Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Clinton saturation
Just came across a copy I made of this delightfully typical offering from CNN some months back, originally linked at http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/10/09/clinton.honored.ap/index.html :
Clinton inducted into women's hall of fame
Nine others enshrined
Sunday, October 9, 2005; Posted: 7:58 a.m. EDT (11:58 GMT) New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton once wanted to be an astronaut.
SENECA FALLS, New York (AP) -- Inspired by Alan Shepard, the first American to journey into space, a 14-year-old from suburban Chicago wrote a letter to NASA in 1961 asking what she needed to do to become an astronaut.She got a curt reply: Girls are not being recruited by the nation's space program."It had never crossed my mind up until that point that there might be doors closed to me simply because I was a girl," recalled the letter writer, better known today as Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, as she was enshrined Saturday in the National Women's Hall of Fame, along with nine other inductees.
Feel like gagging? The fund-raising Democrat superstar tagged at the C for you-know-what news network as the "sitting first lady" and the "junior Senator from New York", now enters the beginning of the end game of her Trojan Bill presidential bid with the media wind in her sails.
Strategically positioned for the world camera at the Corretta King funeral and the Bush State of the Union, she denies being the intended beneficiary of Geena Davis' "Commander in Chief" character.
Now that series' ratings along, coincidentally, with Hillary's approval numbers are falling through the floor. Despite massive financial backing, it's starting to look like somebody other than Hillary - even if that person also has an arrangement with Bill - must lead the Democrats into the next presidential election.
"Islam Defended"
Found this exchange at timblair.net:
To which Tim responds:
Regarding the opening of Ahmed's defence:
Don't know what Blair said, but any reasonable person must agree with his above response: more argument, less arson. The arson and violence in present circumstances is over-the-top and viscious, as was the sneak 9/11 attack and all the other voodoo-numerically coded bloodletting, televised neck separations, hospitality spot blood /gut redecorating and cetera.
These Cartoon Riots proceeded on the back of angry Salafist clerics beating up the issue, through the media. Most Muslims per se, and as usual, probably find the affair unnecessary, ugly, and utterly hypocritical.
Have no earthly idea what this has to do with said cartoons:
So that's what this is all about, at root. A "Zionist" cartoon conspiracy.
ISLAM DEFENDED
Islamic reader Ahmed emails:I am writing this letter in regards to your article on the prophet cartoons. You say that Muslims are vicious to other religions and disrespectful to western culture, but I am telling you we are not.
We are not spiteful to other religions but those who invade our land, rape our sisters, mothers, wives, and kill us; but still we do not disrespect them or their religion, but their belief—“Zionism”, not the Jewish religion or their Prophet, because it is against our beliefs and our moral values to disrespect someone on the basis of religion or to disrespect a messenger of God.
Mr. Blair, you think that we disrespect western culture (by the way, I don’t believe in Sheik Khalid Yasin’s comments) but what has western media done to our faith and religion? Islam is known for a man being able to marry 10 or more wives, oppressing women, terrorism, etc.
As a Muslim I was brought up to love all three main prophets: Abraham, Jesus, and Mohamed, who brought upon us the three holy religions. We as Muslims respect these prophets not for respect for Christians or Jews, but because we believe in them as prophets and respect them as such.
It is also not a matter of freedom of speech, it’s a matter of respect. Displaying cartoons of our beloved prophet is the same as insulting Muslims. Is anyone allowed to insult a race, religion, or group of people on the media? Why is that not allowed? Because it is wrong. You cannot argue that it is a matter of freedom of speech.
I’ll give you an example of something sensitive and close to your heart so you’ll know how deeply these cartoons affected us Muslims. Say if someone drew cartoons about the Bali bombings, making fun of the dead. Or the tsunami victims. Won’t you be deeply offended and hurt? It is wrong and there is no excuse for it.
All religions and their prophets should be given some respect. The prophet of any religion is their symbol. People believe in his or her word and devote their life to the sayings of their prophet. If you insult the prophet, you have disrespected the whole religion and made the prophet look small and demeaned him as a prophet or a man with such dignity, respect and love from his followers.
I hope I have changed your mind about the awful pictures of our beloved prophet.
To which Tim responds:
No, you haven’t; but you have provided an absolutely brilliant example of how to respond to criticism of Islam. Argument—as much as I disagree with claims that Zionists are murdering land-invader sister-rapers—beats threats. For that matter, argument beats torching embassies and calling for a 9/11 attack on Europe. More argument; less arson.
UPDATE. And from reader Amanda, independent of the above, but related:I’m Jewish, but consider myself number one as Australian, above and beyond all else. There are many things in the media which are unfavorable to Jews (and Christians, etc.), but as far as I’m concerned, one needs to cop it sweet, and respond with intelligence and dignity (or not at all), rather than with unjustifiable violence.
It is vitally important that as Australians we ensure that our kids can grow up with the knowledge that free speech is a right. Racial vilification issues aside, the whole world needs to focus on this point more strongly than ever.
Agreed.
Regarding the opening of Ahmed's defence:
You say that Muslims are vicious to other religions and disrespectful to western culture
Don't know what Blair said, but any reasonable person must agree with his above response: more argument, less arson. The arson and violence in present circumstances is over-the-top and viscious, as was the sneak 9/11 attack and all the other voodoo-numerically coded bloodletting, televised neck separations, hospitality spot blood /gut redecorating and cetera.
These Cartoon Riots proceeded on the back of angry Salafist clerics beating up the issue, through the media. Most Muslims per se, and as usual, probably find the affair unnecessary, ugly, and utterly hypocritical.
Have no earthly idea what this has to do with said cartoons:
We are not spiteful to other religions but those who invade our land, rape our sisters, mothers, wives, and kill us; but still we do not disrespect them or their religion, but their belief—“Zionism"
So that's what this is all about, at root. A "Zionist" cartoon conspiracy.
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
Man on the moon, men in the street
There were shades, undeniably, of JFK's famous "man on the moon by the end of the decade" speech in Bush's call for ending substantial US oil dependency by 2025, and OPEC's worried reaction underlines the speech's potential magnitude.
Bush went on to announce the multi-million dollar Advanced Energy Initiative, a 22 percent increase in federal clean energy research that will lead to greater investments in solar, wind and nuclear technologies, as well as zero-emission coal-fired plants.
He also called for more research into hybrid and electric cars and hopes to have alternative sources of fuel, such as ethanol made from corn, wood chips or grass, "practical and competitive within six years."
The goal is to replace 75 percent of U.S. oil imports from the volatile Middle East in the next 20 years. Persian Gulf oil accounts for less than 20 percent of U.S. foreign imports. Bush should make the goal more ambitious.
Oil consumption in this country is staggering — 20.7 million barrels a day in 2004, or a quarter of the world's usage, according to the Energy Department. Two-thirds of that oil goes to transportation, including filling the large SUVs zooming along our highways. No comprehensive and meaningful energy reform can succeed without a concomitant dedication by the American people, who must be willing to make lifestyle changes.
Bush, a former oilman, is correct in calling for industry changes, but a clarion call by itself isn't enough.
(Excerpt is from San Antonio Express-News)
The MOTM speech was a step on the road to dealing with the Sputnik gauntlet thrown down by the Soviets in the '50s, and we should keep in mind that the Soviet Union were outright space race leaders in the early years of that contest, with (err...) moonlight second.
The MOTStreet of today realises that OPEC money can find its way to terror coffers, and that the likes of Chavez and Ahmadinejad would bend and break the West's oil Achilles heel if afforded the opportunity.
That MOTS has also seen the runaway success of Japan in developing new environmentally sensitive technologies in recent years, the failure of the Kyoto bureaucratic US- and free market-bashing regime, and the importance of getting businesses excited about and willingly involved in alternative energies and related techniques.
Getting oil companies and other big producers involved in environmental initiatives was in fact one of the hallmarks of Bush's incredible success as Governor of Texas.
