Today a globeandmail.com: Suicide bomber killed 24 Pakistani soldiers. this is a very important story following on from the Red Mosque siege, but it has had very little coverage in the US.

Financial news in newspapers and television in the US is far superior to Europe, but international news is either nonexistent or terrible.

I would suggest that keeping the public informed of what is happening in Pakistan at the moment, would be an investment better spend than a significant portion of the defense budget.

Someone on CNN called me a 'Dirty Jew'

Imagine that Iran decided to invade Mexico in the face of near universal international condemnation, because it claimed Mexico had weapons that it turned out it didn't. And that it then waged war for several years, de-stabilising the American continent and causing Mexicans to stream across the border into America.

Imagine that Iran had the audacity to setup a Pensicola prison, actually in America but controlled by Iran. Here they could put people that they captured and not have them subject to the Geneva Convention or domestic law. Then imagine that Iran had its navy patrolling the area and inspecting fishing boats, just off the coast of Texas.

Imagine the Americans decided the Iranians were messing too near their border, like with the Russians and Cuba, and captured several Iranian seamen and showed them on TV looking unharmed physically and possibly much better off than the Pensacola detainees, who didn't get many TV crew visits.

Would there be justifiable public outrage at the actions of America, or would the actions of Iran help mitigate it?

CONTINUE READING...

That the actions of Iran are benign is not an issue - its currently a dodgy place, with an even more dodgy leader. Iran, however is a place whose particular dodgy niche has been shaped in a large part by the actions of other nations, since the UK/USA instigated coup that installed the Shah (organized by my former roommate's father, by unhappy co-incidence).

Iran has the world's youngest population who have previously shown that they were ready to embrace the modern world. As a somewhat trivial illustration, Iranian's were the third largest nation to use Google's social network service. The problem is that opinion is changing among young Muslims world-wide, and that opinion is shaped not so much by the mullahs as the actions of god fearing ideological leaders of the West, like Tony Blair.

The current capture of UK soldiers is a political game that politicians like Blair are not really surprised about, but have to display surprised disgust and steadfastness while the mandarins furiously paddle the diplomatic channels underneath.

Some things are deemed unspeakable, like challenging the automatic loyalty to people who perpetrate violence because of which side of an imaginary geographic line they were born. Some other things are deemed absolutely swell in any circumstance and some things are supposed to be the right thing, always, but actually aren't. The last category includes the notion that if a ship goes down, women and children should get the first places on the lifeboats. This rule applies unless the women and children are from another country and the men are soldiers from your own.

Last night on CNN, various presenters could hardly suppress their excitement or, more accurately, their schadenfreude. As I paddled away my surplus of food at the gym, a man on TV asked me, in a very grave and serious voice, to pray for the safe return of the British hostages. But this man was not sad, he was happy, and he used the plight of unharmed, interned troops as emotional currency to buy support for violence that is tearing women and children to pieces. The lifeboats weren't for them, but for 'our troops', but more worryingly they weren't 'our troops' at all but 'our allies' troops'. The emotional currency he was spending was not his own money but mine, apparently - UK money. By showing his support for what he thought I should be supporting, he wanted to spend it. On the same show, someone suggested that Europe was a dying continent that would be Islamic by 2050.

Johnathan Miller once said that he wasn't really Jewish, but if anyone called him a 'Dirty Jew', well then he would proudly say - Yes I am. I don't normally care about where I'm from, there are many things I prefer about America and many things I don't like about Britain and Europe. But last night on CNN someone called me a Dirty Jew, and then wanted to spend my emotional cash.

Yes I am and no you can't.

I hold you partly responsible for the capture, not the release of British soldiers, but I'm actually even more concerned about the women and children whose places in the lifeboats are being stolen by the crew.

Another idea is deemed unspeakable. The idea that America's army is possibly not that good, having not won a major war for half a century. This is not a derogatory statement, but a sign of a civilised nation. It is easier to persuade a soldier to volunteer to strap dynamite to his chest and blow himself to bits in a more barbaric place than America, and how do you compete with that?

Having armies that are not very good has lots of precedent. Rome, who survived on military aggression solved this by, quite literally, hiring Barbarians. Rather like the Imperial British, however, who had an army that Napoleon used to joke about (admittedly before a rare away-win at Waterloo), America has something else. The UK had a good navy and the Americans have an unbeatable Air Force.

Unfortunately, the British had to fight a land war in World War I and it created the Iranian style, 'dodgy niche' that caused another war, World War II. Millions of people died and most people did not see it coming. Those who did see it coming thought it could be avoided, because the German Kaiser called Queen Victoria, 'granny' and Bismark had once considered enlisting in the British army.

I repeat, Millions of people died, a 911 every day for several years. This time we can see it coming and Bush doesn't call the Ayatollah Khamenei 'grandaddy'. America is sleepwalking into a region wide conflict that will require an army of cannon fodder which will inevitably end in the slaughter of countless innocent people.

My parents' generation did something purposeful and peaceful with their youthful energy and enthusiasm, in the 60s, . Depressingly, the last anti-war march in New York seemed to comprise largely of people of that generation, with less energy now but the same purpose. And its not just the ageing hippies of that are warning us. Last week The Economist magazine, hardly a hotbed of radicalism, inched one step further away from its original pro Iraq war stance to talk about the "almost criminal negligence of Mr Bush's administration". All that needs to happen for their complete conversion is the removal of the word 'almost'.

As the slow stream of gray haired anti-war revolutionaries filed past the glitzy Soho fashion stores, my generation, generation apathetic, was busy shopping. So it seems appropriate that all a Generation Apathetic protester can do is write a long, wordy blog post that won't be read because nobody reads more than three lines.

United for Peace : Index

Its pretty amazing when you come accross something you actually know a little about, how you discover how naive a supposedly slick PR machine is.

Today Bush cited 'Iraq the Model' as an example of success in Iraq - because there are bloggers you see.

Some time ago I added 20 or so Iraqi Bloggers to my RSS reader. About a third of them have since fled the country, a third have disappeared and the remainder are a woeful tale of human misery and sufffering, leaving a sample of 1 - Iraq the Model.

In fact Iraq the Model is the potential online equivalent of 'Mission Accomplished', something championed too soon that could go the other way. Carl Rove is not so much a genius (an incumbant Republican sock puppet would have won after 911) but a rather out of touch 'spinster'.

Bush Cites Upbeat Bloggers From Baghdad

Which one of these two buildings was built by slaves?

The one built 4000 years later.

Protester disrupts Westminster Abbey service marking 200 years since slave trade abolished - International Herald Tribune

Chris Jordan does some fantastic art pieces that represent quantitative information visually.

Amount of money spent per hour in Iraq as a giant picture of Benjamin Franklin made out of dollar bills.

Number of people admitted to hospital for painkiller abuse as an abstract shape made from the same number of Vicodin pills etc.

Thanks Cori.

current work

Oh My God, Please Stop This Fucking War

Ty and Renee Ziegel's Wedding
Ty and Renee before Ty's accident. via Kottke

There are currently 34,000 news articles in Google News warning of Global Warming, but Matt Drudge has found the one that doesn't.

"Climatologist Calls Global Warming Fears 'Greatest Deception in the History of Science'..."

That's all fair enough, except that the article doesn't seem to warrant the front page of one of the most widely read news sources in the US. It is written by Tim Ball, a former Geography professor who works for an anti-global warming consultancy that refuses to deny that it is funded by energy companies.

I have no problem with people denying Global Warming - I don't believe in censorship and think that freedom of speech gives a greater chance of the truth. However, Tim Ball does believe in censorship, or he would reveal the source of his backers.

My main problem, however, is Drudge, who through ultra selective reporting also believes in censorship. Reporters in the US have to be very professional and fact check almost everything they write. Aggregators like Drudge don't have such restrictions, if Drudge were a real journalist, he would be out of a job.

The Boston Tee-Hee Party

The Mooninite bombscare gets more and more surreal by the minute. It's rather like someone had decided that traffic lights look like bombs, in the manner that one of Oliver Sacks patients famously mistook his wife for a hat, but because bombs are more serious than hats we have to take it all seriously.

Yes all bomb scares have to be taken seriously, but everything does not seriously constitute a bomb scare, or we would have no resourses to deal with bomb scares. Mad people are always warning about bombs and the end of the world and imaginary demons, part of the role of authorities is to filter out mad people that think everything is suspicious.

Things that do not constitute suspicious devices, include traffic lights, lamp posts, blinking movie signs and the same blinking street art that has been in NYC for more than a month before someone in the Boston mistook his wife for a hat.

Equally weird is the way the 'must treat anything that has invoked the word terrorism seriously, however spuriously' meme spreads into other aspects of the story, such as the po-facedness of the reaction to the bird flip, which is blurred out on TV coverage, lest it offend the people who couldn't be exposed to Elvis' pelvic wiggle.

To illustrate this stupidity, I've created a side by side comparison of the Mooninite figure as compared to a religious icon holding up a cross. If anything the Mooninite is a much more convincing cross bearer than bird flipper. I doubt we would censor the cross, even although it ironically represents a genuine instrument of Roman terrorism, rather than a naughty gesture.

Leading Democrats have recently visited Iraq.
Leading Republicans have recently visited Iraq.
Leaders of America's allies have recently visited Iraq.
The son of Prince Charles is going to Iraq and most importantly, the sons and daughters of many ordinary people will be going.

But the person who sent them, President Bush, is not going because 'it is too dangerous'.

White House: We will send more troops in Iraq - CNN.com

All four of Adam Curtis' excellent documentaries about the mechanisms behind 'manufactured consent' are on Google video.

Here is the last and poss the best:

The Century Of The Self - Part 4 of 4 - By Adam Curtis - Google Video

I've noticed that even the use of the spin doctored prefix 'not in full blown' to pretend that Iraq is not in Civil War has been quietly dropped in the last couple of weeks by magazines like the Economist and people like Kissinger.

At the same time, people who supported the war in Iraq, such as Matt Drudge, the Economist and nearly all of the red blooded (now red faced) war bloggers are now desperately clambering all over each other to make sure the shit doesn't stick to them.

They don't want to be on the losing team, there is nothing in it for them to continue to support Bush over McCain or even the Democrats - except loyalty and integrity.

People who witnessed Murdoch switch his support, overnight, from the Tories to New Labour, in the UK, will not be surprised if even Fox News flips allegiance as its ratings drop. Expect freak shows like O'Reilly to be canned next year. Fox will only follow ideology if ideology happens to be in power and roughly in line with its bottom line.

To help its own switch, in a sleight of hand that doesn't appear to be a switch at all, the Economist defends its original support for the war and blames Rumsfeld. This seems plausibly pragmatic till you consider that Rumsfeld was one of the only pragmatists on the Bush team, leaving them in self-contradictory pragmatic support of the crazy neo-con ideologues.

You can't pretend to be pragmatic when you are choosing the ideologues over the realists. And its mighty convenient to use Rumsfeld as your scapegoat when nobody likes Rumsfeld anymore.

What if the decision to go to war in the first place was wrong?

What if old fashioned military tactics had been used and the outcome was even worse?

Here's a thought. It may just be that Rumsfeld was the only competent person in the Bush administration.

That would leave the Economist, Drudge and the war bloggers to be wrong in the first place, unapologetic about it, and now guilty of absolute cowardice and hypocrisy by blaming the execution rather than the decision to go to war.

A year or so back, after the Iraqi elections, and a glimmer of hope, War Bloggers asked that those who were against the war follow Andew Sullivan's lead, apologise, and admit that they were wrong.

Now its their turn.

The front page of CNN currently reads:

"Bush: Kerry owes troops an apology".

At first glance, I read it as:

"Kerry: Bush owes troops an apology."

Iraqi blogs make for depressing reading these days. The war appears to be all but lost.

Zeyad says:

"Another close friend of mine has been killed in Baghdad. We had lunch together in Baghdad just days before I left.

I can't concentrate on anything any more. I should not be here in New York running around a stupid neighbourhood, asking people about their 'issues'.

I now officially regret supporting this war back in 2003. The guilt is too much for me to handle."

Healing Iraq

And nothing short of a revolt has happened over some pretty weird comments by the increasingly deranged 'Iraq the Model'.

Iraqi Konfused Kollege Kid: Iraqi Bloggers Discuss Lancet Study, Iraq The Model

After luring in the Bush Administration with two tame prequels, the world's most famous journalist delivers a devastating blow.

The Age summarizes the Woodward stance. Imagine for one second, while reading it, that there is no God, or that, less contraversially, there is no God that matches the sect within a sect within a sect that is Mr. Bush's god.

With that single supposition, you leave the United States as the worlds most powerful vessel, rudderless, drifting aimlessly, its captain asleep at the wheel. A giant aircraft-carrier Mary Celeste bristling with nuclear materiel.

Woodward's conclusion is a serious as it gets - the United States is leaderless.

"Mr Bush emerges as a man who not only lacks intellectual curiosity but is untroubled by self-doubt, a man who constantly tells his aides that as commander-in-chief his job is to exude confidence in his decisions. He is, according to Woodward, a man of deep faith, who prays regularly for guidance and believes his prayers are answered."

Bush battens down for hurricane Woodward - World - theage.com.au

Well done Schwarzenegger. Smack bottom Bush.

Science News Article | Reuters.com

A bigger threat to your life than suicide bombers.

The National Review has a list of the most harmful books of the 19th and 20th Centuries. Its next to an ad for Ann Coulter's book, so these guys are clearly literature experts.

(Its a little known fact that (M)Ann Coulter is actually a drag act - check out the give away jaw line.)

My top ten most dangerous books, period:

1. The Tanakh
2. The New Testament
3. The Koran
4. Mein Kampf (these guys can't have a monopoly on it)
5. Atlas Shrugged
6. Pedigree Dogs
7. The Art of War
8. Barbara Cartland's Book of Etiquette
9. High Availability MySQL Clusters for Absolute Beginners
10. Grimms Fairy Tales

Civilians targetted in bombing raid - unbelievable casualties, 220,000 men, women and children dead.

Kottke links to a New York Times piece that suggests that people adopted by higher income families will end up with a higher IQ.

If IQ indicates intelligence, as the name suggests, then this is interesting as part of the nature vs nurture debate.

On the other hand, if IQ tests are fundamentally flawed and merely represent education, then all this result says is that rich people tend to get a better education.

What is more likely? That IQ tests are accurate but that the real world is messed up or that, according to Occams Razor, nature is governed by simple laws but there is a flaw in the measurement?

One of the things that is absolutely obvious about an IQ test, is that it doesn't really test intelligence because it asks all sorts of questions that require such things as a large vocabulary in the language of the test.

So how could this be? Clearly there are all sorts of aspects of IQ tests that test pure logic etc., these seem fairly objective tests.

The problem is that if the tests included are solely logic tests, then they would be perceived to have a scientific bias. To suggest that only scientific ability is a measure of intelligence, would have half of acedemia in uproar, so IQ tests put in things to test areas represented by other disciplines such as languages and the arts.

IQ tests try to balance different academic skills as a political compromise rather than a comprehensive measure.

To measure skills in qualitative disciplines, such as the arts, by quantitative measures is like saying that a painter and decorator is better than Vermeer because he can cover a larger area, more quickly.

The point is that a comprehensive IQ test is nowhere near there yet, and people wouldn't be happy with a SQ or Science Quotient.

So, in the mean time, you have people getting all embarassed because ethnic minorities sometimes get lower scores in IQ tests. Instead of saying 'OF COURSE THEY FUCKING WELL DO' because 1. ethnic minorities often did not have the same rights as the majority and as a result are poorer on average, 2. poorer people tend to get a worse education and have to start work earlier in life.

Perhaps people who really believe in IQ tests, like the subset of people that on getting a high score, decide to join the club of mental mediocrity - MENSA, probably aren't particularly intelligent.

The part of an IQ test that tests logic and spacial awareness is a pretty good test for an aeronautical engineer, but IQ tests do not measure IQ. QED.

"Is Iraq in civil war?...I have no more idea what is going on in Iraq from here in Baghdad, than from back in London"

Sobering, must see, Channel 4 documentary about what's really going on in Iraq. One of the conclusions is that much of the only reporting outside the green zone is coming from bloggers:

Would you help an alcoholic by giving him $100 to buy liquor?

The US is adicted to oil, according to the president. The proposed solution... to subsidize gas.

CNN.com - Senators to push for $100 gas rebate checks - Apr 27, 2006

The Republican religious base is crawling out of its primordial slime to promote its main priorities for the mid-term elections: banning some people from using a particular word to describe their relationship when it is closer to their own ideal of a monogamous family unit and making it illegal to destroy graven idols representing a line on a map.
These are important issues after all, when the alternatives are global unrest dues to energy crises and the death of the planet due to environmental catastrophe.

The fascinating thing about the social conservative disease is that it requires a view of the world which is not based upon traditional morals or any concept of progress. To demonstrate this, let's use the example for gay rights.

Most social conservatives, who aren't criminals, probably agree that someone like Elton John should not be dragged into the street and pelted to a bloody death with rocks, (despite the release of 'I'm Still Standing'). Most of these people also agree that he shouldn't be put in jail because of his sexual preference. Yet most of these people would argue that Sir Elton shouldn't have been able to marry his partner. The argument is 'things have just gone too far'. This is not a political belief so much as an uncourageous disposition - cowardice in the face of progress.

The problem of social conservatism is the 'reverse induction' argument. I.E. the same group of people 50 years ago would have thought that outright murder of gays was probably wrong and that marriage was so inconceivable as to be not worth bothering about, but a good idea was making sure that being openly gay could get you locked up in the one place where you would definitely get laid by another guy.

In short, social conservatives are not defending traditional values (if they are they are breaking the law) or looking to a brighter future, but are an insignificant artifact representing the fleeting transience of the here and now.

CNN.com - GOP hones its core agenda - Apr 15, 2006

Victor, Parisian student, protesting the job contract that could have been in France:

"It means that when I do get a job I will basically have to work as hard as I can to keep it."

Now that the French government has capitulated, I guess he won't have to work hard any more.

Lets get this in perspective, this was a law that suggested, after compromise, that you could be fired within your first year on your first job, providing there was a reason. - That's all.

This is not 19th century style worker exploitation, but stopping the contract will lead to it, because in a globalised economy the fact is that French jobs will now go somewhere where there is genuine exploitation. It was an attempt to help poor people get a start.

And think how ridiculous this all sounds if you use being in a band as an analogy as my friend Buck and I were discussing:

Imagine you start a band with some friends - an entrepreneurial activity that is not normally labelled 'capitalist'. You take on a young bass player who seems to be ok, but its his first time in a band and it turns out that he can't actually play anything other than what he did at audition and doesn't want to learn how to. At your next gig people boo you off stage.

Now imagine that its illegal for you to get a replacement bassist without giving the previous guy his share of the money you get from gigs that he's not playing at, for up to a year and a half.

Knowing this in advance, would you be more or less likely to hire a young inexperienced bass player and give him a chance?

French labour law row: Students' reaction:

Lubos Motl (a must read blogger) points out that climate change, is the new religion.

First things first - climate change is very real and very worrying, if you look at the empirical data and spread of opinion amongst people studying it. It appears to be more truth than fiction - an idea bolstered by the amusing fact that the poster child (the inadmirable Crichton) of the 'its fiction' camp, is indeed noted for his science fiction. The problem is not that the truth is winning, its that its winning too easily and data is being amplified and distorted as it moves into the mainstream culture, and this does not help in the long term.

What are the reasons for this?

1. Darwinism, is being distorted and muted by the negative feedback loop of people who want religious certainty and human primacy instead of evolutionary gradualism and primate-acy. Climate change is experiencing the opposite effect, it is a viral meme that happens to be true. The idea feeds off the delusional end times hysteria that tin-foil hat Christian fundamentalists have injected into millennium time, post 911, American mainstream culture and foreign policy.

2. Even for Darwininsts and people with too much body hair, our ape-like ancestry may seem remote. But the weather - well its everywhere and it affects everyone. If you have nothing else to talk about with someone, at least you can have a conversation about the weather.

3. DIMBY - Definitely In My Back Yard. A people centric, view of the world is natural. Since the weather is everywhere, it affects everyone and people care about what happens in their back yard - like the giant mud slide that just removed their back yard.

4. Human beings don't live very long and so natural weather fluctuations that do not show any long term trend - every single Gaian twitch from earthquakes to April showers will have people subconsciously blaming climate change.

That the truth is winning under false pretences, may not be a problem - that's pretty much how democracy works even at its best - but there is a danger that if falsehoods are exposed they could disillusion people and create a dangerous setback for the need to really do something drastic about climate change.

After all - you can only have so much doom - its no fun, and people may start partying again instead of fixing things.

Luboš Motl's reference frame: Climate apocalypse is the new religion

Boing Boing quotes Alan Moore (Creator of V for Vendetta) as saying that the real polar opposites in politics are not right or left but fascist vs. anarchist - i.e. how much government you have.

This clearly does make the political scale less abstract, but the problem is that Anarchy is by definition not really a political stance but an apolitical one.

As another web bubble brews, there was a definite Libertarian smell in the atmosphere at South by Southwest.

By any logical definition of anarchy, Libertarianism is just an erm 'politically correct' term for anarchy.

On the right Libertarianism is pretty simple - its about gun nuts. But it seems that on the left, Libertarianism is often the choice of former liberals who have made lots of money and choose a cause which allows them to support rights which don't cost them anything.

For 'Liberaltarians', supporting the right to smoke pot doesn't cost you anything, but causes such as health or education mean you have to pay taxes for hospitals or schools.

Isn't putting your money where your mouth is, a no bullshit attitude that has much more of the swagger that Libertarians think their apolitics demonstrates?

Next time soemone says they are Libertarian, ask them what their politics are.

Boing Boing: Alan Moore interview (Creator of V for Vendetta)

After Carter first warned about energy problems in 1977 he installed solar panels on the White House roof.

When Reagan took office, he removed the solar panels.

29 years later and the looming energy crisis is finally in the hands of both parties.

In last night's SOTU speach Bush said:

"To change how we power our homes and offices, we will invest more in zero-emission, coal-fired plants; revolutionary solar and wind technologies; and clean, safe nuclear energy."

Perhaps the solar panels should go back up?

As it happens, Carters' original panels were on a roof at Unity College, less than a year ago:

"1992 when a Unity College administrator named Peter Marbach drove our old school bus down to Franconia, VA, to liberate them from a General Services Administration warehouse under the government surplus donations program. "

In February, they posted a message saying to call them:

"If you are interested in the Jimmy Carter Solar Panels, please call our development office at 207 948 3131 ext 302 or email mwomersley[at]unity.edu"

Heh, the originals, recycled, what could be better?

Perhaps someone could pick up the panels and drive to D.C. to symbolically give them back?

Sustainability

I watched some of the Alito hearings in awe. Alito is very impressive, a great speaker, coherent and logical - but he is damaged goods since his reason and logic has boundaries.

The evidence - the refusal to acknowledge that the constitution is a 'living document'.

This is the latest meme to attack the very foundation of American Democracy by people who cannot accept the Constitution unless it is 'Intelligently Designed' and not Evolutionary.

Since the constitution clearly does change - there are amendments, the argument against it as a living document is not creationist - i.e. it does not pretend that the amendments are fiction, that would be crazy.

Instead, like Intelligent Design it tries to create a mechanism whereby things do change but they change because of an original, divinely inspired and complete design - the original Constitution.

This is the exact opposite of what the founding fathers intended and unlike the biblical history - we have thousands of sources to verify it.

The reason the constitution has amendments is not because it was perfect to start with but badly interpreted, but precisely because the people that wrote it knew the dangers of a frozen religious like document being the central pivot of government.

If you seriously think the constitution is not a living document, then you either:

Stupid: think that Black people should not be treated as human and are too stupid to sit on a supreme court

A constitutional creationist: think that scientific discussion of the Constitution is not possible because it is divinely inspired and therefore your application of reason only extends to areas that are not infected by faith.

A constitutional proponent of Intelligent Design: think that every amendment was because the founding fathers really meant what the amendment says, but people didn't really understand not because there is progress.

Alito is in the last category, he thinks that the Constitution is a religion.

Google Search: living document

I normally beat up right wing incompetence, but time to have a go at left wing paranoia.

Unlike stories of outing spies etc., many people in technology know that using tracking pixels or cookies is ubiquitous, accepted practice, i.e. neither unusual or sinister.

So the thing that can be learned from the story below, is that if something sounds sinister, people will report it as such and one can assume that this is the case for other accusations against the government.

ABC News: U.S. to Probe Contractor's Web Tracking

Wow - Michael Ignatieff, who is a genuinely intelligent person, unlike the vast majority of politicians, is going to run for the Canadian premiership.

I've seen him stark bollock naked, because we used the same gym in London - I guess I may have seen the Emperor with no clothes.

TheStar.com - No more Mr. Nice Guy

American Rhetoric: McCarthy-Welch Exchange During the Army-McCarthy Hearings

In light of today's attacks and me being increasingly annoyed with both right and left wing 'bloggards', I thought I would pick out a sample piece and fact check it:

Instapundit writes:

"UPDATE: Here are some interesting observations about the location of the attacks in London. "I have talked to a few people who have pointed out that Edgware, Aldgate (and Moorgate) and King's Cross all are in or adjacent to Muslim communities. King's Cross is the locale of The School of Oriental and African Studies, a highly respected institution teaching and researching Asia, Africa and the Middle East. It is possible that the attacks were as much directed at the Muslim population as much as the city at large."

1. There are many other stations that are near SOAS, such that Kings Cross is certainly not the local tube station to it. Also, SOAS's remit not Islam - hence the name.

2. Edgware is 10 miles from Edgware road, which is indeed a Muslim area. However the train was on its way to Edgware Road from somewhere else. The Edgware Road station is at the far end of the Muslim area of the Edgware Road on the boundary of what is certainly not a Muslim area.

3. Aldgate's nearest Muslim community is Bangladeshi, however it is closest to the rather bigger target, the Financial district.

4. These tube stations are way underground, with no damage to the surface areas.

Like numerology, given the ethnic diversity of London you could pretty much link these three area to any community with similar (in)accuracy.

None of these places show any particular 'alien' population pattern any more than a crop circle shows where aliens will land.

I have been reading political blogs to try and find out what makes particular ones good meme spreaders. One the left I looked at Eschaton and DailyKos and on the right Instapundit and Little Green Morons.

Conclusions: The left is full of crop circle paranoids. The right is full of stupid angry people.
The sheer volume of information in both does manage to strip things to bare bones facts, but not by virtue of intelligence, just volume - like a colony of bacteria feeding on a corpse.

Analysis still seems to be better in MSM - so I'll be sticking to my favorite publications for the moment: The Economist and Atlantic Monthly.

Great New York Metro piece on Judy Miller from a while back:

"...when there is trouble, it appears she’s more than happy to pass around the responsibility...when Miller co-bylined a story with Douglas Jehl on the WMD search that included a quote from Amy Smithson, an analyst formerly at the Henry L. Stimson Center. A day after it appeared, the Times learned that the quote was deeply problematic. To begin with, it had been supplied to Miller in an e-mail that began, “Briefly and on background”— a condition that Miller had flatly broken by naming her source..."

The article shows someone who is obsessively ambitious.

Would someone who has previously disclosed sources for personal gain refuse to do so for personal loss?

Judith Miller's WMD reporting - New York Times war reporting - Hunt for WMD

MSNBC Analyst Says Cooper Documents Reveal Karl Rove as Source in Plame Case

This would be the most ironic story ever - Journo leaks via unknown source - Supreme Court rules that journos have to give up sources - Supreme Court member resigns - Rove gets to be spindoctor for replacement - MSNBC analyst says that Rove was the leaker.

"Now that Time Inc. has turned over documents to federal court, presumably revealing who its reporter, Matt Cooper, identified as his source in the Valerie Plame/CIA case, speculation runs rampant on the name of that source, and what might happen to him or her. Tonight, on the syndicated McLaughlin Group political talk show, Lawrence O'Donnell, senior MSNBC political analyst, claimed to know that name--and it is, according to him, top White House mastermind Karl Rove."

Somehow this doesn't ring true. This rumor has been around blogs for a while, but this is the first time I've seen a major outlet cover it. It couldn't be true, could it?

Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | US accepts Earth is warming in bid to avert clash

In a massive u-turn over global warming a government statement says:

"We know the surface of the Earth is warmer and that an increase in greenhouse gases caused by humans is contributing to the problem"

Perhaps David Holcberg (the guy that the Ayn Randis booted out for saying that people shouldn't donate to tsunami victims) will be the last person on Earth to deny it.

That is until someone creates an 'Intelligent Design' version.

"Private bloggers or websites must register the complete identity of the person responsible for the site, and the ministry - which has set a June 30 deadline for compliance - said 74% of all sites had already registered."

A nice reminder that despite China's economic growth, it is not free.

Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | China orders bloggers to register with government

I overheard someone today use the cliché that Money is the root of all evil, the popular misquotation of 'love of money is the root of all evil'.

Its an expression that is often accepted as a truism, and yet from forced collectivization to people flying planes into buildings, people who live for ideas seem to have a worse track record.

Capitalism actually has a fairly good record with regards to corruption and intolerance, compared to strongly ideological cultures based upon extreme secularism such as Stalinist Communism or extreme religion, such as Wahabism particularly within multi-cultural societies where any one ideology would necessarily conflict with some other people's beliefs.

From the deforestation of the Amazon to the Slave trade to Tobacco sales plenty of evil is done for pure profit.

But there is a difference - many of the cynical abuses for profit have been ended without major conflict, precisely because there is no bogus ideological justification. In the last century alone, which was defined by secular rather than religious ideology, Pol Pot, Hitler and Stalin accounted for more than 100 million deaths.

Obviously there are exceptions, the US Slave Trade did play a role in the Civil War, but was not its only cause, in the rest of the world it was dismantled relatively peacefully - actually by early evangelicals. In China the Opium war was purely driven by commercial interests.

More generally, wars over resources such as the current and, no doubt, future oil wars are the norm - but they are the catalyst rather than the fuel of conflict.

Societies which allow people to buy and sell what people want, to make the movies people want, write the books that people want seem to become places where all sorts of ideas jostle together and evolve. Money is a numeric abstraction that facilitates the trade of ideas and goods. It would be nice if all of this could happen without money, but that does not seem practical outside of Club Med or Burning Man.

One of the things about capitalism, the doctrine of money, is that of all the isms it is arguably the least ideological, it operates at the lowest level of all, that of numbers. There is no ancient text or teaching that it is based on. If cultures do need a ism as a foundation, best to choose the one that is empty.

Money is not a moral framework for society; it is amoral but not immoral. Its moral emptiness allows it to underpin a culture which allows for multiple ideologies to compete, with no overriding doctrine.

- sorry bad post, am ranting.

What we are seeing is a very interesting form of meme, a meme that is propagated in the exact same form, unmutated, by hosts who both support and oppose the idea coveyed by the meme itself.

Republicans have tried to refer to filibuster amendment as the 'Byrd option' or the 'constitutional option'. Josh Marshall points to a memo urging Republicans not to use the 'nuclear option' epithet.

What is interesting is that both sides cannot help but use the term, despite the fact that it looks like a purely pejorative phrase.

This is an unusually viral phrase because of its dual appeal. It appeals to Republicans because of its viscerally combative stance and to Democrats because of its alarmist quality.

If one looks at memes such as religious ideas, they obviously transfer from one believer to another. Imagine an entire idea system as perfectly symmetrical as the 'nuclear option' phrase that infected both believers and non-believers. This would be like an end-game meme - one that spread far more quickly than normal but at the expense of a lower mutation rate.

The spin:
On the face of it, it looks like it is the Democrats that are being stubborn by threatening to filibuster judicial nominees.

The reality:
The numbers show something different, the Senate agreed to approve all but 1.5% of judicial nominees, and the Republicans are threatening to change one of the fundamental checks and balances on government to have things 100% instead of 98.5% their own way.

"Since Bush took office, he has made 218 judicial nominations and the Senate has confirmed 208 of them. Ten, including Owen, failed to win confirmation because of Democratic filibusters. Seven of those 10 were renominated at the start of this year. Of those seven, Democrats have indicated that they would be willing to confirm as many as four to avoid the showdown."

Neither side blinks as Senate starts debate on judicial nominees

Dawkins in the Independant

Remember, Dawkins' credentials make Hitchens look like the poseur he is.

Today's Financial Times has a piece announcing the trial of 4 men for the murder of a senior Vatican banker, who had threatened to blow the whistle on corruption linked to the Catholic Church with details he said were enough to provoke 'the third world war'.

This announcement comes more than twenty years after the murder happened - on the exact day that the first election of a new Pope commences.

The Shady Deals of God's Banker

Over twenty years ago, after being arrested on corruption charges involving dissapearance of $1 billion, on a trail that lead to the Vatican, and possible funding of right wing governments in South America, Roberto Calvi was found hanging under a bridge in London. His death was deemed to be suicide but was later deemed to be murder.

Against the backdrop of the Vatican banking scandal, Pope John Paul II was appointed as the first non Italian Pope in over four hundred years. This unusual appointment was possibly to sidestep political wrangling and disagreement amongst factions in the church over things such as corruption.

Now, I am not one to subscribe to conspiracy theories (since because people like to believe mysteries, there will always be a large population of false mysteries and conspiracy theories) but this one stands out for two reasons:

1. there is plenty of evidence.
2. there is plenty of precedent for this kind of corruption in Italy.
3. the evidence comes from reputable sources.
4. the level of 'coincidence' in some of the events surrounding the mystery is very high.

So it seems very odd that the announcement that 4 people will stand trial for Calvi's murder is made on the exact day that the election of a new Pope begins after more than 8,000 days.

If there were a faction in the Catholic Church, involved in corruption that Calvi had threatened to expose, then perhaps the announcement of this trial is a warning to that group not to try and engineer the election of their man to be the Pope.

Global warming is fact.

As of this week we now know that global warming as a man made phenomenon is a fact.

That the effects of global warming will cause death and destruction is a fact.

Given these facts, government avoidance of action to reduce global warming would now be criminally negligent.

The final proof: global warming is a man-made disaster

Part of a democracy is to prevent election of the undemocratic which happened disastrously in Algeria.

In December the Associated Press ran this:

Key among its [Iraq's] parties is the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution, a group closely allied to Iran and led by Abdel Aziz al-Hakim...

Al-Hakim's prominence on the list and his close relations with Iran give ammunition to many secular and non-Shiites to attack his coalition, saying Iraq's political future will mirror Iran's Shiite-run establishment if he and his supporters gain power.

Mustafa Alani:

"The nightmare scenario in the region is the election of an Iranian-influenced Shiite government in Iraq will lead to the creation of a 'Super Iran'"

The UIA have two thirds of the votes counted so far.

CTV.ca | Iraq Shiite win may bring 'Super Iran': critics

"As present world temperatures are already 0.7C above the pre-industrial level, the process is well under way...

when the temperature moves up to 2C above the pre-industrial level, expected in the middle of this century - within the lifetime of many people alive today - that serious effects start to come thick and fast...

when the temperature moves up to the 3C level, expected in the early part of the second half of the century, these effects will become critical. There is likely to be irreversible damage to the Amazon rainforest, leading to its collapse...

There will be a rapid increase in populations exposed to hunger, with up to 5.5 billion people living in regions with large losses in crop production, while another 3 billion people will have increased risk of water shortages...

Above the 3C raised level, which may be after 2070, the effects will be catastrophic: the Arctic sea ice will disappear."

Global Warming timeline

Whatever your opinion of the war, lets hope today is as peaceful as possible in Iraq.

...of Austria? Reuters: "California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, a citizen of both the United States and Austria, should be stripped of Austrian citizenship for allowing a convicted murderer to be executed, an Austrian politician says."

There is a lot of France bashing these days, on the basis that France is the most anti-US of its recent allies. The above poll shows that its the Germans, Russians, Turks and Mexicans that view the US in the most negative light, and that French attitudes to the US are pretty much the same as in the UK.

Naughtily referencing image here cos it is in an annoying popup.

This is where it was from, the rest is mostly yawn inducing usual stuff: BBC NEWS | World | Americas | Global poll slams Bush leadership

A lot of fuss in the news today about a sensible proposal to allow people to check one box labeled 'multiracial' under federal requirements for collection of race data for publicly funded universities.

The trouble with race classification is that it is scientifically meaningless and empirically racist itself.

Statistically we are all 'illegitimate' descendants of unknown fathers and racial traits are not always visible. Therefore none of us knows what our 'race' is.

What you mark on a box indicating race necessarily misleading as any geneticist or genealogist can attest:

1. Because race is an abstract notion attempts to classify it logically are always pseudo science. Hence government forms almost always end up confusing nationality and religious and cultural groupings.

(I ended up in a fun argument with a mindless bureaucrat at my local council in the UK because I marked myself down as Irish on a form marked 'ethnicity'. I pointed out that despite having absolutely no connection to Irish nationality, since the form was marked 'ethnicity', being 'Celtic' meant that 'Irish' was a closer match than 'White'.)

2. People's definition of race is usually based upon visual stereotypes. If you have an African American father and an Anglo Saxon American (the term is no more preposterous and patronising than African American) mother you will receive genes from both, you may or receive the gene that determines skin color from either parent you may be 'black' and your sister 'white' but you are not necessarily any more African American than her.

3. Genetic Genealogy based upon Y-Chromosome tests shows that a couple of percent of us are illegitimate without knowing it (this word is a offensive as bastard). If you compound this rate over several generations then we are all illegitimate.

4. Visible traits are biased to whatever is considered preferable by racists. If you are mixed race you are more often called black than white. Bob Marley, whose father was white, was rarely called white.

Oakland Tribune Online - Local & Regional News

When the Democrats became the Republicans, Election results in 52 and 64:

I always wondered when the Democrats, who were traditionally a party with an extreme right, racist platform, became the party to the left.

What is amazing is how absolute the transformation was, the Democrats basically became the Republicans. Maps of the election results in 52 and 64, illustrate this perfectly, they are almost the inverse of each other.

Left and right, conservative and liberal, labels attached to parties are abstract; however conservative is the label that the Republicans want to own. The problem is that the current Republican Party may be socially conservative but fiscally it is careless.

But social conservatism is not really what America is about. What made the US special to my mind was that most people, both to the right and left rooted for being socially liberal with a small 'l' - they called it freedom. One the left this means gay marriage rights and on the right the option to carry a gun. These are socially liberal attitudes - the government doesn't meddle - and these are enshrined in the US constitution from freedom of speech to the separation of church and state.

Fiscally conservative = low government spending, socially liberal = low government meddling. What these things equate to are sometimes called libertarianism, a political ethos that is particularly American and is centered around small government.

Four more years of a radical republicanism, big on spending, big on saying what you can and can't do and the Democrats may have an opportunity to reinvent themselves. By seizing the small government platform, with enough protectionism and welfare to allow local economies to adjust to globalization related changes in employment and to mitigate against the growing disparity between rich and poor (after all these are cheaper than the size of military required by going it on your own all the time), they would have something which resonates well with people to the left and right in the US, compassionate, pragmatic liberalism.

Perhaps the Democrats could flip the US again and win a landslide next time round. If they win this time it may just be more of the same.

During the cold war, the stand off between the US and USSR channeled energy into substitutes for warfare that were actually interesting and benign. Superpowers flexed their muscles figuratively in the space race and literally at the Olympics.

But there is something tawdry about the Olympics these days, it feels anachronistic without having the benefit of being camp, in the way that, say, the Eurovision Song Contest is.

The Olympics are a colossal, committee driven, waste of money, vast sums being spent on facilities that flatter politicians’ egos but would be better spent elsewhere. For a poor country are super expensive Olympic facilities, that are usually underused after the event itself, that much different from a hugely opulent, dictator’s palace?

In today's political climate, instead of muscle flexing on the track and field, sadly we have $1bn plus security spend against potential terrorist threats.

For the events themselves, the sophistication of doping and the emergent prospect of gene therapy reduce the value of an Olympic medal, and provide a spectator experience as unsatisfying as visiting a museum half full of fakes. These days, perhaps a cyborg Olympics would actually have more integrity and it would certainly be more interesting to see just how fast a state-of-the-art, scientifically enhanced human being could run.

Lastly, for all the purist ideals of the Olympics - amateur competitors competing for the honor and privilege, this purism doesn’t extend to the organizers who are so eager to leech so much money off sponsors that spectators can't take a brand of soda that isn't paying a sponsorship fee into a stadium. In the sports, like soccer, where there are major professional international competitions, the Olympics' version of the event is largely inferior.

So perhaps the Olympics have jumped the shark, and if so then it would be perfectly fitting if they disappeared into obscurity from whence they came - in Greece.

DRUDGE REPORT has a transcript of Fox's 'sensational' Moore interview and - its boring.

Politics is boring, but tabloids are not. I always watch Fox news when I want a laugh, because it is an 'Elvis found on the moon' tabloid delivered in all seriousness by angry people in suits. But comedy needs opposites, a straight man and a gagster. When you put tabloid left vs. tabloid right (Moore is after all very similar to Bill O' Reilly) there is some kind of matter/anti-matter annihilation of comedy and the result is vacuous.

For real entertainment I am waiting for the Ali G, Noam Chomsky interview.

Michael Moore?

Free Web Polls

"Last year Mr Niyazov instituted a holiday in honour of the muskmelon, a relative of the watermelon, complete with lavish festivities"

link

Oil futures

"There is a precedent for price hikes to compensate for dollar devaluation, and it is not a comfortable one."

"The first oil crisis, although prompted by the political furore over the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, and the use of the "oil weapon", was also a response to the devaluation of the dollar that took place in the course of the breakdown of the Bretton Woods fixed exchange rate system in 1971-73."

Saudi is at odds with Kuwait and UAE, Saudi wants to cut oil supply to maintain oil prices.

Oil price rises are compounded by fact that OPEC revenues are pegged to dollar and the dollar is very weak and that economic growth in China is increasing demand.

Higher gas prices in the US are not good in run up to election. US needs lower oil prices and more control of pricing.

Iraq plus Kuwait oil reserves equivalent to Saudi's

The US has played its hand with the Iraq invasion, a stable Iraq mitigates against a fragile Saudi. An unstable US controlled Iraq creates further instability for Saudi Arabia.

De facto, stability in Iraq is now the key to western economic wellbeing.

In April 1937, Hitler deliberately bombed civilian targets in a small Northern Spanish town on behalf of his friend Franco. One thousand people were brutally murdered, inspiring the most famous anti-war painting, Picasso's Guernica. Guernica was a Basque town and the atrocity was used to justify further barbaric atrocities by Basque separatist terrorists, ETA.

Guernica Introduction

The Observer:

"A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world."

Funny how this kind of headline always crops up in the Sunday papers. I guess the Observer needs to boost its circulation.

The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow. Jim Crow Stories . Democratic Party | PBS

"The South remained a one-party region until the Civil Rights movement began in the 1960s. Northern Democrats, most of whom had prejudicial attitudes towards blacks, offered no challenge to the discriminatory policies of the Southern Democrats."

Clearly the Democratic party is now the more tolerant party. When did it change?

UPI has compiled a list of the nationalities of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay from analysis of multiple news sources.

The results: almost half the foreigners taken from Afghanistan were from the Arabian peninsula (160 from Saudi Arabia, 253, from the Arabian peninsula as a whole), less than 0.2% were from Iraq and there are more Brits than from any other European country.

Going to war with Iraq, meant that you removed a tyrant and had control over almost exactly the same oil reserves (Iraq plus Kuwait) as Saudi Arabia. This would mean that you could tighten the screws there, or be covered if there were a revolution, without drying up the pipeline of oil. Playing hardball with Saudi directly would not have been possible. Just a thought.

Saudi Arabia 160
Yemen 85
Pakistan 82
Afghanistan 80
Jordan 30
Egypt 30
Algeria 19
Morocco 18
Kuwait 12
China 12
Tajikistan 11
Turkey 11
Britain 9
Tunisa 8
Russia (not including Chechnya) 8
France 7
Bahrain 7
Kazakhstan 5
Australia 2
Canada 2
Chechnya 2
Uzbekistan 2
Syria 2
Georgia 2
Sudan 2
Bangladesh 1
Belgium 1
Denmark 1
Sweden 1
Germany 1
Iraq 1
Kenya 1
Libya 1
Mauritania 1
Qatar 1
Spain 1

The head of the BBC resigned over exactly the same allegation that the Independent makes today. So either the Independent is guilty of far worse than the charges levelled at the BBC, under which circumstances one would expect a gagging order - or - the BBC had covered the truth but couldn't prove it.

"[I]ntelligence-gathering, like reporting, is an imperfect business".

After years of hide and seek with Saddam Hussein one might have some sympathy with intelligence services that may have made mistakes about WMD, particularly when interpretations of findings would naturally filter, like a game of telephone, to reflect what governments wanted to hear, as documents moved up the food chain.

Sympathy for intelligence gatherers and reporters alike might also be needed for the usually bullet proof Bair. Just when he was riding high on the outcome of the Hutton report and a critical government vote, came the bolt. Blair's accidental betrayal came from his main ally over WMD – Bush. What plays out now may be the same as the alternative turn of events, had the Hutton report been highly critical of Blair instead of the BBC.

Recap:

The UK government, saw an opportunity to focus attention away from a report on WMD that they provably sexed up (remember the one with the student report cited as evidence, the one that journalists seem to have forgotten about) by pretending to be outraged by BBC comments about one that they could defend.

Unfortunately a civil servant caught in the middle of the stage-fight kills himself. It all gets a bit serious and an enquiry is held.

The enquiry is utterly anal and holds journalists to standards that the vast majority of newspapers and TV stations never abide by. The heads of the BBC are forced to resign because a single journalist had inaccurate findings.

But now:

Bush needs to shut people up going on and on about WMD - so he allows an enquiry which will dampen the noise before the election.

There is room for maneuver for Bush but for Blair the entire reason for going to war was the presence of WMD in Iraq, so if the US has an enquiry then the UK also has to have one.

Will this be the 'oh shit moment' for Blair (who has been pretty teflon coated until now) as he caught between the proverbial rock and hard place?

The Rock: The Hutton report forced people to resign over inaccurate reporting. We are already pretty sure that there was inaccurate reporting over WMD so at the minimum heads will roll at British Intelligence. But if intelligence was not badly investigated but badly interpreted by the government, then the Intelligence folks will be unhappy to take the blame entirely.

The Hard Place: The Hutton enquiry looked like an enquiry into the case for war when in fact it was very focused - it didn’t have the remit to go near documents that used outdated student's work to sex up the case for war, for example. An enquiry into the case for war can.

I like America and I like France, and I am always amazed at how much the stereotypical view of one country persists in people from the other.

Is France a totalitarian state barring individuality and commerce and is America a cultural desert of fast food and strip malls?

No, France doesn't look like Eastern Europe during the cold war, it functions much like America. Contrary to popular perception, the Socialists lost power in France years ago and the current government is to the right. Sure, France needs to take major steps to encourage more enterprise, but the popularity of French libertarian, Sabine Herold shouldn't be a surprise (according to Jeff Jarvis, P.J. O'Rourke has some good insight here!). French stores are full of things to buy, with neon signs and billboard advertising and the world's biggest retail chain after Walmart is French.

Likewise, America is the cultural center of the universe and if you don't realize it yet, you haven't been to New York.

But the biggest reason for abolishing these negative stereotypes is that the fears that they are based upon are fears of the same thing. The fear of French Socialism is a fear of homogeneity - of the blandness that was every day life behind the iron curtain. The fear of Americanism is the same - of the blandness of Starbucks and McDonalds replacing the local cafe and restaurant.

The Statue of Liberty is French, but all the wine in France is made from vines whose roots are American.

Although the US has received most of the flak for not ratifying the Kyoto treaty, it is Russia that has effectively buried it.

"Russia said it would not ratify the Kyoto protocol, the world treaty on global warming.
Russian ratification is necessary for the treaty to take effect."

Kyoto treaty

"The mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the only two cities in the world to have suffered atomic bombings, blasted Russia on Friday over its plan to consider restricted use of nuclear weapons to deal with regional conflicts and international terrorism"

Japan Today-Hiroshima, Nagasaki mayors protest Russia nuke plan

Glenn Reynolds has missed the big picture in the latest events in the Hutton enquiry when he says:

"Things just get worse for the British Broadcasting Corp., as the initial claim that Tony Blair's government 'sexed up an intelligence dossier about Iraq has exploded, and revealed a miserable tissue of lies and shoddiness at the BBC. "

Yesterday was a bad day for the BBC in an enquiry which has hurt both the BBC and the government in a game of political ping pong. Glenn either hasn't been following the Hutton enquiry or is grinding a big axe.

Salam Pax attends the Hutton enquiry in London.

"What I really don't understand is the fixation on the 45 minutes. I mean, what does it matter whether it was 45 or a 100? The real question is whether Saddam had WMDs or not. Because that, in the end, was the main selling-point of the war."

This, of course, states the obvious, but UK politics are Byzantine

The Democracy Index measures how democratic individual US states are based upon variables such as seats-to-votes ratios.

Is there such a measure anywhere for countries? This could be tallied with foreign trade, international aid receipts or donations and local subsidies to quantitatively measure an 'ally' (i.e. how much a country puts its money where its mouth is) and create a 'Global Ally of Democracy' index.

If a country is both highly democratic and favors aid and trade to other countries which are also highly democratic without imposing tariffs or subsidizing domestic production then it would score highly as a Global Ally of Democracy.

Martin Walker suggests that coalition hand-outs over the rebuilding of Iraq will be worthless since it now looks like it will cost more to rebuild than near term oil revenue.

Instead, he argues that France will need something else, and that the US will agree to keep quiet over French agricultural subsidies at the upcoming WTO summit in Washington.

The Moonie owned Washington Times reports: British asylum problem 'out of control'

The source of this is a poll carried out by Britain's most popular newspaper, the Sun (same owner as Fox), which has been using misleading information to whip up paranoia about immigrants.

Subsequent to a propaganda campaign against asylum seekers, the Sun conducted a poll which showed that a majority of readers thought that immigration was the most important political issue, four times more than those who thought that the ‘war on terror’ was. Specifically they have been exaggerating, risks of disease, violence, costs to taxpayer and threat to the British way of life from specific instances concerning asylum seekers, at a time when the numbers of people being granted asylum in the UK is in decline.

The UK, like many European countries is becoming a much more multicultural place, something that the US has been for a long time. The notion of ‘American’ is by necessity a matter of shared values rather than heritage, something that has helped to challenge racism over the longer term. Mainstream, endemic racism was a problem in Europe 50 years ago and British newspapers supported it then, the Daily Mail praising the then Chancellor of Germany as a strong leader. It probably isn’t a good idea to make the same mistake twice.

Below are some articles from today’s Sun:

Our heritage is crumbling.
The spin: British port towns are overrun with illegal immigrants and destroying national heritage. The truth: A hotel that once knew better days is now a cheap hostel. Hardly news, the UK is full of hotels that have seen better days and has been for as long as I can remember.

Mob in riot at Butlins
The spin: UK taxpayers money used to give vacation to a mob of asylum seekers who threaten women and beat up men.
The truth: A group of refugee boys between 14 and 18 from the horrors of the Yugoslav war, are given a weeks break. They try to chat up some English girls. A group of English boys taunt them and a fight breaks out between 'one' person on each side. Two unarmed people fighting is hardly a riot.

HIV cases up 27 per cent The spin: whips up hysteria over rise in heterosexual HIV rate from African immigrants and links this to cost of treating foreigners in UK hospitals.
The truth: Actual number of HIV cases related to African immigrants is around 150 out of a population of around 60 million. This is not the cause of the 2bn GBP cost of treating 'foreigners', nor is the majority of this cost related to recent immigrants.

The Hutton inquiry in the UK is proving to be as much a test of journalism as it is of government. Perhaps the weblog model has something to offer here?

Polly Toynbee, in the Guardian, points out the hypocrisy of the outcry over inaccurate journalism:

"which of us would escape a walloping if asked to open our notebook scribbles to the searchlight of prosecution interrogation, every word examined for absolute clarity and veracity?"

Now that an army of bloggers - writers of journals, so de facto - journalists, have no sub editor, editor or proprietor to answer to (let alone check that they are keeping short-hand notes in spiral bound notepads), are we going to drown in a sea of spurious allegations and downright lies? I would argue that we are less likely to than when respectable news came from those nice gentlemen at The Times.

There are two ways to go about controlling any business: license it or create a marketplace. With weblogging we are seeing a journalistic marketplace evolve, the virtual currency, the whuffie, of links creates a self regulating popularity index which governs reach. In turn, a medium has emerged which allows individuals without Hearst's bank balance, to exercise free speech to reach a potential audience of millions.

Everyone can be a publisher and everyone can publish lies, but not everyone will. The more people that write online, the more likely it is that lies and inaccuracy will disappear as background noise and that the truth will emerge. This happens not because there are no editors - but because anyone can comment or publish a counter argument - everyone is an editor and lies require effort to corroborate. Professional Journalism won’t disappear, but there will be a new marketplace to recruit from.

Guardian Unlimited Politics | Special Reports | Polly Toynbee: Hutton seeks certainty in a world of wobbly truths

So that you don't have to read through the UK broadsheets, here's a summary of what I've learned about the political scandal over Iraq that is dominating the UK press:

In September 2002 the UK Government issues Iraq dossier which contains material know known to be false (if a statement which says that Iraq could be ready for a Chemical attack in 45 minutes was known to be false prior to publication and was inserted into document on the instruction of the Prime Minister, the consensus in the UK press is that Tony Blair may have to resign).

UK Government Iraq dossier issued in February is found to be plagiarized student material and generally full of crap.

No WMD's found in Iraq to date, UK press starts to question original government evidence. Government concedes an inquiry.

Government spin doctors decide to feign outrage at press allegations over original dossier - which is less 'dodgy' - in an attempt to shift focus away from February document. In particular they demand an apology from the BBC for an article that claims that government spin doctor 'sexed up' dossier number 1. They do this during the 'government' inquiry into the same government's case for war in Iraq. They demand that the BBC reveal the source of its allegations but the BBC refuses so the Ministry of Defense leaks the identity of the 'mole', David Kelly. The idea is that the Kelly will embarrass the BBC because, on his own, he will have to claim that the BBC fabricated part of their story. Kelly is put under huge pressure in the enquiry and claims that either the BBC exaggerated or that there was another source. It is possible that he realized that nobody in the government was going to stick up for him so he would end up having his integrity questioned if he told the full truth. He is a devoutly religious person and does not like lying. He kills himself under the pressure.

The government's diversionary tactic from the 'dodgy dossier' has worked but the intent has backfired massively as a full public inquiry into the death of the government source is called.

The BBC takes the first hit. Since they reveal that Kelly was indeed the only source and since he had said that either they had exaggerated or had more than one source, they have been guilty of the same thing they had accused the government of - they had 'sexed up' the accusation of 'sexing up'.

It turns out that Kelly had given another interview to a journalist which had been recorded - the head of the BBC smiles when he hears it - the inference is that Kelly may have been telling the truth in the first place and not to the parliamentary committee.

The governement has two choices: do nothing; discredit Kelly. The government decides to call Kelly a 'Walter Mitty character' - a very high risk strategy since, true or not, if it doesn't stick they will lose a lot of sympathy by slagging off someone that killed himself due to pressure that is perceived to have been put on him by the goverment. UK papers pick up that the Mitty slur is a major mistake by the governement. The enquiry starts and witnesses testify that Kelly was no Walter Mitty.

Lots of people in 18th century costume spend the next month or so cross examining people who don't like being lectured to. etc. etc.

Great article by Matt Welsh on the disenfranchisement of felons.

"the democratic world's largest pool of adult citizens living under a system of taxation without representation".

I can never manage to label Matt Welsh's politics, which means he must have integrity.

A few days ago Tony Blair had possibly reached his zenith. basking in 17 standing ovations before congress. How quickly things change. Today the BBC reports on the scandal surrounding the suicide of the WMD report whistle blower:

"Governments have fallen and prime ministerial careers have collapsed over less."

Even members of Blair's own party are calling for his resignation. The most likely outcome is that Blair's spin doctor and/or defence secretary will resign, but if the UK governement falls because of a scandal surrounding false evidence over weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, then Bush may have a problem.

BBC NEWS | Politics | Kelly death 'changes everything'

MSNBC have finally had to sack Michael Savage for suggesting that a caller who he believed was gay should "get AIDS and die".

During the Iraq war Savage was used as a pundit as part of a crude attempt by MSNBC to imitate Fox's gung ho stance and cash in on their ratings success.

Firing savage is right, but wasn't hiring someone with openly held fascist and racist ideas for a mainstream slot, on a channel that blanches at the idea of a shot of a nipple, clearly wrong in the first place. That Savage should go is obvious - but those responsible for hiring him at MSNBC should also go. Savage did not act out of character, and those who chose him knew what they had bought into.

Savage, like many people who are motivated by hatred, has a chip on his shoulder as a failed academic rejected by liberal Berkeley. I can't help being reminded of a failed painter who turned his bitterness into resentment of the race of many of the successful painters around him.

MSNBC fires Michael Savage

Ross Mayfield points out some disturbing facts about the boy scouts movement:

"Meanwhile, the Boy Scouts ban atheists and gays. With the supreme court granting the right to private civil society organizaitons to be exclusive, extreme interests are balkanizing. Again, this is a market with few sellers."

I guess this is no surprise from the organization that has historically shared some of the styling and aspirations of the Hitler Youth.

On my honor, I will do my best | csmonitor.com

Jeff Jarvis is sensibly skeptical of conspiracy theories:

"I never buy a conspiracy theory, for I argue that the world -- and especially government and especially big business and very especially big media -- are simply not well-organized enough to conspire. That's why synergy doesn't sell. No, I don't believe in conspiracies."

Given that: a. conspiracies, as a subset of mysteries, are seductive and intriguing; b. people who think alike will independently behave alike, without having to go to the significant bother of conspiring. One can assume that the universe of claimed conspiracies is much, much larger than the number which are real.

But I still think that Michael Jackson's behaviour plausibly points to him having been abducted by aliens.

... the Netherlands according to this:

"The CGD/FP Commitment to Development Index ranks 21 of the world's richest countries according to how much their policies help or hinder the economic and social development of poor nations."

Foreign Policy

Did he really mean this:

"Richard Perle, said he believes Iraqis will opt for freedom and pluralism after living through "a quarter of a century of brutal oppression." But if they choose to create an Islamic theocracy, the United States will have to live with that choice."

If Iraq went the way of Iran, i.e. a religious govenment in reaction to a corrupt secular administration, would this be a victory?

More likely is that Perle is laying the groundwork so that he cannot be accused of supporting a non democratic puppet while at the same time warning of the dangers of a theocracy.

Washington Post

Two key dates here

Andrew Sullivan, in an OpEd for the Washington Times (the paper that is owned by the Moonies):

"On the day Kabul fell to Northern Alliance and American troops, the lefty journalist Nicholas von Hoffman predicted disaster and quagmire for the United States in Afghanistan. In von Hoffman's honor, I instituted the von Hoffman awards for terrible predictions in wartime."

With news that the Taliban is operating again in Afghanistan, IPS reports:

IRAQ-U.S.: Meanwhile, Back in Afghanistan

"WASHINGTON, Apr 7 (IPS) - As senior U.S. officials promise to rebuild and democratise Iraq, citizens of that country might wish to consider the fate of nearby Afghanistan."

With every twist and turn in this 24 hours a day real-time reported war comes a knee jerk 'I told you so'. Armchair anarchists and suburban warriors would be well advised to wait a little before jumping to conclusions. There are enough eggs to smear the faces of the entire political spectrum.

Nick Denton writes:

"The problem with the anti-war movement is that most of its participants were more interested in protesting against authority figures in their own lives, and indifferent to the plight of the Iraqi people. They have no conception of what it's like to live under a capricious totalitarian regime."

You could also say:

The problem with the pro-war movement is that most of its participants are unquestioning of authority figures in their own lives, and ultimately indifferent to the plight of the Iraqi people. They have no conception of what it's like for Arabs in the Middle East.

But it is a statement that is both empty and destructive, a viral meme. It would be a sweeping generalization that would contribute to further unnecessary polarization amongst the reasonable majority.

It would be manufactured dissent.

nickdenton.org: Conversation with a sceptic

"I woke up beside a running sewer and did not expect the day to smell of roses."

Democracy speaks, and in Baghdad at least, the jubilation speaks volumes.

Reuters | Latest Financial News / Full News Coverage

Iraqi Ambassador to th UN: "It's Game Over"

Whitehouse: "Its not a game and its not over"

Two months ago.

Whitehouse: "It's Game Over"

French Ambassador to the UN: "It's not a game and its not over"

Oh well the French are in agreement with one thing then.

"I have in mind those men in Washington who have given a new life to the missionary impulse in American foreign relations: who believe that this nation, in this era, has received a threefold endowment that can transform the world. As they see it, that endowment is composed of, first, our unsurpassed military might; second, our clear technological supremacy; and third, our allegedly invincible benevolence (our "altruism," our affluence, our lack of territorial aspirations). Together, it is argued, this threefold endowment provides us with the opportunity and the obligation to ease the nations of the earth toward modernization and stability: toward a fullfledged Pax Americana Technocratica. "

The Atlantic monthly whose former editor Michael Kelly was tragically killed yesterday.

April 2003? - no, 35 years ago, April 1968.

Then:

"Who was the aggressor -- and the "real enemy"? The Viet Cong? Hanoi? Peking? Moscow? International Communism? Or maybe "Asian Communism"?"

Now:

Who was the aggressor -- and the "real enemy"? Al-Quaeda? Baghdad? Tehran? Riyad? Islamic Fundamentalism? Or maybe "Secular Iraqi Pan-Arabism"?

Then:

"In Washington the semantics of the military muted the reality of war for the civilian policy-makers. In quiet, air-conditioned, thick-carpeted rooms, such terms as "systematic pressure," "armed reconnaissance," "targets of opportunity," and even "body count" seemed to breed a sort of games-theory detachment."

Now: ditto

How Could Vietnam Happen? - An Autopsy by James C. Thomson, Jr.

"As a member of one family that survived a bomb, I can tell you from the bottom of my heart: Bombing will never be the solution. "

The interesting thing about the Washington Post article is that although it raises an issue that I believe in, it is completely illogical.

The argument is that bombing people makes people angry and increases the risk of terrorism. This argument is being put by someone who survived an Al-Qaeda bomb, but instead of reacting angrily and being in favor of the war she is against bombing. However noble her intentions, she disproves her own argument in the very act of proposing it.

Its an interesting conundrum for newspaper editors - a victim of terrorism is a more credible proponent of anti-war, much like anti-war Vietnam vets, but the argument, that bombing only creates anger and revenge can only be made by someone who is not a victim and therefore less credible.

Bombs Bring Only Pain and Terror (washingtonpost.com)

"Former CIA director James Woolsey said Wednesday that the United States is engaged in World War IV, and that it could continue for years. "

Oh super, excuse me while I slit my wrists.

In case you were wondering, World War III is already over. Don't worry, the US won, you can come out from behind the sofa now.

CNN.com - Ex-CIA director: U.S. faces 'World War IV' - Apr. 3, 2003

"Umm Qasr is a town similar to Southampton," UK Defence Minister Geoff Hoon told the House of Commons yesterday. "He's either never been to Southampton, or he'