|
February, 2006 Archives
Dubai Ports World Tries To Censor Lou Dobbs
CNN's Lou Dobbs reports that Dubai Ports World (which is controlled by the government of the United Arab Emirates) is trying to censor his reporting on the UAE ports deal. They told CNN that if they didn't "shut up Lou Dobbs" they wouldn't allow CNN to film any of their oprations around the world, nor would they allow any CNN reporter to interview anyone from their company. You can see the video here.
Lou Dobbs reported today that "Dubai Ports World" officials have tried to silence him and get CNN to suppress his reports.
Mark Dennis, spokesman for Dubai Ports World
said: "CNN won't shut up Lou Dobbs."
They are refusing to give any more interviews to CNN or allow them to video tape their operations overseas. To CNN's credit they have refused to comply with their demands.
Lou gave his opinion that he believes that Bush Administration officials are not being honest with the American public about the real reason behind the ports deal.
Kudos to CNN for refusing to kowtow to the thugs at Dubai Ports World. If this doesn't prove that this is not the company to be running our ports, I don't know what does.
Posted on February 28, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
Bush Bicycle Crash Details Leaked
On Sunday, The Scotsman obtained previously unavailable details about President Bush's bicycle crash during the last G8 Summit in Scotland. Apparently, some crucial facts were omitted when the incident was reported to the press. But The Scotsman is on the job, and has managed to obtain the unreleased police report. The conclusion: President Bush was unable to ride a bike, talk and wave at the same time.
Scotland on Sunday has obtained remarkable details of one of the most memorably bizarre episodes of the Bush presidency: the day he crashed into a Scottish police constable while cycling in the grounds of Gleneagles Hotel.
The incident, which will do little to improve Bush's accident-prone reputation, began when he took to two wheels for a spot of early-evening exercise during last year's G8 summit at the Perthshire resort.
*****
It was "about 1800 hours on Wednesday, 6 July, 2005" that a detachment of Strathclyde police constables, in "Level 2 public order dress [anti-riot gear]," formed a protective line at the gate at the hotel's rear entrance, in case demonstrators penetrated the biggest-ever security operation on Scottish soil.
The official police incident report states: "[The unit] was requested to cover the road junction on the Auchterarder to Braco Road as the President of the USA, George Bush, was cycling through." The report goes on: "[At] about 1800 hours the President approached the junction at speed on the bicycle. The road was damp at the time. As the President passed the junction at speed he raised his left arm from the handlebars to wave to the police officers present while shouting 'thanks, you guys, for coming'.
"As he did this he lost control of the cycle, falling to the ground, causing both himself and his bicycle to strike [the officer] on the lower legs. [The officer] fell to the ground, striking his head. The President continued along the ground for approximately five metres, causing himself a number of abrasions. The officers... then assisted both injured parties."
*****
At hospital, a doctor examined the constable and diagnosed damage to his ankle ligaments and issued him with crutches. The cause was officially recorded as: "Hit by moving/falling object." [Editor's note: that "moving/falling object" being President Bush]
The writeup of the crash makes for some pretty funny reading. But it apparently wasn't quite so funny for the officer who was struck by the "moving/falling object": he was injured so severely he was unable to return to work for 14 weeks. The White House refused comment to The Scotsman. Let's hope they paid the guy's medical bills, at the very least. And would someone please tell President Bush that it's time to switch to a safer exercise regimen: like walking on a treadmill?
Posted on February 27, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
The UAE: A Criminal Crossroads
In December, David E. Kaplan of U.S. News and World Reportsfiled an interesting piece about Dubai, the "criminal crossroads" of the United Arab Emirates, which is poised to take over six of the U.S.'s most important ports. As part of the deal, the UAE will be exempted from a number of key regulations: for one thing, the UAE will not be required to store any of its records on-site in the U.S. where they would be subject to a subpeona from a U.S. court.
From Egypt to Afghanistan, when terrorists and gangsters need a place to meet, to relax, maybe to invest, they head to Dubai, a bustling city-state on the Persian Gulf. The Middle East's unquestioned financial capital, Dubai is the showcase of the United Arab Emirates, an oil-rich federation of sheikdoms. Forty years ago, Dubai was a backwater; today, it hosts dozens of banks and one of the world's busiest ports; its free-trade zones are crammed with thousands of companies. Construction is everywhere--skyscrapers, malls, hotels, and, soon, the world's tallest building.
But Dubai also serves as the region's criminal crossroads, a hub for smuggling, money laundering, and underground banking. There are Russian and Indian mobsters, Iranian arms traffickers, and Arab jihadists. Funds for the 9/11 hijackers and African embassy bombers were transferred through the city. It was the heart of Pakistani scientist A. Q. Khan's black market in nuclear technology and other proliferation cases. Half of all applications to buy U.S. military equipment from Dubai are from bogus front companies, officials say. "Iran," adds one U.S. official, "is building a bomb through Dubai." Last year, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents thwarted the shipment of 3,000 U.S. military night-vision goggles by an Iranian pair based in Dubai. Moving goods undetected is not hard. Dhows--rickety wooden boats that have plowed the Arabian Sea for centuries--move along the city center, uninspected, down the aptly named Smuggler's Creek.
U.A.E. rulers have taken terrorism seriously since 9/11, but Washington has a half-dozen extradition requests that they refuse to honor. The list includes people accused of rape, murder, and arms trafficking, and the last fugitive of the BCCI banking scandal. The country has put money laundering controls on the books but has made few cases. Interior Minister Sheik Saif bin Zayed Al Nahyan told U.S. News the U.A.E. has made great strides in cracking down, but he insists that the real problems lie elsewhere. "We are a neutral country, like Switzerland," he says. "Give us the evidence, and we will do something about it. Don't blame others." Not everyone agrees. "All roads lead to Dubai," says former treasury agent John Cassara, author of Hide and Seek, a forthcoming book on terrorism finance. Cassara tried explaining U.S. concerns about Dubai to a local businessman but got only a puzzled look: "Mr. John, money laundering? But that's what we do. "
The key to understanding the UAE ports deal is to follow the money. Who's making the money here? The investigation is just beginning, but here's a nice starting point: Neil Bush, the scandal-plagued baby brother of President Bush (who narrowly avoided going to jail in the infamous Silverado savings and loan fraud case), absolutely loves Dubai and is very tight with the royal family.
Today, Lou Dobbs connected the financial dots:
The oil-rich United Arab Emirates is a major investor in The Carlyle Group, the private equity investment firm where President Bush's father once served as senior adviser and is a who's who of former high-level government officials. Just last year, Dubai International Capital, a government-backed buyout firm, invested in an $8 billion Carlyle fund.
Another family connection, the president's brother, Neil Bush, has reportedly received funding for his educational software company from the UAE investors. A call to his company was not returned.
Then there is the cabinet connection. Treasury Secretary John Snow was chairman of railroad company CSX/. After he left the company for the White House, CSX sold its international port operations to Dubai Ports World for more than a billion dollars.
In Connecticut today, Snow told reporters he had no knowledge of that CSX sale. "I learned of this transaction probably the same way members of the Senate did, by reading about it in the newspapers."
Another administration connection, President Bush chose a Dubai Ports World executive to head the U.S. Maritime Administration. David Sanborn, the former director of Dubai Ports' European and Latin American operations, he was tapped just last month to lead the agency that oversees U.S. port operations.
The connections are just beginning to emerge, but it's starting to paint a disturbing picture of what's really going on in the Dubai port deal.
Posted on February 23, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
Bush Vows Veto of Bill Banning UAE Port Sale
President Bush is refusing to listen the avalanche of negative opinions being expressed about the UAE ports deal; in fact, he has now vowed to
veto any legislation that would put a stop to selling control if our major ports to a company that is wholly-owned by the United Arab Emirates.
The president on Tuesday defended his administration's earlier approval of the sale of London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co. to Dubai Ports World, despite concerns in Congress it could increase the possibility of terrorism at American ports.
The pending sale ? expected to be finalized in early March ? puts Dubai Ports in charge of major shipping operations in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia. "If there was any chance that this transaction would jeopardize the security of the United States, it would not go forward," Bush said.
"It sends a terrible signal to friends around the world that it's OK for a company from one country to manage the port, but not a country that plays by the rules and has got a good track record from another part of the world," Bush said.
*****
Bush sought to quiet a political storm that has united Republican governors and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee with liberal Democrats, including New York's two Democratic senators, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Charles Schumer.
Frist said Tuesday, before Bush's comments, that he would introduce legislation to put the sale on hold if the White House did not delay the takeover. He said the deal raised "serious questions regarding the safety and security of our homeland.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., asked the president for a moratorium on the sale until it could be studied further. "We must not allow the possibility of compromising our national security due to lack of review or oversight by the federal government," Hastert said.
*****
Bush said that protesting lawmakers should understand his approval of the deal was final.
"They ought to listen to what I have to say about this," the president said. "They'll look at the facts and understand the consequences of what they're going to do. But if they pass a law, I'll deal with it with a veto."
President Bush, pictured here in his infamous hand-holding stroll with Saudi King Abdullah (at the time, Crown Prince Abdullah) among the bluebonnets, does not seem to realize that his own party is ready to revolt. Speaker Hastert and Senate Majority Leader Frist have thrown down the gauntlet. The president has never exercised his presidential veto power even once since he was first sworn into office. And this is the bill he swears will be his first veto? To allow a foreign power who is known to support terrorism to take over our ports, while we are at war? It's politically tone deaf, to say the least. This is starting to look like this is Bush's "Read my lips: no new taxes" moment.
Message to the White House: it's time to stop tip-toeing through the tulips with Arab royalty and start paying attention to our ports and border security.
Posted on February 22, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
Governor Pataki Takes a Stand
Republican New York Governor Pataki and New Jersey lawmakers have stated that they are going to pursue legal action in order to stop the already-approved deal which would allow a Dubai-based company to control a number of major U.S. Ports. But they'd better hurry, since the Bush Administration is just as determined to allow the deal to stand.
Elected officials from New York and New Jersey are vowing to block a controversial plan that many say places our ports at risk. The Bush Administration is allowing an Arab company to assume control of several major ports including several in this area.
Governor Pataki wants the Port Authority to explore the state's legal options as the federal government goes ahead with plans to let a Saudi Arabian based company take over six major U.S. ports, including one in New York and one in New Jersey.
Senator Charles Schumer and Long Island Congressman Peter King are expected to announce emergency legislation to try and put a stop to this. Critics do point out that two of "9/11" hijackers did come from the United Arab Emirates.
Rep. Peter King, (R) New York: "I'm confident, certainly very hopeful that if we speak loudly enough and really focus on this issue, we can get the contract delayed, get it frozen, get it held."
The port deal is said to be worth seven billion dollars.
Seven billion dollars? Yes, that's what this is really about: money. But what it should be about is the safety of the ports of the United States of America. Currently, only 4% of containers that come into this country are inspected. Our ports are our biggest weakness, from a terrorism standpoint. U.S. law requires that all airport security be handled by approved, American firms. The same standard should be applied to our ports.
Kudos to Governor Pataki for taking a courageous stand on this issue.
Posted on February 21, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
Space Tourism's First Stop: Dubai
Not only will cargo coming into the United States through several of its major ports have to go through facilities owned by the UAE (United Arab Emirates), now it appears that if you want to go into space as a space tourist, you will have to visit a the new Spaceport operated by and located in -- you guessed it -- the UAE.
The space travel agency, Space Adventures, has announced plans to develop a commercial "Spaceport" in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to take tourists on sub-orbital flights.
The proposed facility in Ras al-Khaimah, the most northern of the seven emirates that form the UAE, would be the first of several such spaceports under a global development project budgeted at more than 250 million dollars.
Other potential locations have been identified in Asia, specifically Singapore, and North America.
The company said it had already received clearance from the UAE authorities to operate sub-orbital space flights in their air space.
"The close proximity to Dubai, one of the worlds leading luxury tourist destinations, makes (Ras al-Khaimah) a choice location for Spaceflight operations," said space adventures president and CEO, Eric Anderson yesterday.
"Suborbital flights will offer millions of people the opportunity to experience the greatest adventure available, space travel," Anderson said.
Currently the only operating space tourism agency, space adventures first made its name by sending US millionaire Dennis Tito into space in 2001.
Since then, two other ultra-wealthy tourists have made similar trips, South African mark Shuttle worth in 2002 and last year another American millionaire businessman, Greg Olsen, who paid 20 million dollars to spend eight days aboard the international space station.
So when did Dubai suddenly become 1) the gatekeeper of U.S. international cargo and 2) the owner of the world's first Spaceport? Dubai became the international banking center of choice of terrorists after Switzerland starting complying with those pesky international laws. And because America has stopped focusing on innovative new technologies to get us off our dependence on Arab oil, we've made that part of the world rich beyond belief, while we slowly fall behind in the space race, stem cell research and scientific progress.
Posted on February 20, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
Port Security Threatened by Turning our Port Control Over to the United Arab Emirates
This is really the last straw for a supposedly "tough on terror" admininistration. President Bush wants to turn over the control of our major shipping points to a company based in Dubai, which is part of the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Yes, that's right -- in the middle of the War on Terror we're handing over our shipping ports to Dubai. Senators on both sides of the aisle have banded together to stop the bill. The bill was originally sponsored by Senator Clinton (D-NY) and Senator Menendez (D-New Jersey) presented the bill; a number of Republicans are getting on board. After all, in an election year, how will lawmakers explain to their constituents that they've handed over control of some of our busiest shipping ports to the UAE?
The purpose of the bill would be to block the $6.8 billion sale of a British shipping company to Dubai Ports World, a port operator controlled by the government of Dubai, part of the United Arab Emirates. The British company, Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation, operates the cruise ship terminal on the West Side of Manhattan and has a half-interest in the Port Newark Container Terminal, the third-largest cargo terminal in New York harbor.
"I just don't believe that our ports should be handed over to foreign governments," Mr. Menendez said in an interview. Especially not to Dubai, he added, because it has a "serious and dubious history" as a transit point for terrorism.
Echoing other lawmakers in Washington who criticized the federal approval of the deal this week, Mr. Menendez cited reports that two of the Sept. 11 hijackers were from the United Arab Emirates and that some of the money that financed the attacks flowed through banks there.
That bipartisan group of critics included Senator Charles E. Schumer, a Democrat, and Representative Peter T. King, a Republican from Long Island.
But senior administration officials reiterated their support for the transaction and their favorable relations with the United Arab Emirates.
The Dubai purchase passed a review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, a panel composed of the leaders of 12 federal agencies and headed by the treasury secretary, John W. Snow.
Mr. Snow and Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state, said yesterday that the committee had determined that the transfer would not compromise security. Ms. Rice, who is scheduled to visit the United Arab Emirates next week, described one of them, Abu Dhabi, as "a very good friend" of the United States, according to Bloomberg News.
A "good friend"? Give me a break. The don't even recognize that Israel has the right to exist. Their goverment has ties to known terrorist organizations. The 9/11 Commission Report noted that many of the hijackers transited through the United Arab Emirates. A great deal of Osama bin Laden's and other terrorists group's money is laundered through the UAE. This is just plain wrong, and the furor on Capitol Hill is just starting.
Posted on February 18, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
NASA Scientist Says Icecaps Melting Faster Than Originally Thought
NASA scientist Jim Hansen is the Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, and is President Bush's top climate modeller. But the White House doesn't like what he has to say and attempted to stop him from talking to the media about what the latest satellite studies show: the Greenland ice cap is melting far faster than scientists had feared - twice as much ice is going into the sea as it was five years ago. This could have a devastating effect on climate change as sea levels begin to rise. Here's what Hansen had to say:
"Yet, a few weeks ago, when I - a NASA climate scientist - tried to talk to the media about these issues following a lecture I had given calling for prompt reductions in the emission of greenhouse gases, the NASA public affairs team - staffed by political appointees from the Bush administration - tried to stop me doing so. I was not happy with that, and I ignored the restrictions. The first line of NASA's mission is to understand and protect the planet."
"This new satellite data is a remarkable advance. We are seeing for the first time the detailed behaviour of the ice streams that are draining the Greenland ice sheet. They show that Greenland seems to be losing at least 200 cubic kilometres of ice a year. It is different from even two years ago, when people still said the ice sheet was in balance.
Hundreds of cubic kilometres sounds like a lot of ice. But this is just the beginning. Once a sheet starts to disintegrate, it can reach a tipping point beyond which break-up is explosively rapid. The issue is how close we are getting to that tipping point. The summer of 2005 broke all records for melting in Greenland. So we may be on the edge."
*****
How far can it go? The last time the world was three degrees warmer than today - which is what we expect later this century - sea levels were 25m higher. So that is what we can look forward to if we don't act soon. None of the current climate and ice models predict this. But I prefer the evidence from the Earth's history and my own eyes. I think sea-level rise is going to be the big issue soon, more even than warming itself.
It's hard to say what the world will be like if this happens. It would be another planet. You could imagine great armadas of icebergs breaking off Greenland and melting as they float south. And, of course, huge areas being flooded.
How long have we got? We have to stabilise emissions of carbon dioxide within a decade, or temperatures will warm by more than one degree. That will be warmer than it has been for half a million years, and many things could become unstoppable. If we are to stop that, we cannot wait for new technologies like capturing emissions from burning coal. We have to act with what we have. This decade, that means focusing on energy efficiency and renewable sources of energy that do not burn carbon. We don't have much time left.
The idea of gagging scientists is just absurd. Science is science: let's get the truth out there and see what we can do about it. It may very well be that New Orleans is just the first of many major cities that will have to be abandoned in the next decades, according to climatologists speaking on the BBC last night. One thing's for sure: it's probably better to rent a summer beach home than to buy one these days.
Posted on February 17, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
Latest Developments in Quailgate
Here are some of the latest developments in Quailgate:
The political cartoonists have been busy. Cagle.com, the website of professional cartoonist Daryl Cagle, has a collection of dozens of the cartoons.
Vice President Dick Cheney, who is known to take heart medication, had at least two drinks that day. He told Brit Hume during the interview on Fox that he drank one beer at lunch several hours before the shooting took place. He also drank a cocktail later that evening after the shooting according to comments that Katharine Armstrong made to CNN.
Fox News has the complete transcript of Brit Hume's interview with Dick Cheney. Journalists were hoping he would give a press conference about the accidental shooting instead. Many journalists also argue that Cheney did not explain the long delay in reporting the story. This article lists some of the questions journalists have for the Vice President. However, President Bush was satisfied with Cheney's answers.
Alan Dershowitz explains why he thinks the long delay in reporting the story means something is being covered up. Dershowitz uses a cost/benefit analysis to explain his argument.
An article in the New York Times cites a quail hunter who says Cheney had to have been "far closer" than 30 yards for the victim to have been hit with that many pellets.
A CBS News story said Karl Rove pushed Cheney to do the interview with Fox News. The article said Cheney is in a "state of meltdown" over shooting his friend and the political fallout it created.
David Letterman has the Top Ten Dick Cheney Excuses.
Media Matters notes that many media outlets did not report that contradiction between Cheney's beer consumption and ranch owner Katharine Armstrong's comments that Dr. Pepper was served at lunch.
The local sherrif's office has closed its investigation. No charges will be filed.
Posted on February 16, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
Cheney Shooting Victim Has Heart Attack
The Associated Press is now reporting that 78 year old attorney Harry Whittington, who was shot by Vice president Dick Cheney during a hunting trip, has had a heart attack because some of the birdshot is lodged too close to his heart.
Peter Banko, the hospital administrator at Christus Spohn Hospital Corpus Christi-Memorial, said Harry Whittington had the heart attack early Tuesday while being evaluated.
He said there was an irregularity in the heartbeat caused by a birdshot pellet, and doctors performed a cardiac catheterization. Whittington expressed a desire to leave the hospital, but Banko said he would probably stay for another week.
Whittington, a prominent Republican attorney from Austin, was accidentally sprayed with shotgun pellets when Cheney was aiming for a quail Saturday.
Whittington had initially been placed in intensive care. He had been moved to a "step-down unit" Monday after doctors decided to leave several birdshot pellets lodged in his skin rather than try to remove them.
*****
The wildlife department issued a report Monday that found the main factor contributing to the accident was a "hunter's judgment factor." No other secondary factors were found to have played a role.
CNN is reporting that Mr. Whittington has just had an angiogram procedure to evaluate his condition. Reports indicate that he has never had heart trouble before being shot by Vice president Cheney.
After all the jokes about the incident by comics on late night television last night, the White House had decided to play along with the jokes this morning. Even Jeb Bush cracked a joke at Cheney's expense. But after Whittington had a heart attack, Scott McClellan turned serious this afternoon. This is a PR nightmare for the White House, but it will have to get in line for top spin doctor treatment.
After all, Scooter Libby just testified that his bosses (e.g., Cheney) told him it was ok to lead undercover agent Valerie Plame's name to the press and the CIA has confirmed that Plame was undercover at the time, working on the Iran-nuclear weapons case. That's not good news for Dick Cheney or the White House.
Posted on February 14, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
Dick Cheney's Hunting Fiasco
Most people thought it was some kind of joke because it's almost exactly like the quail hunting scene in Wedding Crashers starring Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn, but it turned out to be true: Vice President Dick Cheney accidentally shot his lawyer in the face while they were hunting quail on Saturday.
Luckily for the nearly 80 year old attorney, Harry Whittington, Cheney is in such poor health that he travels with a full medical team and has instant access to an ambulance. Whittington was helicoptered to a hospital in Corpus Christi on Saturday evening, and was still in the ICU as of Sunday evening. The hospital listed his condition as "stable," which is one step down from "good." The Austin attorney reportedly was sprayed in the face, neck and chest with buckshot.
The shooting was first reported by the Corpus Christi Caller-Times. The vice president's office did not disclose the accident until nearly 24 hours after it happened.
Armstrong said she was watching from a car while Cheney, Whittington and another hunter got out of the vehicle to shoot at a covey of quail.
Whittington shot a bird and went to look for it in the tall grass, while Cheney and the third hunter walked to another spot and discovered a second covey.
Whittington "came up from behind the vice president and the other hunter and didn't signal them or indicate to them or announce himself," Armstrong said.
"The vice president didn't see him," she continued. "The covey flushed and the vice president picked out a bird and was following it and shot. And by god, Harry was in the line of fire and got peppered pretty good."
Kathryn Armstrong, the daughter of the owners of the ranch where Cheney was hunting tried to downplay the incident. She told reporters that "This is something that happens from time to time. You now, I've been peppered pretty well myself," which leads to the inevitable question: is she insane? It "happens from time to time"? Yeah, I've heard of accidents like this happening, but only when everyone in the hunting party has had a few too many cocktails. After all, if you're sober and in broad daylight, a quail breaking cover from the ground and a 6' tall white guy don't look much alike.
Notice that a) the story wasn't reported until 24 hours after the accident occurred and that b) Ms. Armstrong's statement blames the victim. But anyone who's taken a hunting safety course knows that if you have a weapon it is your job to know where your fellow hunters are at all times.
Of course the jokes have already started: "It took 40 years, but Cheney finally saw some action." "Good thing he got those 5 deferments to get out of going to Viet Nam: otherwise his platoon would never have made it back alive." Cartoons showing Cheney as Elmer Fudd the Hunter are also starting to surface. Let's hope that Mr. Whittington makes a full recovery. And that he declines the next hunting invitation he receives from the Vice-President.
Posted on February 13, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
And Now...The Muhammed T-Shirt
Just in time for Valentine's Day, a company has created what every woman wants: a t-shirt of of one of the infamous Danish cartoons. This t-shirt shows a picture of Mohammed's face, with a bomb stuck in his turban.
Let's see if the creator of the t-shirt is brave enough to wear it in downtown Beirut. Yeah, that's what I thought. I'm all for free speech, but this is getting ridiculous.
Posted on February 9, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
Iran Ups the Ante With Holocaust Cartoon Contest
The Islamic fury over the Mohammed cartoons continues into midweek
with more violent protests in the Middle Eastern countries. Several people
were killed today in protests in Afghanistan. Adding fuel to the fire, a
French weekly newspaper called Charlie Hebdo reprinted the cartoons
then -- just for good measure -- added a new one, according to a Reuters news story.
The French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo reprinted cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad on Wednesday and published one of its own, further angering Muslim groups.
The weekly's front page carried the new cartoon depicting the Prophet Mohammad burying his face in his hands and saying: "It's hard to be loved by fools."
President Jacques Chirac condemned "overt provocations" which could enflame passions. "Anything that can hurt the convictions of someone else, in particular religious convictions, should be avoided," Chirac said.
Moderate Muslims, while condemning the cartoons, have expressed fears that radicals are hijacking the debate over the boundary between media freedom and religious respect.
Meanwhile, Bloomberg reports that the boycotts of Danish products continue,
and in Palestine there are threats to kidnap Westerners.
In countries including Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, Muslims are boycotting Danish goods, and,
in the Gaza Strip, Palestinian militants threatened to kidnap Westerners if governments
don't apologize for the actions of newspapers in their countries.
Iran cut trade relations with Denmark when President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Feb. 4
issued a decree calling on the Trade Ministry to terminate economic agreements with
all Western countries where the cartoons were published.
But the Award for the Most Disgusting Yet Juvenile Response to the Cartoons by an Official Government Agency clearly goes to Iran. The daily Hamshahri, one of Iran's five biggest newspapers, is running a contest asking for cartoons ridiculing the Holocaust. The Iranian government supports the contest (the municipal government owns the newspaper in question.)
Last night on The Colbert Report, Stephen Colbert revealed that the Muslims had been "Punk'd"; he then proceeded to do a standup routine showing how "one man's joke is another man's jihad."
What the protestors don't seem to realize is that the more out of control and violent the protests, the more difficult it's going to be for mainstream
newspapers and TV shows to explain the story without showing the cartoons themselves.
Posted on February 8, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
Mohammed Cartoon Fury Continues Unabated
The furor over the Dutch cartoons showing the prophet Mohammed continues unabated. In fact, the violence appears to be escalating. The latest developments:
- The Pakistan Medical Association is now refusing to prescribe any drugs from firms based in European countries where the Mohammed cartoons were published. The Association will boycott drugs from from Denmark, Norway, Switzerland, Germany and France to protest the "blasphemous" drawings. That means no Tamiflu for Pakistanis -- Tamiflu is made by Roche in Switzerland. Roche also manufactures the breast cancer drug Herceptin, the HIV drugs Fortovase and Invirase, the Cystic Fybrosis drug Pulmozyme and the acne drug Accutane -- just to name a few. Hey, what a great idea -- make sure your own people don't get their cancer drugs just to spite a bunch of Danish cartoonists.
- In India riots broke out over the cartoons. The riot police used tear gas and water cannons to quell the protest -- four students were injured.
- Four are dead in Kabul where 2,000 armed protesters tried to break into a U.S. army base outside Bagram, the largest U.S. base in Afghanistan. They must not have gotten the sniveling memo from the U.S. State Department condemning the cartoons.
- British Muslim cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed has declared that the Danish cartoonists should be tried under Islamic law and then (after it's proven that they committed the crime of blasphemy) they should be executed. He noted with dismay that this did not appear to be legal under British law. Bummer.
- Meanwhile, American Muslims peacefully protested against the Philadelphia Inquirer for reprinting the cartoons; they also have threatened a boycott of the newspaper if the newspaper does not apologize. The demonstrators carried signs that said, "Freedom of Speech, Not Irresponsible Speech," "No to Hate" and "Islam=Nonviolence." Not a death threat or burning effigy in sight so far, just civilized, non-violent protests -- the way citizens of enlightened nations tend to do.
Posted on February 6, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
Mohammed Cartoons Spark Rage in Middle East
The republishing of cartoons featuring the prophet Mohammed have caused outrage in some Islamic communities. The cartoons were originally published in Denmark in the Danish newspaper called Jyllands-Posten. The Financial Times reports that Danish products are being boycotted in some Middle East countries.
Publication of the cartoons in Spain, Italy, France, Germany and the Netherlands triggered condemnation in the Muslim and Arab world, where consumers turned their anger on Danish companies.
Arla, the dairy company based in Denmark, where the cartoons were first published, admitted on Thursday its sales in some Middle East countries had fallen to zero. Carrefour, the French retailer, said it had removed Danish products from shelves in its Middle East operations.
Other Danish companies targeted in the boycott include Lego, the toymaker, and Novo Nordisk, the pharmaceuticals company.
As popular protests spread, the leaders of Egypt and Afghanistan warned the cartoons had offended millions of Muslims and could be exploited by terrorists in their war against the west.
Of course, in their righteous zeal to denounce an unflattering comic portraying Mohammed, they are conveniently ignoring the offensive anti-Semitic and anti-Christian comics that run every day in the mainstream, supposedly "moderate" Arab media.
A Deutsche Welle article reports that an independent Jordanian newspapers has published the controversial cartoons.
Meanwhile, a Jordanian gossip tabloid defiantly published three of the cartoons that have triggered outrage in the Arab and Muslim world.
"Muslims of the world, be reasonable," said the editor-in-chief of the weekly independent newspaper Al-Shihan in an editorial alongside the cartoons, including the one showing the Muslim religion's founder wearing a bomb-shaped turban.
Editor & Publisher also has articles on the story including a fired French editor and protest by gunmen in the Gaza Strip. In the blogosphere the topic is being heavily discussed. If you run a Technorati search for "Jyllands-posten Mohammed," there are hundreds of posts. CJR Daily blogs about the blogosphere coverage and says the blogs uncovered this collection of depictions of Mohammed throughout history which includes a few of the recent cartoons.
Right now various European newspapers are trying to decide whether to cave into this xenophobic nonsense and refuse to run editorial cartoons or to be brave and stand up for freedom of expression. If anyone is offended by the Danish cartoons and wants to show his displeasure by refusing to buy Danish Butter Cookies or some of the other myriad Danish products that are being removed from Middle Eastern store shelves, fine. That's a non-violent way to protest (although it's quite unfair to Danish companies who had nothing to do with the cartoons in question). But if anyone carries out a threat of violence to innocent bystanders -- Danish or otherwise -- because of a cartoon, they they should be dealt with in a very harsh manner.
Why not show your support for free speech by either 1) eating a delicious Danish Butter Cookie, 2) buying a Bang & Olufson stereo system or 3) buying a new set of Legos for a favorite child.
Posted on February 2, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
New Clues in Plamegate
Finally, some interesting news about what special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has been up to in Plamegate. Scooter Libby's lawyers requested a document dump of all the evidence that Fitzgerald has against him. So he complied. But in the cover letter enclosing the documents, Fitzgerald let a bomb drop: he doesn't have all the White House emails pertaining to Plamegate because someone at the White House deleted them.
RAW STORY has acquired a letter from CIA leak Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald to Vice President Dick Cheney's former Chief of Staff, I. Lewis Libby, who was indicted for allegedly obstructing justice and other charges for his role in the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame.
In the letter, Fitzgerald admits that he has been told some emails from the President and Vice President's offices have been deleted, though he cautions that "no pertinent evidence has been destroyed."
"In an abundance of caution," he writes, "we advise you that we have learned that not all email of the Office of the Vice President and the Executive Office of the President for certain time periods in 2003 was preserved through the normal achiving process on the White House computer system."
The New York Daily News' James Meek reported this morning that "CIA leak prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald collected 10,000 pages of documents - including the most sensitive terrorism memos in the U.S. government - from Vice President Cheney's office, he said in court papers released yesterday.
*****
Meek added: "Fitzgerald, who is fighting Libby's request, said in a letter to Libby's lawyers that many e-mails from Cheney's office at the time of the Plame leak in 2003 have been deleted contrary to White House policy."
So someone was deleting emails before they got into the official archiving system. How interesting. Is it a modern-day Rosemary Woods?
Posted on February 1, 2006
Permalink | Blogs linking to this post: BlogPulse | IceRocket | Technorati
| |
|
Our Blogs
Bloggers Blog
Book Blog
Crafters Craft
Drivers Drive
Fantasy SF Blog
Gamers Game
Health News Blog
HowToWeb.com
The IWJ Blog
Lovers Love
Media Cynic
Petosphere
Pleasant Morning Buzz
Science News Blog
Shopping Blog
Singers Sing
Surfers Surf
Traders Trade
Video Nacho
Watchers Watch
Workers Work
The Write News
Writer's Blog
|