nomadic reports from the frontiers of style and information
nomadic reports from the frontiers of style and information
"He couldn't put them together as long as the inspections were going on" before to the war, he said.
That little gem, attributed to a "senior administration official" is buried at the very end of the NYT cover story on Bush's 'War Over' speech.
Now lets think about it. If Iraq couldn't assemble its weapons of mass destruction because of the UN inspections, doesn't that mean the inspections were working? I think it does. Wonder if the senior official is a black man from the Bronx?
Mind open, mind blown. Every once in a while I come across some fact, story or writer who really blows open some of my worldview.
Al-Muhajabah is a white American woman, highly educated, very sharp and who is a devout muslim who wears the complete islamic dress (hijab). That adds up to a pretty unique perception of the world. Very opening to read her blog (if you let yourself be open of course). Plus she's a Movable Type master, all sorts of really well thought out plug-in implemented on her site.
Her post on issues in penal law hit me hard:
It's taken as a given in America that prison is far more humane than corporal punishment. But is it? The body heals; the mind and the soul may not. When we consider whether the prison system is humane we should look at the psychological damage caused by captivity. It's not as easy to measure as physical damage, but it may be far worse and more lasting.
So true, but I never would have thought of it like that in a million years. I have serious issues with the current American penal system, but I still was locked into a knee jerk corporal punishment = evil thought process. Now I still don't like corporal punishment, but I don't think I'll ever be thinking about it in the same way again. Damn, I love having my worldview widened...
"It so happens there are times when there are issues where social conservatives, whether they be Muslim or Christian, find common ground."
Iran, Syria, Iraq, Axis of Evil. Yep, unless its about repressing women. All of a sudden they become our best friends in the UN. Perhaps Bush and Co want to fight with all them because jealous of the way they mix politics and religion and get to beat their wifes. How fucking backward is this country going to be after another 1-5 years of this crap? We'll be acting like cavemen soon enough. Christian cavemen.
[via Matthew Yglesias]
Ethan Eismann maybe on hiatus from blogging with Information Flow, but he did post some really interesting stuff on a mailing list we belong too.
Headlines around the world an incident in Iraq. I believe taken from Google News last night:
US Force Said to Kill 15 Iraqis During an Anti-American Rally
New York Times - 16 hours ago
US Troops 'Massacre' 13 Iraqis
The Mirror, UK - 8 hours ago
US troops 'shoot dead two more Iraqis'
Guardian, UK - 3 hours ago
Iraqis say US troops killed 14 protesters
San Francisco Chronicle, CA - 5 hours ago
US troops take fire, shoot back at Iraqis
Casa Grande Valley Newspapers, AZ - 12 hours ago
US forces kill 13 pro - Saddam protesters
Hi Pakistan, Pakistan - 13 hours ago
A good reminder that media bias is certainly not all structural...
Whiskey Bar: The Doctor is in - billmon keeps rolling. No idea who he really is or what he does, but he writes some of the funniest, sharpest political comedy around.
Here in Buenos Aires, every week brings news of a new occupation: a four-star hotel now run by its cleaning staff, a supermarket taken by its clerks, a regional airline about to be turned into a cooperative by the pilots and attendants. In small Trotskyist journals around the world, Argentina's occupied factories, where the workers have seized the means of production, are giddily hailed as the dawn of a socialist utopia. In large business magazines like the Economist, they are ominously described as a threat to the sacred principle of private property. The truth lies somewhere in between.
Naomi Klein: Snapshot of a nation: Argentina
There is a revolution going on in Argentina and only Naomi Klein seems to be noticing. This is Klein at her absolute best. My take on her has always been that she's a marvelous journalist and a god awful theorist/figurehead. And now that's she's playing journalist again the results are great. No one reports better from the front lines of corporate globalism then she does. Read the whole article, its worth it. If the world economy doesn't U-turn soon then this piece is a crystal ball.
The Liberal Media, the Conservative Press, which one is it? I find it interesting and sometime amusing the way liberals and conservatives always seem to think that the media swings the other way. I once thought it was a nice indicator of a relative balance in the media. And the media is a bit more balanced then many give it credit. But there is something else, something structural, let me break it down.
There is a strange dynamic inside our most popular media of today, minus the internet and books. That means TV, movies, radio, newspapers and magazines. Those 5 media have a structural bent towards conservative messages. But counteracting that bent, is a tendency for the staff to lean a bit liberal.
The typical result? A liberal leaning reporter trying to act balanced, but producing a story that comes off with a bit of conservative edge to it. The dynamics are easiest to see in Hollywood. Politically the players in the movie industry on average are strongly to the left, and they contribute mainly to the Democrats. But somehow a fuck of a lot of patriotic movies with strong moral messages come out of system.
Why? Because the conservative approach of pushing strong simple moral messages is tailor made for movies. It makes a nice strong ending to the story. Same goes for TV spots, newspaper headlines, and magazine covers. Simple, basic and familiar but dramatic. Its the conservative way. The structure of these media encourages the right wing worldview to show through on the simplest level.
However, the traits that make good reporters, actors, directors, editors and the like are more in tune with a liberal world view. Creativity, rational thinking and detailed exploration of stories. The nurturing liberal worldview breeds these ideas and encourages liberal reporters. Hence the "liberal media". And in times of slow news, the questioning liberal worldview slowly takes over the tone of the news.
You could see it in GW2 when news was hot and running quick the tone was pro-war, celebrating the moral clarity of soldiers heading to battle. A couple days later as things settled in, the questioning and exploration of the darker sides would return. And then bam! more war motion and the bombastic conservative headlines were back. Slow down, more liberal, explode fast, more conservative. Cycle. Repeat.
I have a feeling this sort of dynamic has been around for a long time. What's different now is that the Bush administration has a great feel for the rhythms of media, and have been timing there actions remarkably well. Their over the top conservative rhetoric and action is pace perfectly for maximum US media exposure. They understand the structure better then the Dems and it shows. And the advantage is huge. The left just doesn't have the rhetoric to win in the game of overblown headlines. Their arguments are better suited for a slower more reasoned environ. Its no coincidence that the lefts biggest media victory of late, the downfall of Trent Lott, came during the slow news time around Xmas. The Left needs to throw off the Bush administrations rhythm and slow the pace down. Summer is dead when it comes to news, and they'll need to maximize that to their advantage. And come Fall its all about setting the pace, whoever does it going to control the media game.
Sharon Bush is moving on. One week after the grueling two-day mediation that sealed the deal, Bush is turning philosophical about her split from presidential brother Neil Bush.
She won't be writing a Bush family exposé after all. "You know I'd never write a hateful tell-all," she said Tuesday...
As for her post-divorce financial situation, Bush said Tuesday, "The grandparents (former President George Bush and Barbara) have been good to me and to the children."
HoustonChronicle.com - Bush ex-inlaw decides not to spill
Ok, lets paraphrase. After a nasty split with her husband Sharon Bush threatens to write a tell all exposé of the family. Papa Bush steps up and makes it clear that isn't an option, and tosses in a pile of cash to sweeten the deal. This stuff is old hat the Bush family. Nothing gets written about them. Those that try have a habit of dying... or at the least staying out of print. (note to self if you plan on writing a Bush bio it pays to be a loony who is down with Lyndon Larouche.)
"We were not lying," said one official. "But it was just a matter of emphasis."
That's from ABCNEWS.com : Officials: 9/11 Was Main Reason for War. Not that I'm happy about it, but it does fit in with my thesis on The Art of Lying in Politics. Point 3, never admit that you are wrong. How true. If you are more concerned with manipulating the public via the media then with keeping friend and making diplomacy that is. The Bush administration continues to work the media effortlessly. More on that soon.
Being Senate majority leader is akin to being grounds-keeper at a cemetery; you have a lot of people under you, but they aren't paying much attention.
[via Semi-Daily Journal]
Think its pretty evident that Senator Rick Santorum should be resigning from office, effective immediately. If he has any sense of decency that is. What a disgusting and morally repugnant creature. Couple quotes from the now infamous AP Interview:
In this case, what we're talking about, basically, is priests who were having sexual relations with post-pubescent men. We're not talking about priests with 3-year olds, or 5-year olds. We're talking about a basic homosexual relationship.
So let me get this straight a priest using his position of authority to molest a 12 year old boy is "a basic homosexual relationship"? Don't know what world Santorum lives in, but he needs to leave the world of the Senate pronto.
Lets not even get into his man on dog comments...
Course Bush is fully behind this sort of repugnant immoral homophobia:
"The president believes the senator is an inclusive man. And that's what he believes," Fleischer said.
So I guess inclusive now means you are willing to group homosexuals with pedophile rapists priests and bestiality, I think I'm going to be sick.
Let me say it again. Senator Santorum should be resign and resign now.
Bush, that is a whole other story...
[links via DailyKos]
I knew I was going to link to it just for the title, but Billmon has really topped himself with, When the Shiite Hits the Fan. Get this man a sitcom or something...
"Al Jazeera, like so much else in the region, becomes part of an Americanization machine." Michael Wolff's latest column,
Al Jazeera's Edge digs into the breakout network of the GW2. Good stuff. His point is that Al Jaz is a business, a TV station. What grabs me more then that though, is that its making money by selling a political viewpoint. On a similar note is Mecca Cola, pitched as an alternative to Coca-Cola.
Both are examples of something, I've been thinking about a long time, the commercial viability of ideology. I call it Revolutionary Capitalism, and there will be more coming in the near future.
In the previously mentioned A Farewell to Arms post, Christopher Allbritton talks about a rumor going round Iraq:
The marchers in Baghdad demanding a quick end to American occupation, he said, were incited by Ahmed Chalabi and the INC to stir up trouble against the Americans, so they will leave and the INC can seize complete control.
Now Chalabi is the neocons man in Washington/Iraq. His position of being the next potential leader of Iraq arose due to his extensive DC connections and lobbying. No idea if that rumor is true, but if it is then Iraq is going to get really nasty real soon. If even Chalabi wants the US out, then imagine what others think? As Allbritton points out there are a lot of ethnic groups, tribes, religions and invaders involved here. And they all want their power in a limited space.
Messy indeed. Lets see how Bush, Rove and company handle the news. More Afghanistan style ignoring I expect. But the stakes are larger in Iraq will the media be willing to step up and report? Unlike some who have given up on mainstreams media's ability to criticize the current administration I have some hope left. I think a good deal of the mainstream Bush dickriding that went on during the war was the product of the media's laziness combined with good timing on the part of administration PR machine. The admin PR people where able to keep creating new news events for the media. And since the media is lazy they went for the easy story. After a couple slow news days you could see the more balanced reporting return. But then the PR machine would hit back with new stories. Return to lazy media.
Now generating stories is hard work. Especially without an army of 300,000 people working for you to create some news. I have a feeling that the media will start hitting harder when slow news periods emerge. All of a sudden they'll need to investigate a bit to find the story. And odds are the story will sometimes be in Iraq. And it might not be pretty. I'll be keeping my eyes open.
Been thinking a lot about what it will take for the Democrats (for lack of a better alternative) to retake the White House. The Primaries are less then a year away. 8+ men (and probably just one woman) all competing with each other for the nomination over a span over a year. Its an archaic process and one that needs changing. Too much time is spent on the internal competition and not enough focusing on the opposition. It presents a picture of an un-unified party and draws attention to the flaws of the candidates. And the odd week by week progression through states is just bizarre, its designed to give jobs to obscure strategists, not help out the process. Anyway here are some thoughts on a better process, no idea what it would take to implement any of them.
Again this is all said while being relatively ignorant of the actual structure of the Democratic party system, but still they can do better and we all know it.
Anyone but Bush in 2004!
Howard Dean just wrote a tearing attack on Bush. Strong, clear and on point. Gives me a lot more respect for Dean. Someone needs to call Bush on the tone of paranoia and anger that he's setting for the world. And Dean comes real close to taking him up on the fact. Good stuff.
Theirs is a radical view of our role in the world. The President who campaigned on a platform of a humble foreign policy has instead begun implementing a foreign policy characterized by dominance, arrogance and intimidation. The tidal wave of support and goodwill that engulfed us after the tragedy of 9/11 has dried up and been replaced by undercurrents of distrust, skepticism and hostility by many who had been among our closest allies.
and
When did we become a nation of fear and anxiety when we were once known the world around as a land of hope and liberty?
On day one of a Dean Presidency, I will reverse this attitude. I will tear up the Bush Doctrine. And I will steer us back into the company of the community of nations where we will exercise moral leadership once again.
And not only will I seek to heal the divisions this President has caused in the world community, but I would also begin the process of healing the divisions he has exploited here at home.
This President shamelessly divides us from one another. He divides us by race ? as he did when he claimed that the University of Michigan uses quotas in its law school admissions. He divides us by class by rewarding his campaign donors with enormous tax cuts while the rest of us are deprived of affordable health care, prescription drugs for our seniors, and good schools for our kids. He divides us by gender by seeking to restrict reproductive choice for women. He divides us by sexual orientation by appointing reactionary judges to the bench, and as he did in Texas by refusing to sign the Hate Crimes bill if it included gay or lesbian Americans as potential victims.
It is a Bush Doctrine of domestic division, and I want to be the President who tears that doctrine up, too. I want to restore a sense of community in this country.
The whole article is archived below.
Published on Thursday, April 17, 2003 by CommonDreams.org
Bush: It's Not Just His Doctrine That's Wrong
by Howard Dean
[Note: After reading a recent article that called into question my opposition to the Bush Doctrine of preemptive war, I wanted to state my position clearly to set the record straight. I appreciate that the editors of Common Dreams have given me this opportunity.]
When Congress approved the President?s authorization to go to war in Iraq ? no matter how well-intentioned ? it was giving the green light to the President to set his Doctrine of preemptive war in motion. It now appears that Iraq was just the first step. Already, the Bush Administration is apparently eyeing Syria and Iran as the next countries on its target list. The Bush Doctrine must be stopped here.
Many in Congress who voted for this resolution should have known better. On September 23, 2002, Al Gore cautioned in his speech in San Francisco that ?if the Congress approves the Iraq resolution just proposed by the Administration it is simultaneously creating the precedent for preemptive action anywhere, anytime this or any future president so decides.? And that is why it was such a big mistake for Congress to allow the president to set this dangerous precedent.
Too much is at stake. We have taken decades of consensus on the conduct of foreign policy ? bipartisan consensus in the United States and consensus among our allies in the world community ? and turned it on its head. It could well take decades to repair the damage this President and his cohort of right-wing ideological advisors have done to our standing in the international community.
Theirs is a radical view of our role in the world. The President who campaigned on a platform of a humble foreign policy has instead begun implementing a foreign policy characterized by dominance, arrogance and intimidation. The tidal wave of support and goodwill that engulfed us after the tragedy of 9/11 has dried up and been replaced by undercurrents of distrust, skepticism and hostility by many who had been among our closest allies.
This unilateral approach to foreign policy is a disaster. All of the challenges facing the United States ? from winning the war on terror and containing weapons of mass destruction to building an open world economy and protecting the global environment ? can only be met by working with our allies. A renegade, go-it-alone approach will be doomed to failure, because these challenges know no boundaries.
The largest, most sophisticated military in the history of the world cannot eliminate the threat of sleeper terrorist cells. That task requires the highest level of intelligence cooperation with our allies.
Even the largest, most sophisticated military in the history of the world cannot be expected to go to war against every evil dictator who may possess chemical weapons. This calls for an aggressive and effective diplomatic effort, conducted in full cooperation with a united international community, and preferably with the backing of the multilateral institutions we helped to build for just this purpose. This challenge requires treaties ? such as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty ? that this Administration has sometimes treated cavalierly. In any case, war should be a last resort or an option to be used in the face of an imminent threat.
The UN Charter specifically protects the right of self-defense against armed attack, and most agree that action against imminent threat is also justified. As President ? as has been the case with all previous presidents ? I would not hesitate to use our military might to protect our people or our nation from an imminent threat. But you will not find a Dean Administration turning to the option of force in the first instance as this President does.
The immediate task at hand of the next president will be to begin rebuilding our relationships with our allies so that we can work in concert on tackling these challenges.
The next president will need to undo the work of this band of radicals currently controlling our foreign policy ? who view the Middle East as a laboratory for their experiments in democracy-building, where no such traditions exist. Their approach will drastically change the view that the world has had of the United States.
Our nation should be viewed as a moral and just power, a power that seeks to do good, one that has led by example and with a spirit of generosity, and one that works with the world community in advancing the ideals of human dignity and rule of law across the globe.
The people of this country must understand that this Administration has a far different concept of the role of America in the world. This concept involves imposing our will on sovereign nations. This concept involves dismantling the multilateral institutions that we have spent decades building. And this concept involves distorting the rule of law to suit their narrow purposes. When did we become a nation of fear and anxiety when we were once known the world around as a land of hope and liberty?
On day one of a Dean Presidency, I will reverse this attitude. I will tear up the Bush Doctrine. And I will steer us back into the company of the community of nations where we will exercise moral leadership once again.
And not only will I seek to heal the divisions this President has caused in the world community, but I would also begin the process of healing the divisions he has exploited here at home.
This President shamelessly divides us from one another. He divides us by race ? as he did when he claimed that the University of Michigan uses quotas in its law school admissions. He divides us by class by rewarding his campaign donors with enormous tax cuts while the rest of us are deprived of affordable health care, prescription drugs for our seniors, and good schools for our kids. He divides us by gender by seeking to restrict reproductive choice for women. He divides us by sexual orientation by appointing reactionary judges to the bench, and as he did in Texas by refusing to sign the Hate Crimes bill if it included gay or lesbian Americans as potential victims.
It is a Bush Doctrine of domestic division, and I want to be the President who tears that doctrine up, too. I want to restore a sense of community in this country ? where it?s not enough to worry whether your own kids have health care, but whether your neighbors? kids have health care. I want to go to the South and talk about race. White southerners have been flocking to the Republican Party in recent years, but I want to offer them hope that their children will benefit from better schools and affordable health care, too. The Republican Party has done nothing for working people, black or white, and we need to remind Southern white folks that the only hope for better schools, and better job opportunities, and health care that is affordable is a Democratic President.
I am what is commonly referred to as a social liberal and a fiscal conservative. I am proud of the fact that as Governor I routinely balanced the budget ? which I was not required to do by Vermont?s constitution ? and paid down our state debt by nearly a quarter. I had to make tough decisions, and I will admit that some of them did not make the progressive community happy. But I made those decisions because I have a guiding principle that social justice must rest upon a foundation of fiscal discipline. Because of that approach to governance, Vermont today is not cutting education and is not cutting Medicaid despite the perilous economic times brought on by the Bush fiscal policies.
One of my goals as a Presidential candidate is to represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party ? a line made popular by the late Paul Wellstone. Some have questioned why I would so closely align myself with a politician whose politics were considerably more liberal than mine. The fact is that I admired Paul Wellstone greatly, not only because of his politics, but because he stood up for his beliefs and fought for them until the day he died. I can only hope that someday people will say the same about me ? that I, too, remained true to my core principles no matter what. I believe that the Democratic Party needs to stand for something if we want people to vote for us. And by standing against the Bush Doctrine of preemptive war and domestic division, we may yet rediscover the soul of our Party.
MyDD: Fallout has a couple of nice instances of discord among the conservatives. Lets hope this grows enough to shatter the tactical unity they've been enjoying in recent elections. Favorite quote is Eagleburger:
If George Bush [Jnr] decided he was going to turn the troops loose on Syria and Iran after that he would last in office for about 15 minutes. In fact if President Bush were to try that now even I would think that he ought to be impeached. You can't get away with that sort of thing in this democracy.
Wonder if he's thinking he's got better job prospects in a Democratic White House then he does in the current. Nevermind that he's probably ancient and in no need of work. Guess that's the radical side coming out in the neocons
like old communists they are upsetting the old conservatives. Be funny if it wasn't so damn upsetting. If I become president, be sure to remind me to wake Osama out of retirement, so he can bomb me a carte blanche to do whatever I want in DC. And for those .arpanet and .mil people who periodically visit this that's a joke, get it.
How neoconservatives conquered Washington -- and launched a war raises far more questions then it answers. I've heard many times that the neocons where originally Trotskyists, but never have seen the story laid out. If its even true, that is. And if its true it should be documented someplace. Anyone have any pointers?
T minus 1 year and counting. Been over a year now that Starbucks has been offering 3rd party wireless internet. Forgot the initial company name, but the service is run by T-Mobile now. And its a case study on how not to attract customers.
Would you rather rip off one customer or have 10 happy customers? T-Mobile apparently wants the former. From the get go the Starbucks wireless service had 2 pay options. Pay by the minute at super sized prices or unlimited access provided you commit to a year contract. What's missing is a middle ground, the space where all most all their target market lies. People's need for wireless internet comes in bursts, on random trips where they don't have access in an office or hotel. And when they have need for access they want it to be unlimited. If T-Mobile offered day passes for $10, weeks for $20 and months for $30 they'd be racking up customers. Instead they rack up animosity. I've paid them at times, but each time I do I hate them more. And I sure don't recommend them to people.
Writing this up now because for a second I thought T-Mobile had learned. They finally offered a month to month option for a sort of reasonable $40 I only need a week but I almost paid up, it make this week a bit smoother. Until I saw the $25 cancellation fee. WTF? What is the point of a monthly option if you get penalized for only taking a monthly. Could have easily bought 3 or 4 months scattered through this year at $40 a pop. Instead I'll be taking my business else where, thank you.
And just for google let me add that T-Mobile sucks.
How low can they get? The Republican Party was the party of Lincoln. I know its hard to believe in this day and age, and it just got even harder:
Yesterday's debate suddenly veered from guns to race when Cubin criticized a failed Democratic amendment that would have banned gun sales to drug addicts or people in drug treatment. After noting that her sons, ages 25 and 30, "are blond-haired and blue-eyed," she said: "One amendment today said we could not sell guns to anybody under drug treatment. So does that mean that if you go into a black community you can't sell any guns to any black person?"
Rep. Melvin Watt (D-N.C.), who is black, interrupted and demanded that Cubin retract the statement. Cubin said that she did not mean to offend her "neighbors" on the Democratic side, and maintained that her comment was within House rules.
Watt was not satisfied. "She needs to apologize for using words that are offensive for the entire African American race," he said. He demanded Cubin's comment be "taken down," meaning it was inappropriate for a House debate. In a largely party-line vote, the GOP-controlled House voted 227 to 195 to uphold the chair's ruling that the remark fell within House rules.
In other words the entire Republican party in the House of Reps just voted in favor of racism. Disgusting.
Debate on Gun Rights In House Turns Racial (washingtonpost.com) is the reference.
[via dailyKos]
I'm an American, no doubt about it. I was born here and lived here for all but a year of my life. America represents a lot of things I'm proud of and some I'm not. I'm not a big fan of nationalism, but I still love this country, despite all that Bush and friends have done lately. Been pretty disturbing since S11 to see just how much the anti-war movement is willing to hand over the American Flag to the conservatives. Waving a flag is almost like being pro-war. And that's fucked up.
The American Peace Sign flag is my favorite response to the co-option of the flag by the right wing. It simultaneously promotes a support for America and support for peace. As my small contribution to spreading the meme, here is vector version of the peace flag. Its an Illustrator 10 .ai file so its really for designers only, but if anyone wants other versions just email me. And yeah feel free to do whatever you want with the file. If you improve it at all, be cool to get sent a copy, but there are no restrictions.
Right at the beginning of Bush's Presidency the Onion had a piece called Bush: 'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over'. Scarily they were all too right.
Mere days from assuming the presidency and closing the door on eight years of Bill Clinton, president-elect George W. Bush assured the nation in a televised address Tuesday that "our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity is finally over."
"My fellow Americans," Bush said, "at long last, we have reached the end of the dark period in American history that will come to be known as the Clinton Era, eight long years characterized by unprecedented economic expansion, a sharp decrease in crime, and sustained peace overseas. The time has come to put all of that behind us."
and a bit later
During the 40-minute speech, Bush also promised to bring an end to the severe war drought that plagued the nation under Clinton, assuring citizens that the U.S. will engage in at least one Gulf War-level armed conflict in the next four years.
CalPundit has a good post on strategies for the Democrats in 2004. Most intriguing are: 1 - Gay rights and 2 - a 1964 Barry Goldwater strategy.
Gay rights is interesting. As Calpundit points out there is a 30 trend of increase acceptance of gays in America. Has it passed the tipping point where the acceptance outweighs kneejerk homophobia? Definitely close, but it merits further investigation. Drug policy reform, especially with marijuana is a similar issue with an even stronger case behind it I think. Is there an American born after WWII who hasn't smoke a joint?
The Barry Goldwater strategy is potent as well. Don't know much about it but CalPundit claims "Lyndon Johnson beat Barry Goldwater in 1964 by making him look like he was set to plunge us into World War III". Considering Bush and Co are running things on fear and loathing, if the Democrats go figure out a way to make this approach work they could be in really good shape. End the bloodlust and paranoia, that's exactly what the country (and the stock market) needs.
"Bush believes he was called by God to lead the nation at this time, says Commerce Secretary Don Evans, a close friend who talks with Bush every day."
This is one scary fucking article. As Bush might say, will God help us all...
[Via Daily Kos]
So nice to finally see good propaganda coming from the side you support.
[via zephoria]
Does protest and extremism work? CalPundit has some solid thoughts. Don't think he factors in culture enough though. The question I'm still trying to answer is how much do extremist movements shift cultural norms?
I think its pretty clear that at times extremist movements pave the way for the eventual acceptance of ideas into the mainstream. Slavery is a great example. But how often does this happen? And what factors make an extremist movement succeed?
Sunday_Mirror.co.uk - COOK: BRING OUR LADS HOME is an op-ed by Robin Cook, the former british cabinet member who resigned over the war. Think it sums up the current situation better then anything else I've seen.
For a much more detailed sum up, Daily Kos is the place to go. Kos has been spot on over the past couple weeks, highly recommended once again.
The Bush Administration's media manipulation skills never ceases to amaze me. As the war in Iraq skewers away from the chickenhawks dream plans its starting to become clearer just how the Karl Rove media technique works. Its all pretty simple really, it can be broken down into 3 steps:
Follow those steps and you look like you are doing a good job in the mass media. Up close or under close scrutiny all the lying and bullshitting the administration engages in is pretty evident. But when broadcast over mass media it looks like the administration is right on track.
Never admitting you are wrong is the most important step. Once you admit you are wrong your words become circumspect when broadcast. Bush always maintains that things are going well, and because he never entertains the possibility of being wrong, he projects and image of being right and believable. Not everyone buys it off course, but in the mass media and winner takes all democracy all you need is a healthy percentage of the population to buy it.
Clinton used this technique as well, but not quite as deftly as Bush. Clinton's problem was the details, he was too willing to dig into them. Once the details are out its harder to maintain the image of always being right. And Clinton missed the secrecy as well, Bush keeps as much info secret as possible so there are less details to complicate the projection of being right.
Perhaps the greatest tactical failing of the Bush administration is the way they've let the success of these media techniques infect their attempts at diplomacy. These techniques work when broadcast in the media, as I said before they fail completely when used up close and in person. They just don't work in diplomacy, hence the outrageous failings of the Bush administration in the UN, Turkey and elsewhere.
Worst part of it all is that now the world hates America, and Bush is still sitting pretty at home. I think (hope) I can handle 2 more years of this crap, but if he gets 4 more beyond that then I don't know...
There is a new stereotype on the rise, the violent peace protester. Seen it popping up all over the web. Usually comes from an amused and/or angry conservative and generally is phrased in a way that ignores the fact that the vast majority of protesters are completely nonviolent. Not exactly the best PR for the antiwar movement.
Still I'd rather have a Black Bloc and an extra stereotype then no Black Bloc and a bunch of whining liberal protesters. Peace doesn't mean being a wimp and the Black Bloc tactic at least tries to escalate protests to a level of higher impact. No hard evidence whether the tactic works at achieving positive results (of for that matter that any protest tactics work). But an experiment is better then nothing so I'm all for it at the moment.
The Memory Hole > This Is Gulf War 2 and its not pretty. The pictures a pretty horrifying, but America needs to see them to remember how horrifying war can be.
The Real Reasons for the Upcoming War in Iraq: A Macroeconomic and Geostrategic Analysis of the Unspoken Truth, by W. Clark
is a fascinating document. No idea how much of it is true, but it sounds like its potentially on point. And if it is its scary.
Key underlying idea is that oil is currently bought and sold using dollars exclusively. Iraq recently switched to a Euro standard and OPEC is thinking about it as well. If that switch happens it will result in a huge drop and destabilization of the dollar, fscking up the US economy majorly. Need to investigate more, anyone know how true this might be?
+++ Update +++
Paul Krugman has rebuted this rumor pretty strongly. I'm inclined to believe him.
Back to Iraq for Christopher Allbritton. Well he leaves in a day or two, but he's got some strong words on corporate media to part with.
bq. Starting this week however, the real purpose of Back to Iraq comes into view, as this becomes a much more heavily reported site instead of one based on analysis and commentary. (That will still be there, but in much smaller portions.)
bq. I’ve been doing a fair number of interviews, too, as various media members want to know my story. Often they ask me why I’m doing this, what do I expect or hope to get out of this, am I crazy, etc. Well, I’m probably crazy, yes, but what I’m hoping to get out of this is some respect for the Web (and blogs) as a serious medium for independents. To all the journalism professors who say blogs aren’t “real” journalism, I say, “I don’t see you getting out of your tenured chair and putting your butt in the middle of Kurdistan to report on what’s happening.” To those who say, “You’ve got no editor,” I reply, “My readers are my editors.” To those who complain, “You’re biased, you offer nothing but op-eds,” I reply, “I am biased, but at least you know where I’m coming from. And just wait until next week when my butt is in Kurdistan.”
Venik's Aviation is a Russian site that is providing very detailed reports on the military situation in Iraq. Not sure of the accuracy, but so far it seems on point. Has about a 24hr lead time on bad news, versus it being reported in the American Mass Media. Damn how things have changed from the cold war days. Now Russian has the freest flow of information, ironic no?
"I understand when the government wants to brainwash the enemy, but bullshitting its own people is just sad." is the choice quote from the site's Russian (apparently at least) author, Venik.
Daily Kos has quickly emerged as my favorite info feed for this awful war. Essential reading.
I'm writing this sitting safely at a computer as helicopters and sirens scream through the streets. SF Indymedia indicates 30,000 are marching and some being arrested. Enemy Combatant Radio is giving legal updates. I was out in the streets all day Thursday, but I'm still pretty ambivalent on the effectiveness of the protests. Here's where my thoughts stand at the moment:
Protest Positives
* Emotional Unity: people feel better knowing they are not alone in the opposition to the war.
* Emotional Outlet: breaking Starbucks windows isn't too cool, but its better that energy gets taken out on corporate property then on people someplace.
* International PR: its essential that some internationally newsworthy protests happens so that people around the world don't think all Americans are with Bush and Co.
* Domestic Results - Personal: Shutting down the city means people in America will start associating war with domestic uncomfort. They may not be able to realize that war = major deaths in foreign places, but maybe being personally discomforted by traffic and city shut downs will change people's willingness to support wars.
* Domestic Results - Political: Can't imagine the national economic losses of protests can measure up to the cost of waging war, but perhaps the it can encourage local and state governments to be more vocal in resisting the drive towards military violence. And of course politicians can't be to happy to see all these voters upset in the streets.
Protest Negatives
* Bad Domestic PR: Protests don't look so hot on TV and they sure piss off those stuck in traffic. They don't encourage people to change there views towards those of the protesters. Probably alienate a lot of people actually.
* Success Unproven At Best: Did the protests of the 60's lead to the end of Vietnam or the election of Dick Nixon. Could be both, could be neither, but Nixon certain came into office well before the war ended.
* Perpetuates Fear: The government is using fear to sell war and reduce civil liberties. Protests in the street (or at least the police response to the protests) help spread that fear.
* Economic Damage: Slowing down the economy isn't usually the best thing for the people.
All in all I'm still on the fence. Happy I was protesting hard on Thursday, those actions made the international papers. But now I'm more interested in figuring out actions that produce more long term results. In other words I think my time could be spent better doing something besides protesting. What it is exactly I can't say yet, but I firmly believe that there are ways we can improve this world on a large scale, so its back to the lab for me. Stay tuned for further developments.
Christopher Allbritton is an independent reporter who was in Iraqi Kurdistan last summer. He's about to head back in a few days. Posted his website before.
His goal for fund raising was $10,000 which seems like a minuscule amount to be covering a war in a foreign country with. So far he's only raised $7,000 and he's going to Iraq anyways, but his trip will be cut short unless he can raise more funding.
We all know that independent journalism is in trouble as the media companies continue to consolidate. The need for people like Christopher Allbritton is huge. there is a war being waged in our name in Iraq, it be nice to at least get some independent reports of what is going on inside the country. I urge you all to contribute what ever you can to his efforts. This list is all about finding the news that isn't being reported in the mainstream media, here is a chance to really make a small impact in the way the story of this war is being told.
You can donate to Allbritton by going to his website and clicking on the PayPal icon on the right side. Its an easy process, no need to have a PayPal account to make payments. I just donated, be great to see you contribute as well.
Decompressed a bit from all day protesting, tired but ready to put some thoughts together.
First off I spent the whole day protesting on a bike. This is the way to do it. The theme of the day was decentralized swarming and it appeared to completely overwhelm the cops. Choice quote from the NY Times: "By late in the day, Assistant Chief Alex Fagan said, the situation in San Francisco deteriorated into 'absolute anarchy.'" And that was with a vast majority of the protesters being on foot.
The mobility and versatility of the bike is incredible. If the goal is to shut down the city then the bike is the tool. While bulk of the protesters were swarming downtown, me and a friend connected with about 100 other bikers and did a long range protest. Whatever street we rolled on was basically shut down. Every couple intersections be circle in for a few minutes cutting off cross town traffic. We did about a 5 mile circle around downtown. With all the cops in the core, we didn't encounter a single po-po. In other words if there were a handful of other crews of 100 bicyclists doing the same thing we were the city would have shut down to a whole other level.
I think 10 or 20 crews of 50-100 bicyclists could completely shut down a city the size of San Francisco, or maybe even NY. Shut down quick and move to the next intersection. If the police try and intervene they just shut things down more. And with enough crews moving randomly traffic will back up chaotically. Cars turning off one blocked street only to encounter traffic from another blockade. And with a bike the risk of getting arrested is way lower as its far easier to make a quick get away. Its a far more decentralized tool for a decentralized protest.
*** warning technical bike tangent ***
Those who know me well know I ride fixed gear and generally look down upon those who ride mountain bikes in urban areas. But I have to say that a mountain bike is probably a better bike for protesting. The fixey treated me right but the mountain bikes curb hopping ability is damn useful when negotiating crowds and trying to escape in an urban area. Being able to coast while riding really slowly all day would be nice too. Come to think of it I should have flipped that flip flop hub. First time ever since switching to fixey that I've seen a benefit to heading back to the other side though.
*** technical bike tangent over ***
All that said, let me note that I'm not 100% sold on the effectiveness of protest as a revolutionary tactic. How exactly does protesting change the world? The answer is unclear and unfocused. I was out there today partly in solidarity with the other protesters and partly just to experience it. I'm still up in the air on whether is an effective use of energy. Its pretty obvious that Bush couldn't give a fuck if SF gets shut down, but that's not the only factor to consider.
After today's experience I'm far more inclined to think protesting is important and helpful, but maybe I'm still high off the days energy. Effective or not, protesting is damn fun. Not always, tear gas, getting arrested and getting abused by the cops are not exactly pleasurable. But hanging in a crowd of like minded energized people is great. As is the feeling you get shutting down an intersection. Or the feeling of riding free in miraculously car free streets.
Not only is protesting fun, but it gives the protesters a great feeling of connection. Not only to the other people protesting around you, but also to all the people protesting around the world. That's a powerful feeling and a prime reason why protest can be good.
To tired to finish this now, going to post and then add more tomorrow, going into some of the reasons I'm on the fence about protesting.
War looks more and more inevitable now. The last one in Iraq was a disaster in terms of independent journalism, although the Bush administration probably seems it the opposite. Arguably the fact that the Pentagon had almost perfect control over the presses access to info in the Gulf War 1 was a major factor in the fact that it was so easy for Bush and Co to manufacture the Gulf War 2. How different is this one going to be?
There are few online attempts to provide an alternative information source for the Gulf War 2. Hope they do a better job then the mainstream press did a decade ago.
http://www.back-to-iraq.com/ is a pretty much unknown journalist, Christopher Allbritton, going at it alone. This is a real attempt to be an independent journalist using an online blog as the outlet.
http://www.kevinsites.net/ is the blog of CNN reporter Kevin Sites. Given that he gets paid by a big cable network his ability to speak his mind is a bit more truncated. Still this blog appears like he might have a "what I do on my own time is my own business' attitude. Hope that its true and he can provide a really candid view of the war.
http://dear_raed.blogspot.com/ is the blog of Salam Pax an Iraqi living in Bagdad. No pretenses of being journalism here, but its never the less far more informative about what's actually happening in Iraq then anything I've ever read in the papers. Good stuff, hope it can stay up and Salam can get through this evermore inevitable seeming nightmare untouched.
how could “support democracy in Iraq” become to mean “bomb the hell out of Iraq”?
Had drinks with Sam Bower director of the excellent Green Museum last night. Talked about the way that art movements don't take off unless there is a portion of the establishment that finds the philosophy of the art useful. Modernism for instance was a tool for the US government to push American ideals onto the world after World War II. A artistic complement to the Marshall Plan. The book to read apparently is How New York Stole the Idea of Modern Art. Its now on the top of my wish list.
Interesting to see how our new school imperialists in the Bush administration just don't get it. They push with raw power, without understanding that the war can't be won without a cultural victory. Of course winning a cultural war is just as distasteful to me as winning a military one. A cultural marriage on the other hand is quite intriguing. What happens when Islamic and Western culture mix? Could such a cross breed (if allowed to exist) lead us closer to a political movement of unity and peace?
A Specter is Haunting Gaming. Hmmm isn't this great, all this time I've been thinking video games are this growing field where innovation and creativity can still lead to a successful new idea that also is profitable. Guess not, at least by this take on the industry. Sounds about halfway between the music and movie industries. Which is exactly where video game budgets sit.
Guess the game industry is just a bit too likely to vote democrat. Only the oil and war companies are allowed to flourish nowadays.
Target Iraq - Art of War is a collection of what seems to be psyops (psychological operations aka propaganda) fliers dropped on Iraq. No documentation though. If they are real (and they feel real to me) the scariest bit is the tone. They are all written as if the war is a given. Obviously there are psychological reasons to use that tense, but its damn messed up the way the military is taking this unneeded war for granted.
Resist!ca Activist Search Engine is a cool tool to search the web with all the corporate bs stripped out. Good stuff, although its obviously weighted towards a particular political result. Highly needed, even though I often prefer a more balanced set of results showing all sides to an issue.
While making major noise with Iraq it appears that the Bush administration does have a bit of a domestic agenda. Not to improve the economy, but to crack down on the harmless makers of glass pipes. Raids Put Drug-Paraphernalia Traffickers Out of Business is the NYT headline, but word on the streets they mainly went after people selling hand blown artistic glass pipes. Guess the economy isn't bad enough and the feds want to put some more people out of business. 1984 pops up again as the spectre of war distracts us from the oppression in our back yard.
Adam Greenfield drops An Open-Source Constitution for Post-National States over on his excellent v-2 site. Tasty food for thought, although to be perfectly honest I'm not quite sure how it relates to the real world. And for god's sake if the goal is to move forward why hold onto the regressive concept of the state?
I've never drank the social contract Kool-Aid. There is something deeply disturbing about the fact that governments somehow are vested with the ability to control everything that goes on with a give territory. And as a reluctant citizen of the Bush-Chaney fiefdom I don't need to venture far to find an example of why vesting large amounts of power in Governments is problematic. If we are looking to build a better way organize society isn't it time we look beyond the state?
sophismata puts the bear market into a well needed historical perspective.
So you want to know my politics? The Political Compass puts me as being strongly (but not extremely) libertarian (anti-authoritarian) on social/political issues and very close to the center leaning slightly to the right on economic issues. Closest label is anarchist. They're probably 75% right, their labeling system seems a touch dated, not sure my true politics would fit very neatly on their 2-D graph.
Where The Pirates Are is another interactive map for today, this one showing "piracy" rates for various countries.
Very interesting and highly informative, despite the fact that it reports some extremely dubious figures. All the "loss" figures are a load of crap. There is no way most people would really be buying all that software and movies at the official prices. How many people who are willing to download Photoshop for free would pay $600 for it? In Pakistan? It hasn't even been proven that file sharing and "piracy" are actually causing any losses at all. Last I checked having a bigger audience/user base was a good thing.
Once again Subcomandante Marcos addresses the news with the strongest, clearest and most poetic voice around. Not sure where the english version is on the web so I'm placing it here.
"This is the war of fear.
Its objective is not to defeat Hussein in Iraq. Its goal is not to do
away with Al Qaeda. Nor does it seek to liberate the people of Iraq. It
is not justice, nor democracy, nor liberty which drives this terror. It
is fear.
Fear that the entire world will refuse to accept a policeman which tells
it what it should do, how it should do it and when it should do it. It
is fear.
Fear that the world will refuse to be treated like plunder.
Fear of that human essence which is called rebellion.
Fear that the millions of human beings who are mobilizing today
throughout the world will be victorious in raising the cause of peace."
Originally published in Spanish by the EZLN and the FZLN
************************************
Translated by irlandesa
Communique' from the EZLN which was read during the demonstration in
Rome, Italy, on February 15, 2003. It was read by Heidi Giuliani, the
mother of activist Carlo, who was assassinated by the Italian police in
Genoa in July of 2001.
Zapatista Army of National Liberation.
Mexico.
February 15, 2003.
Brothers and Sisters of Rebel Italy:
Greetings from the men, women, children and old ones of the Zapatista
Army of National Liberation. Our word is made cloud in order to cross
the ocean and to reach the worlds which are in your hearts.
We know that today demonstrations are being held throughout the world in
order to say "No" to Bush's war against the people of Iraq.
And it must be said like that, because it is not a war by the North
American people, nor is it a war against Saddam Hussein.
It is a war by money, which is represented by Se~or Bush (perhaps in
order to emphasize that he is completely lacking in intelligence). And
it is against humanity, whose fate is now at stake on the soil of Iraq.
This is the war of fear.
Its objective is not to defeat Hussein in Iraq. Its goal is not to do
away with Al Qaeda. Nor does it seek to liberate the people of Iraq. It
is not justice, nor democracy, nor liberty which drives this terror. It
is fear.
Fear that the entire world will refuse to accept a policeman which tells
it what it should do, how it should do it and when it should do it. It
is fear.
Fear that the world will refuse to be treated like plunder.
Fear of that human essence which is called rebellion.
Fear that the millions of human beings who are mobilizing today
throughout the world will be victorious in raising the cause of peace.
Because the victims of those bombs which will be launched over Iraqi
lands will not only be Iraqi civilians, children, women, men and old
ones, whose deaths will be merely an accident in the headlong, arbitrary
path of he who, from his side, calls on God as an alibi for destruction
and death.
The person leading this stupidity (which is supported by Berlusconi in
Italy, Blair in England and Aznar in Spain), Se~or Bush, used money to
buy that power which he is trying to hurl upon the people of Iraq.
Because it must not be forgotten that Se~or Bush is the head of the
self-proclaimed world police, thanks to a fraud which was so immense that
it could only be covered up by the shadows of the twin towers in New
York, and by the blood of the victims of the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001.
Neither Hussein nor the Iraqi people matter to the North American
government. What matters to it is demonstrating that it can commit its
crimes in any part of the world, at any moment, and that it can do so
with absolute impunity.
The bombs which are to fall in Iraq seek also to fall on all the nations
of earth. They would also fall on our hearts, and thus universalize that
fear which they carry within.
This war is against all humanity, against all honest men and women.
This war seeks that we should know fear, that we should believe that he
who has money and military force also has right.
This war hopes that we shall shrug our shoulders, that we shall make
cynicism a new religion, that we shall remain silent, that we shall
conform, that we shall resign, that we shall surrender...that we shall
forget...
That we shall forget Carlo Giuliani, the rebel of Genoa.
For the zapatistas, we are the men who dream our dead. And today our
dead are dreaming a rebel "NO."
For us there is but one dignified word and one conscientious action in
the face of this war. The word "NO" and the rebel action.
That is why we must say "NO" to war.
A "NO" without conditions or excuses.
A "NO" without half measures.
A "NO" untarnished by gray areas.
A "NO" with all the colors which paint the world.
A "NO" which is clear, categorical, resounding, definitive, worldwide.
What is at stake in this war is the relationship between the powerful and
the weak. The powerful is powerful because he makes us weak. He lives
off our work, off our blood. That is how he grows fat while we languish.
The powerful have invoked God at their side in this war, so that we will
accept their power and our weakness as something that has been
established by divine plan.
But there is no god behind this war other than the god of money, nor any
right other than the desire for death and destruction.
The only strength of the weak is their dignity. That is what inspires
them to fight in order to resist the powerful, in order to rebel.
Today there is a "NO" which shall weaken the powerful and strengthen the
weak: the "NO" to war.
Some might ask whether the word which has convened so many throughout the
world will be capable of preventing the war or, once it has begun, of
stopping it.
But the question is not whether we can change the murderous march of the
powerful. No. The question we should be asking is: could we live with
the shame of not having done everything possible to prevent and stop this
war?
No honest man or woman can remain silent and indifferent at this moment.
All of us, each one in our own voice, in our own way, in our own
language, by our own action, must say "NO."
And, if the powerful wish to universalize fear through death and
destruction, we must universalize the "NO."
Because the "NO" to this war is also a "NO" to fear, a "NO" to
resignation, a "NO" to surrender, a "NO" to the forgetting, a "NO" to
renouncing our humanness.
It is a "NO" for humanity and against neoliberalism.
We would hope that this "NO" would transcend borders, that it would sneak
past customs, that it would overcome differences of language and culture,
and that it would unite the honest and noble part of humanity, which is
also, and it must not be forgotten, the majority.
Because there are negations which unite and dignify.
Because there are negations which affirm men and women in the best of
themselves, that is, in their dignity.
Today the skies of the world are clouded over with warplanes, with
missiles - which call themselves "intelligent" merely so that they can
conceal the stupidity of those who are in charge of them, and those who,
like Berlusconi, Blair and Aznar, justify them - with satellites which
point out where there is life and where there will be death.
And the land of the earth is tarnished with machines of war which would
paint the earth with blood and shame.
The storm comes.
But dawn shall come only if the words made cloud in order to cross
borders is turned into a "NO" made stone, and they make an opening in the
darkness, a crevice through which tomorrow can slip.
Brothers and sisters of rebel and dignified Italy:
Please accept this "NO" which we, the zapatistas, the smallest, are
sending you.
Allow our "NO" to unite with yours and with all the "NO's" which are
flourishing today throughout the earth.
Viva the rebellion which says "NO!"
Death to death!
>From the mountains of the Mexican Southeast.
By the Comandancia General of the
Clandestine Revolutionary Indigenous Committee of the
Zapatista Army of National Liberation.
Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos
Mexico, February of 2003.
A New Power in the Streets front page New York Times. Right on, for once street protest is making an impact on the traditional media. Here's to more to come.
Can't make it the protests in SF today, but I am behind my computer, so here is me playing my part.
Merriam-Webster definition 2 of impeach: to cast doubt on; especially : to challenge the credibility or validity of.
As the Bush administration continues to manipulate the media like a virtuoso, its time to start question their actions. To cast doubt upon Bush.
These images are designed to multiply, to spread throughout our visual frames of reference. They are released to the public domain. They can be used freely for whatever purpose you so desire. They are free. You can alter, use and share them at your leisure and/or haste. High quality vector art is available to all. The Bush administration PR machine is high gear, lets get the opposition marketing operation rolling in response.
Spread the word in the name of freedom.
Doc Searls has an interesting column on the metaphors underlying the recent arguments on copyrights. Even more interesting for me though was the hyperlinked + google journey it sent me on. Been a while since I've jumped off on that sort of exploration of new ideas. An excellent counterpart to warning about over reliance on the internet for news I just posted.
Searls references an essay by George Lakoff, a cognitive scientist I had previously known nothing about. Haven't had enough time to really figure out how much I agree with his theory on the moral metaphors behind American Conservatism and Liberalism, but it is certainly innovative and interesting. Makes a great companion piece to this weekend's "Memo to the Democrats: Quit Being Losers!" NYT Magazine piece.
Looking for more info on Lakoff lead me to this excellent edge.org interview. Lakoff comes off as one of the rare thinkers who is able to let his ideas evolve all over the traditional academic boundries, leaving a trail of insite behind. Leave no doubt his books are now on my wish list...
