Also at the Al-Aqsa Mosque, the 'Dome of the Rock' was the site for Prophet Muhammad's experience of "Mairaj" or ascension to heaven. The sanctity of the Al-Aqsa mosque for Muslims globally, and in Palestine, cannot be overstated.
And what happened on September 20, 2000?
The Al-Aqsa Intifaada began on September 28, 2000 triggered by a visit made by Ariel Sharon, who in the government of Ehud Barak was a General in the Israeli Army. It was not however an event that occurred in an impromptu manner ,without a backdrop. This is not to suggest either that it was a pre-conceived tactic by the Palestinian Authority. The clash was instigated by a visit that Ariel Sharon, the current Israeli Prime Minister, undertook to the Al-Aqsa Mosque, accompanied by 1000 Israeli police forces. The Muslims were reviled by Ariel Sharon's visit which was undertaken in a manner to emphasize the political strength of Israel over the Palestinian and to reassert with psychological maneuvers the state of perpetual subjugation that the Palestinians live under. It also needs to be kept in mind that the persona of Ariel Sharon is highly repulsive to many Palestinians who remember him well from the days when he instigated the massacres in the Sabra and Shatila camps in 1953.
Did Sharon visit alone or with a small number of bodyguards? No. He showed up with 1000 soldiers to do nothing more than take a symbolic piss on the third most sacred Muslim site. And to reinforce the humiliation, the military was rolled in again the next day.
A large military contingent was deployed by the Government of Israel at the Al-Aqsa mosque the day following Ariel Sharon's visit. This deployment was again seen as highly inciteful by the Palestinians, and a group of unarmed Palestinians clashed with the Israeli forces. Five Palestinians were killed and over 200 were wounded in the clashes.

posted by Steven Baum 4/2/2002 10:19:36 AM | link

FARCE AT KANDAHAR
Seymour Hersh writes of the reality of the October 20 raid on Kandahar. Unsurprisingly enough, it was nothing like pathological liar Donald Rumsfeld said it was.
...
The after-action arguments over how best to wage a ground war continued last week, with many of the senior officers in Delta Force "still outraged," as one military man described it. The Pentagon could not tell the American people the details of what really happened at Kandahar, he added angrily, "because it doesn't want to appear that it doesn't know what it's doing." Another senior military officer told me, "This is the same M.O. that they've used for ten years." He dismissed CENTCOM's planning for the Afghanistan mission as "Special Ops 101," and said, "I don't know where the adult supervision for these operations is. Franks"- the CENTCOM commander-"is clueless." Of Delta Force the officer said, "These guys have had a case of the ass since Mogadishu. They want to do it right and they train hard. Don't put them on something stupid." He paused, and said, "We'll get there, but it's going to get ugly."
...

posted by Steven Baum 4/2/2002 10:03:51 AM | link

ISRAEL SHOOTS PROTESTORS
Just imagine what the hysterical outcry would be if Iran or Iraq or North Korea or any state on the Cabal's "evil" list were to open fire on protestors in
the manner that Israel is doing so. If Iraq did this today the invasion would start tomorrow.
Israeli troops opened fire Monday during a demonstration in support of the Palestinians near here, wounding seven foreigners and a Palestinian cameraman, organizers said.

The group Solidarity International said a 26-year-old Australian woman was hit in the stomach with shrapnel during the incident in the town of Beit Jala and was rushed into surgery. A Frenchman, 54, was shot in the head.

The other foreigners wounded were two Britons, two Americans and a Japanese, the group said. The one Palestinian wounded was a cameraman for Associated Press Television (APTV).

An earlier toll supplied by hospital sources listed five foreigners and two Palestinians wounded.

The excuse offered by the Israeli military would be deemed pathetic and laughable if offered by Saddam Hussein.
"We know for sure that it was an act of provocation carried out on purpose by members of groups supporting terrorists, supporting suicide bombers, killing our women and children," said Lieutenant Colonel Olivier Rafowicz.

"These people decided on purpose to provoke our forces where we are combating terrorism. They are deliberately trying to provoke us," he told AFP.


posted by Steven Baum 4/2/2002 09:18:46 AM | link

THE MOSSAD-HAMAS CONNECTION
A
discussion thread provides insight into the connection between Hamas and the Mossad. The query was: Is is true that Mossad backed Hamas in the early days to discredit the PLO? The answer begins as follows:
It is basically true and well known, and several cites follow below. There just two technicalities to keep in mind.

(1) What Israel in fact backed was Sheik Yassin's Gaza chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization that goes back to the 30s. Yassin, a quadraplegic cleric, set up the Gaza chapter in the early 70s, and Israel backed it in the 80s. During the period they backed it, it was a service organzation attached to mosques and universities. They were completeley non-violent and almost completley non-political. Sheik Yassin's conversion to the use of violent means was extremely abrupt. The first intifada traumatized him, and within 3 months he had set up a military organization to resist it. Sheik Yassin is still Hamas's spiritual leader today.

(2) Hamas is the Arabic acronym for "Islamic Resistance Movement" and means "zeal" in Arabic. When it first came into existence, the name only referred to the military wing under Yassin's control, and was distinguished from the service wing, which was still called the Muslim Brotherhood. So therefore technically, Israel can say it never supported Hamas. What it supported (with millions of dollars) was the non-violent group out of which Hamas was suddenly created.

The respondent then points to an article in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs by David Neff entitled Muslim Fundamentalists of Hamas Challenge PLO for Palestinian Support. Pertinent excerpts are:
It was 11 years ago, on Sept. 9, 1988, when fistfights broke out among a crowd of Palestinians in the West Bank city of Bethlehem. While there were no fatalities, the melee was memorable because it marked a serious challenge to the Palestine Liberation Organization by a relatively new Islamic militant organization, the Islamic Resistance MovementHamas, meaning Zeal (Glenn Frankel, Washington Post, 9/18/88. Also see John Kifner, New York Times, 9/17/88; Daoud Kuttab, The Brothers Join the Fray, Middle East International, 9/9/88). In the following years, acts of terrorism against Israel by Hamas would make the PLOs efforts to find peace more difficult and ultimately directly contribute to the election of hard-liner Binyamin Netanyahu as the prime minister of Israel on his promise to provide security.

Hamas emerged out of the Muslim Brotherhood, a pan-Arab nationalist group. A branch of the Brotherhood was founded in Israeli-occupied Gaza in the 1970s by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, a fiery, wheelchair-bound quadriplegic and Gaza clergyman. At the time, the Gaza Brotherhood devoted itself to grassroots work in mosques, clinics and social work. It abstained from all forms of the anti-occupation struggle. By 1986 it controlled 40 percent of all the mosques and the 7,000-student Islamic University in Gaza.

Israeli authorities saw the Brotherhood as a useful counterbalance to the largely secular PLO. Israel began secretly to contribute to the Brotherhoods cause through favors and donations to mosques and schools (Graham Usher, The Rise of Political Islam in the Occupied Territories, Middle East International, 6/25/93. Also see Andrew Whitley, London Financial Times, 9/8/88; John Kifner, New York Times, 9/17/88). Israeli donations to the Brotherhood were reported in the millions of dollars, considerably strengthening Yassins organization (Haim Baram, The Expulsion of the Palestinians: Rabin Shows His True Colors, Middle East International, 1/8/93; Rowland Evans and Robert Novak, Washington Post, 12/21/92. Also see Alan Cowell, New York Times, 10/20/94).

Israels brutal suppression of the Palestinian uprising, the intifada, which began Dec. 9, 1987, traumatized Yassin, who was 51 at the time. Within three months, he created Hamas as a militant organization devoted to violent opposition to Israels occupation of Palestinian lands. Hamas first official communiqué came in February 1988 stating that the Islamic Resistance Movement is a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood chapter in Palestine. The Brotherhood is an international organization...[that] professes a comprehensive understanding...of the Islamic precepts in all aspects of life (Graham Usher, The Rise of Political Islam in the Occupied Territories, Middle East International, 6/25/93).

Just as the U.S. saw Muslim fundamentalists whipped into jihad as a marvelous strategic weapon against the Soviets in 1979, the Israelis saw Muslim fundamentalists as a weapon against the PLO, especially when the PLO started negotiating since, as an Israeli Defense Forces spokesman tells us, negotiation is not an option with Hamas.
HAMAS defines the transition to the stage of Jihad "for the liberation of all of Palestine" as a personal religious duty incumbent upon every Muslim. At the same time, it utterly rejects any political arrangement that would entail the relinquishment of any part of Palestine, which for it is tantamout to a surrender of part of Islam. These positions are reflected in the HAMAS Covenant, which was written in the territories, and of course in its activities.
The same IDF spokesman is also quite clear as to where the violence originates.
Thus, HAMAS is an organization composed of several interdependent levels. The popular-social base is maintained materially by the charity committees and ideologically through instruction, propaganda and incitement delivered in the mosques and other institutions and through leaflets. This base is the source for the recruitment of members into the units which engage in riots and popular violence. Those who distinguish themselves in riots and popular violence sooner or later find their way into the military apparatus, which carries out brutal and violent attacks against Israelis and Palestinians alike. The latter (and their families and relatives, if they are arrested or killed) enjoy the moral and economic backing of the preachers in the mosques, the directors of HAMAS-affiliated institutions, and the charity committees.
That is, the more violent ones in the "service wing" of Hamas are migrated to the "military wing." In other words, this IDF spokesman knew exactly what would happen when the Mossad financed the "service wing" to the tune of millions. He and the Mossad know it would polarize a sufficient number of fundamentalist Muslims to create a supply of violence sufficient to sink any peace initiative, and that the resulting violence could be blamed on Yasir Arafat and all Palestinians. This would allow the tanks, helicopters and fighter planes to be used to "negotiate," thus perpetuating the cycle of violence.
posted by Steven Baum 4/2/2002 08:51:05 AM | link

Monday, April 01, 2002

REPORT FROM RAMALLAH
Here's
a report from Ramallah by a French psychologist working in the area.
I just wanted to communicate some recent news from Ramallah.I am a psychologist working with the French NGO "Doctors of the World" who have two teams of psychologists in the West Bank, one in Nablus and the other in Ramallah.

This afternoon, our chief psychologist who is blocked in his village ten miles west of the city reported that the medical situation is critical. All of the international NGOs including the Red Cross have pulled out their personnel because it is too dangerous for them to operate. Therefore, there is no direct presence of foreigners to witness and possibly prevent certain actions.

The entire city is under curfew and even doctors and ambulances cannot do their work and are unable to leave the hospital to come to the aid of numerous injured inhabitants. The local hospital is out of many medicines and the electricity has been cut off (as it has in many other parts of the city). For the babies in incubators and patients in dialysis or needing immediate surgery, the consequences of such action are obvious.

Food shortages are beginning to develop and all young men detween 15 and 45 years of age are being rounded up for questioning and eventual arrestation. In the village of our chief psychologist, Kobar, 25 young men were taken from their homes this morning by members of Tsahal. Please do what you can to bring this very critical situation to the attention of the American public.

Thank you. [NAME REDACTED], clinical psychologist

One of the excuses the first Bush Cabal gave for Operation Desert Storm was a poignant tale of a young Kuwaiti lass about evil Iraqi soldiers taking babies out of incubators. That story was later proven to be a crass lie dreamed up by a PR firm hired by Kuwait.

We now have a case where a berserk war criminal - this one named Ariel Sharon - is causing this to happen for real. Is Bush Cabal II going to do anything about it? That is, is the Cabal running the country that funds Israel to the tune of more than $8 billion a year going to do anything to stop Sharon from repeating the massacres for which he was responsible in 1982? Surely they don't think that they'll be able to put together any further Arab "coalitions" to justify further invasions in the Middle East if they let the berserk Sharon have his way with wholesale slaughter.

Bush must be curled up in a fetal ball in Crawford while Ari Fleischer, Karen Hughes and Karl Rove desperately attempt to come up with some way to spin this to save his approval ratings. Bush, Cheney and even Powell apparently cower in fear whenever Sharon even grimaces in their direction. If Sharon had the U.S. ambassador assassinated, they'd probably just cower and apologize and promise not to send another to get in Sharon's way. Sharon must have a bigger collection of files than even J. Edgar Hoover.
posted by Steven Baum 4/1/2002 04:01:15 PM | link

DEMOCRACY NOW - 4/01/02
Today's version of Democracy Now featured a live description of Israeli soldiers shooting international activists and journalists who, the last time I checked, weren't members of either the PLO or Hamas. Sharon provokes Hamas suicide bombers, which he then uses to justify killing anyone he thinks he can get away with killing.
posted by Steven Baum 4/1/2002 03:57:24 PM | link

FETCH MY SHOOTIN' IRON
John Kelso, a columnist for the Austin American-Statesman who I had the pleasure to meet via a mutual friend a few weeks back, has
penned a column that's done got me irate.
Somebody call the barbecue police and have these people locked up in smoked-meat jail.

Starting Aug. 1, the New Braunfels Smoker, a popular barbecue cooking unit, will no longer be made in New Braunfels, the town about 45 miles south of Austin for which the smoker is named.

But the company that makes the smoker will continue to use the New Braunfels name on its smokers, even though the New Braunfels Smoker will be made - gag - in Georgia and in spots outside the United States.

Get a rope. Heck, get several ropes.
...

I've had one of those New Braunfels Smokers for nearly eight years now, and it's done one hell of a job of raising the cholesteral level of many a good friend. And while I recently obtained a Green Egg for smaller jobs, when the occasion calls for a massive brisket attack or the traditional 12 turkey Thanksgiving smoke-off, ol' blackie gets fired up.

If anything, this solidifies my plan to apprentice with a professional welder so I can make my own BBQ smoker out of 8 foot diameter pipeline and an abandoned oil well when I have to retire ol' blackie. And I've got my eye on a Cat D-9 engine to drive the rotisserie.
posted by Steven Baum 4/1/2002 10:14:47 AM | link

THE HILLS ARE ALIVE...
The journey to and from Texas hill country was made that much better by a couple of radio gems, both of which I've mentioned before in these here environs. First is
Texas Rebel Radio (KFAN, FM 107.9).
Texas Rebel Radio
The second station is KGSR (FM 107.1) out of Austin/Bastrop, whose annual Broadcasts CDs I've previously mentioned. This time the Rebel Radio signal lasted a little past Dripping Springs, while KGSR held out until Caldwell, after which we eased on back to local favorite KEOS (FM 89.1). Both the KGSR and KFAN streams are available via the web. The fun albeit poverty stricken folks at KEOS are looking into it.

We stopped at Luckenbach on the way back and raised flagons of ale (well, actually a Shiner Bock and a Pearl Lite) to Waylon, but found out we'd missed the "Waylon Wall" by about a week. A German oompah band/comedy troupe somewhat lessened the disappointment although, to tell the truth, the semi-permanent acoustic guitar jam had a bit more on the talent side.

I picked up a Luckenbach Radio Hour t-shirt and found an appropriate way to memorialize Shiva when she shuffles off to that biscuitland in the sky. For a mere $50, you can have a memorial brick engraved and placed right next to the Luckenbach auditorium.
posted by Steven Baum 4/1/2002 09:27:34 AM | link


Comments?
Archive

LISTS

Books
Software

uPORTALS

cider
crime lit
drive-in
fake lit
hurricanes
os
scripting
sherlock
texas music
top 100
weirdsounds
wodehouse

LEISURE

abebooks
alibris
amazon
bibliofind
bookfinder
hamilton
powells

all music guide
best used cds
cd bargains
second spin
raven's links

ampol
arts & letters
atlantic
art history
attrition
bibliomania
bitch
bizarre
bizarro
bloom country
bob 'n' ed
bob the angry flower
callahan
chile pepper
classical music
cnnsi
crackbaby
cult films
culture jamming
discover
disinformation
dismal scientist
electric sheep
espn
exquisite corpse
feed
fine cooking
fishbowl
fluble
fried society
fry and laurie
hotel fred
hotendotey
hypocrisy network
jerkcity
last cereal
leisure town
logos
london times
mappa mundi
miscmedia
mp3lit
mr. chuck show
mr. serpent
national geographic
new scientist
no depression
not bored
obscure store
onion
on-line books
parking lot is full
pearly gates
phrase and fable
probe
red meat
rough guides
salon
Simpleton
sluggy freelance
spacemoose
spike
straight dope
strenua inertia
suck
superosity
tawdry town
too much coffee man
toon inn
verbivore
vidal index
yes minister
you damn kid





Powered by Blogger