If it doesn’t fit elsewhere, please drop it here …
|
|
|
|
Back to Main
|
||
|
May 18, 2006
OT 06-43
If it doesn’t fit elsewhere, please drop it here …
Comments
Silverstein (Harpers): “Fairy Tales”
Two CIA station chiefs Bagdhad fired/demouted after writing realistic reports, one promoted after writing a fairy tail. narcosphere: Interior Dept. Starts Arizona Border Fence Project
chris floyd: Border Lords: Immigration Plan is Crony Pork Bonanza
nyt: Bush Turns to Big Military Contractors for Border Control
sam smith: Bush Calls Up National Guard To Help In Campaign
Posted by: b real | May 18 2006 21:33 utc | 2 Americans behind bars | FP Passport Posted by: Uncle $cam | May 18 2006 22:18 utc | 3 @ Posted by: Uncle $cam | May 18 2006 22:52 utc | 4 Airbus landed that elephant at Heathrow today. Posted by: Cloned Poster | May 18 2006 23:02 utc | 5 Added bonus: Border walls built by military contractors to keep ‘dusky foreigners’ out can later be used to keep dissident citizens or, more likely, debt-indentured ‘servants’, in. Posted by: gylangirl | May 18 2006 23:05 utc | 6 @Uncle, did you hear Bensky’s excellent post-hearings interviews/discussions? Posted by: jj | May 19 2006 0:48 utc | 7 So, given the above, who will Kissinger, Scowcroft -who promised to move to Impeach chimpy if he tried to invade Iran, and he said this in a public speech around time of Iraq invasion – Brzez. enlist to help them thwart Iran invasion??? Posted by: jj | May 19 2006 1:02 utc | 8 It is official now: Posted by: gylangirl | May 19 2006 2:06 utc | 9 It suggests that the Peak of Regular Conventional Oil was passed in 2005 and that the peak of All Liquids will come around 2010….” Posted by: jj | May 19 2006 4:04 utc | 10 @jj Posted by: Uncle $cam | May 19 2006 5:01 utc | 11 @jj: (I can see your post as I write this, so no mistake this time!) Since, for Campbell, ‘Peak Oil’ is defined in terms of extraction rate, it is actually possible that ‘all liquids’ might reach peak by 2010 — if, by then, the world is extracting them at the maximum rate we are likely ever to reach, then we would be at peak, albeit a very prolonged peak. Whether this will actually happen I am not competent to judge. Personally I’m hoping that the high cost of energy will finally start to knock some sense into us technolovores and there will be serious investment in other fuel sources… I’d be very happy if sixty years from now I can laugh at the way ‘peak oil’ came about because demand went way down, so extraction slowed… Posted by: The Truth Gets Vicious When You Corner It | May 19 2006 5:48 utc | 12 Monday’s WaPo gave an inkling of some of the ancillary costs of the oil wars/peak oil AKA now where did I put that bicycle/sailing boat/hot air balloon?
The infant mortality rate in Iraq pre-invasion was already much higher than surrounding nations; due chiefly to the impact of years of sanctions. That seems like the ‘good times’ looking back now. Posted by: Anonymous | May 19 2006 7:01 utc | 13
Why is there not more public discussion about the proposed Mexican wall (err… I mean, fence)? What a silly and useless waste of money. Is all these guys know is force and submission? What the hell is coming of this country? Posted by: D | May 19 2006 13:42 utc | 15 Some good news (and the Moon rarely covers sports, so here goes):
Thank god for that. Posted by: Dismal Science | May 19 2006 16:38 utc | 16 Patrick Smith, a pretty good writer who does an “Ask the Pilot” series for salon, gives his take on some of the 9/11 conspiracy theories. Posted by: mats | May 19 2006 16:42 utc | 17 unfortunately, clear as day or as dark as night – reichsfuhrer rove will not be indicted today, tommorrow or ever, & the thug general hayden will become cia fuhrer – in the bloody triumvirate of the criminal negroponte Posted by: remembereringgiap | May 19 2006 16:49 utc | 18 one contention w/ smith’s ask the pilot article. he uses a straw-man argument – It’s not beyond reason that some aspects of the 2001 attacks deserve more scrutiny than the 9/11 Commission lavished on them. But those who most urgently wish us to believe so have done themselves no favors by expanding the breadth of their contentions beyond all plausibility. – when it’s not really necessary. he makes his case on the particulars, so, other than a personal/professional need to put as much distance as possible between himself & the fringe conspiracists, it’s not necessary for such broad slander. Posted by: b real | May 19 2006 17:18 utc | 19 @DS: Posted by: Groucho | May 19 2006 17:29 utc | 20 Dismal Science- Posted by: fauxreal | May 19 2006 17:48 utc | 21 watched congressional ‘hearing’ on hayden – inn fiction you could not create such beasts Posted by: remembereringgiap | May 19 2006 17:56 utc | 22 On those sham Hayden hearings, Dana Milbank does his fine sarcasm
@Faux: Posted by: Groucho | May 19 2006 18:09 utc | 24 and the Moon rarely covers sports Groucho- come on, you weren’t rooting for them in 2003? –you didn’t want a Cubs/Red Sox series? blasphemy! Posted by: fauxreal | May 19 2006 19:23 utc | 26 Thanks for the invite to do a sports thread at Le Speak, faux, but I don’t think I’m really qualified. Posted by: Dismal Science | May 19 2006 19:40 utc | 27 Dismal Science- why are you not qualified? It’s the back room of the bar. We’re shooting pool and smoking cigarettes and drinking pale ale –when we’re not discussing manure. Posted by: fauxreal | May 19 2006 19:57 utc | 28 sorry, but I don’t know if she/he is around right now…if so, please check your le speak mail because I’ve asked you another stupid question® about messing around with preset blog codes. –thx- fauxreal Posted by: hey jonku | May 19 2006 20:01 utc | 29 Why is there not more public discussion about the proposed Mexican wall Posted by: dan of steele | May 19 2006 20:59 utc | 30 & speaking as i do of beasts – the congress or what passes for it in those united states is now confronted with the problem of haditha Posted by: remembereringgiap | May 19 2006 21:16 utc | 31 the fool i saw was named duncan hunter & he had obviously spent time at the school of rudimentary & repetative rhetoric Posted by: remembereringgiap | May 20 2006 1:15 utc | 32 but suharto is gravely ill & that can’t be a bad thing Posted by: remembereringgiap | May 20 2006 1:18 utc | 33 Ok RG, fer Christ’s sake: Posted by: Groucho | May 20 2006 1:34 utc | 34 yes groucho Posted by: remembereringgiap | May 20 2006 1:45 utc | 35 I know RG, but everyone is very fatigued and demoralized. Posted by: Groucho | May 20 2006 2:02 utc | 36 Hey, speaking of soccer, let’s hear it for champions Barcelona, the only major European club not to have a huge, ugly corporate ad defacing their jerseys. Sometimes, you just don’t need those extra millions of euros. Posted by: Rowan | May 20 2006 3:34 utc | 37 some items that would be funny in different times
spin of the day: Pentagon Briefing Shows Guantanamo’s ‘Good’ Side
spin of the day: Berman’s Center for Union Smears Hits TV Screens
Posted by: b real | May 20 2006 3:58 utc | 38 @b real: Don’t forget the ads online about network neutrality claiming that the government is harming small businesses by even thinking about requiring common carriage. Yeah, all those poor little U.S. mom and pop phone companies, out there… yeah… Posted by: The Truth Gets Vicious When You Corner It | May 20 2006 4:19 utc | 39 Huffington Post – Air America MIHOP??
Interesting to see this kind of talk on Huffington. No? Posted by: Uncle $cam | May 20 2006 5:33 utc | 40 It’s going to be funny when Chevaz yells”Mr. Bush Tear Down That Wall”! Posted by: R.L. | May 20 2006 5:34 utc | 41 Been reading about the demands to put a disclaimer at the start of “The Da Vince Code”, stating that this is all fictional and has nothing to do with the facts of Christianity or history. Posted by: ralphieboy | May 20 2006 7:18 utc | 42 Can’t be doing that Ralphie Boy, freedom of speech is a one way valve nowadays, a door that only opens out. Posted by: Anonymous | May 20 2006 10:45 utc | 43 All the mistakes and the correct pointing on the idiots in a few paragraphs:
FWIW. Posted by: gylangirl | May 21 2006 1:49 utc | 45 I am just amazed at how people can get upset over a work of Fiction, and now a Hollywood film based on a work of fiction. Although the historical background is nothing that has not been kicking around in academic works for years, Catholic leaders seem to be upset that they have found an outlet in popular culture. Posted by: ralphieboy | May 21 2006 6:53 utc | 46 |
||