Three Dot Thursday
Another "three-dot journalism" column today, in the continuing tradition of the late great Herb Caen.
. . . Starting with the good news, the ACLU has won a legal victory (again) with a ruling by a judge who has actually read the First and Fourth Amendments to the Constitution. The ruling bans the federal government from issuing "National Security Letters" (NSLs) which are, in essence, a power usually reserved for royalty (I've actually written about this many times in the past). The FBI issued NSLs to avoid the pesky process of actually getting a warrant before searching or seizing evidence. The judge threw this mockery of the Constitution on the ashheap of history. Of course, the Bush Administration will probably appeal all the way up to the Supreme Court, so stay tuned.
. . . In other good news for civil libertarians, the Homeland Security Department has announced it will shut down a controversial data mining program because of the utter lack of any attempt to protect the average American's data from being used. While this is indeed good news, these data mining programs seem to have a way of being "shut down" and then quietly being renamed in some back room, only to surface once again.
. . . Tim Grieve's "War Room" column at Salon has a great rundown on the White House's abrupt about face on what the "benchmarks in Iraq" actually mean. It's astonishing, because if you listen hard as you read the list of quotes, you can actually hear the heavy equipment in the background digging up and repositioning the goal posts.
. . . For those of you not old enough to remember, America's views on "sovereignty" didn't actually begin to warp under President George W. Bush. We are reminded of this because Manuel Noriega is about to get out of American jail, having served his sentence. He's off to France to be tried there, so it's not like he's going free or anything. But our invasion of Panama remains as a benchmark of its own when it comes to the history of the American Empire.
We invaded Panama and arrested Noriega -- the sovereign head of a sovereign state -- because we said he was guilty of breaking U.S. laws. Now, sovereignty is supposed to mean that you get to rule as you see fit, which means that even if Noriega was guilty of using Panama as a pipeline for smuggled drugs, there is nothing to legally stop him from doing so, since it's his country. We didn't see things quite the same way, so we invaded the country, captured Noriega, and tried him in American court for breaking American law. In Panama.
Even Dubya -- who has ignored pretty much any international law he didn't agree with -- hasn't gone that far. Saddam was tried in an Iraqi court, not back here at home.
. . . An alert reader of this column sent me this article on whether America is preparing to bomb Iran or not. It's worth a read, (especially since it comes from non-American media). Apparently, some high-level DC mucky-mucks ran a four-month-long war game on this very subject. Reading about some of the possible effects of such a campaign is chilling. Even more chilling is what the participants took away from the experience:
In the meantime, administration officials are studying the lessons of the recent war game, which was set up to devise a way of weathering an economic storm created by war with Iran. Computer modelling found that if Iran closed the Straits of Hormuz, it would nearly double the world price of oil, knock $161 billion off American GDP in a single quarter, cost one million jobs and slash disposable income by $260 billion a quarter.
The war gamers advocated deploying American oil reserves - good for 60 days - using military force to break the blockade (two US aircraft carrier groups and half of America's 277 warships are already stationed close to Iran), opening up oil development in Alaska, and ending import tariffs on ethanol fuel. If the government also subsidised fuel for poorer Americans, the war-gamers concluded, it would mitigate the financial consequences of a conflict.
The Heritage report concludes: "The results were impressive. The policy recommendations eliminated virtually all of the negative outcomes from the blockade."
Yeah, tell that to Americans paying seven bucks a gallon for gas. I'm sure they'll agree that you've "virtually eliminated" all those irrelevant negative outcomes.
. . . And finally, it looks like the Republicans should be a little worried about voters' attitudes towards their candidates. Republican voters, mind you. After the recent presidential debate in New Hampshire (the one Fred Thompson blew off to go on Leno), Republican Framer-In-Chief Frank Luntz talked to average Republican votes who had just witnessed the debate. As Salon reports:
...Frank Luntz, who has a focus group of 29 Republican voters at a restaurant in New Hampshire. Luntz asks the voters to raise their hands if they think the candidates exceeded their expectations. No hands get raised. He asks how many were disappointed. They all raise their hands. "This is not a good night," Luntz concludes.
I don't know about that, Frank. Sounds like a pretty good night to me!
-- Chris Weigant
Chris,
If I can add another ... for you:
- Keith Olbermann did a quick story about how Bin Laden was supposedly going to issue another tape next week (9/11 anniversary week)... and he even had a 2004 photo of Bin Laden and beside it a 2007 photo of Bin Laden.
There is only one problem
In the 2007 photo "Bin Laden" had a black beard and in the 2004 photo he had a greying beard. This is VERY significant.
In the Middle East, age denotes a position of respect. Muslim men, as they get older, flaunt their gray beards... and they wouldn't dye them to look younger since youth doesn't carry with it the same automatic respect factor. Hence... take a guess if the photo is real or not.
You can verify this Here:
"Middle-Eastern culture ensures respect for the elderly and values highly the natural bonds of affection between all members of the family. The eldest members are a source of spiritual blessing, religious faith, wisdom and love."
and here
"Always remember that elders are held in high esteem in Arab culture and are treated with the utmost respect."
An alternate explanation is that Bin Laden's handlers wanted to show that he is healthy and vibrant so they dyed his beard...
Bin Laden doesn't need to worry about respect from the world's Arabs. The dying of his beard tells me that Bin Laden is playing to the western audience...
Ya know, not EVERYTHING bad and evil can be laid at the feet of President Bush and the GOP...
Michale.....
>Now, sovereignty is supposed to mean
>that you get to rule as you see fit,
The right to swing your arms ends where someone else's nose begins..
In this context, Noreiga's right to be a drug lord stops at the US Border...
>It's astonishing, because if you
>listen hard as you read the list
>of quotes, you can actually hear
>the heavy equipment in the background
>digging up and repositioning the goal posts.
Yea, but that repositioning is from the DEMOCRATS who went from "We need to worry about our troops!!" to "We need to worry about the Iraqi Political Situation!!!"
:D
Michale.....
Michale,
I understand that you want to take any fact and twist it to suit you... but that dog doesn't hunt...
Your twisted pretzel logic has a devout muslim fundamentalist trying to play to a non-muslim crowd that he has no compuncture about bombing... yeah, sure, Michale...
Your twisted pretzel logic skipped right over the facts into spin mode... "he's trying to look young and vibrant"... try READING instead of the whirling-dervish routine... a devout muslim fundamentalist, Bin Laden wouldn't dye his beard to remove the grey from it. He doesn't NEED to look and vibrant. If he is dead, he becomes instant diety material for the jihadist's and if he is alive he is revered for his age, wisdom and experience.
Are you familiar with the principle of Occam's Razor??
What's more likely here??
That there is a vast conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of people in and out of government and their intention is to completely fabricate an entire war on terror??? AND NONE OF IT HAS EVER LEAKED....
Or that a single psychopath vain man has decided to enhance his youthfulness to appeal to a broader audience??
A "devout muslim fundamentalist" would not murder thousands and thousands of innocent people. The Quran specifically forbids such actions.
So, this "devout muslim fundamentalist" of yours has perverted the religion to suit his own psychopathic ends...
Does it not enter that hysterical Bush hating mind of yours that, if your "devout muslim funamentalist" can pervert THAT part of the idealogy to suit his purpose, that it's possible he would pervert OTHER parts of the idealogy to suit his own purposes...
Did THAT ever occur to you??
Of course not. It's much easier and much more pleasant for you to simply, irrationally and hysterically hate than it is to be logical and rational about things...
You have more in common with your "devout muslim fundamentalist" than you like to face up to..
You both have an irrational and hysterical hatred of anyone who disagrees with you...
Michale.....
Also, if you look at this image:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/09/07/newvideotapef_mn.jpg
You can see that his whole overall appearance is different...
There is speculation that the beard is actually a phony one and that Bin Laden is clean shaven. The theory goes that Bin Laden may be hiding in a different part of the Muslim world, where most men are clean shaven. Indonesia or the Philippines for example..
But I am certain the looney Left would prefer to believe that Bin Laden is dead and that picture is actually Cheney with a phoney beard...
Matter of fact, we haven't seen much of Cheney lately, so that is proof positive (to the looney Left, anyways) that it IS Cheney and not Bin Laden... :^/
Michale......
It can't be Cheney. There's no sneer...
heh heh.
-CW
Michale,
I am a part of the loony left and I take great offense at your comment, "But I am certain the looney Left would prefer to believe that Bin Laden is dead and that picture is actually Cheney with a phoney beard" It is clearly Alberto Gonzales. Hello? Why do you think after going through so much without a ruffle he finally resigned? Because he had to go to Culver City studios to rehearse his new gig as Bin Laden. Michale, sometimes you just don't think do you? Cheney. Really. Everyone knows Cheney is in the U.K. planning a hit job on the new Prime Minister, uh... you know... whats his name... whatever - the Not-Blair guy.
But all jokes aside (well maybe not all but definitely some) I think you were a bit harsh with Michael Gass. I mean, the statement he made about Islam and the beard thing did seem reasonable to me even if I don't agree with the theory and if nothing else, the new information that Bin Laden may have shorn his beard just shows how loose and slippery Bin Laden is willing to play with his Islamic "ideals." In other words, he doesn't care about them one lick.
Michael Gass: I used to come here a lot and I can tell that Michale's a cranky old man ;), but a lovable one. Just throw a few Klingon quotes in his direction and he'll be your friend forever.
@jlapper
>I mean, the statement he made about
>Islam and the beard thing did seem
>reasonable to me
The statement is reasonable. But the reasoning behind the statement is flawed and biased. Based on nothing more than an irrational and unreasonable hatred..
If a "devout muslim fundamentalist" could warp the Quran into justifying brutal and sadistic murder on a national scale, why would ANYONE expect that this same "devout muslim fundamentalist" would somehow transform into the perfect muslim when it comes to grooming?? :^/
>I can tell that Michale's a cranky old man ;)
Hay!! I resent that!!!
I am NOT old!! :D
Michale.....
But Michale, you've got to admit jlapper was right about the Klingon quotes...
heh heh.
-CW
Actually... I have been informed that there are times a muslim man can dye his beard:
The ruling on dying hair differs for men and women. For men, it is forbidden except for two occassions, which are:
1) One’s hair has turned grey at a young age in which case it is permissible to dye it to its original colour, i.e, black.
2) One’s hair has turned grey due to old age in which case it is permissible to dye it other than the colour black.
3) When one is in war in which case it is permissible to dye one’s hair black to deceive the enemy.
Which explains why I never met a muslim man in all of my time in the Middle East who dyed his beard black...
So, as much as it pains me... I'll apologize to Michale... I'm sorry I snipped at you.
No worries.. I was equally snippity, so... :D
That's kinda always been my beef with religions... There is an exception for every rule..
You can use the Bible (or the Quran) to justify just about anything...
@CW
I am partial to Rihannsu (Romulan) quotes myself. But they are just so damn hard to locate, so I always end up using the Klingon ones.. :D
Michale.....
Michale,
As I told one person on another blog... I never sat chatting with muslim men in jihad, so, would never have known about that provision.
>I never sat chatting with
>muslim men in jihad,
You should try it some time...
It's very....... enlightening...
Michale.....