A real President
While America is still split on the Clinton legacy, most of the rest of the world agrees: he was a great leader inside and outside the US. Living in Europe, I talk to average people all the time who tell me how great Clinton was and then ask me "What happened?" with a pained confusion, when talk turns to the present "president".

Anyway, the people of Srebrenica showed how much they think of Clinton when they personally invited him to a mass funeral for members of their town slaughtered in a massacre during the former-Yugoslavia wars.

I'll be interested to see if the current administration just ignores this world event or tries to put some spin on it. Remember, these are the same people who, less than a year ago, claimed we needed to go into Iraq no only to find ficticious WMD, but also for humanitarian reasons (you know, because Saddam gassed Kurds way back when he was still the US's ally, in 1988). They are also the people who OPPOSED Clinton's actions to stop the Balkan slaughter, the same actions the people of Srebrenice hail him for.

Baghdad Slaughter not confined to humans

Of all the crimes and disasters commited in Iraq since the US invasion, I think this one is the worst I've heard about.

It reminds me of some of the propoganda that was stirred up against the Taliban (not that they weren't evil, mind you) back in late 2001...the many pieces about the abused and neglected animals in the Kabul Zoo. And now this...a rare, majestic tiger shot dead because a group of soldiers snuck into the Baghdad zoo, got drunk, and started messing around.

Voters in England deliver a shock for Blair

Well, in what is hopefully a foreshadowing of the next US elections, voters in a district of England elected a new MP from the Liberal Democrats party. That party opposed the war in Iraq, and the upset victory marks the first time since taking power in 1997 that Tony Blair's party have lost a previously-held seat.

Now the question is, will American voters do the same.

And...well...then, the question is, will the powers that be honor the will of the American voters this time. We'll see.

The Onion.
Once again, I read The Onion and shake my head, thinking "why didn't I think of that one".

The Article is titled: Revised Patriot Act Will Make It Illegal To Read Patriot Act

Freedom...
...is measured by the distance between church and state. (one of my favorite bumperstickers).

This story from Nigeria illustrates that point, wonderfully. What's really amazing is the way people who want to institute the same kind of fanatical "christian" law system here in the US are outraged by this type of thing in other countries. The distance between that nutbag in Alabama and the "Islamic" law of Nigeria is a narrow margin indeed.

As for the heinousness of stoning a woman to death for adultry...it'll be interesting to see if any conservatives in the Bush regime condemn this. It's a lose-lose situation for them...if they say nothing, they're condoning it. If they denounce it, then they're hypocrites.
As Governor of Texas, Bush did nothing to stop the execution of a man convicted because of the testimony of ONE SINGLE WITNESS, despite no physical evidence and the fact that the witness was some distance away at night. So, pointing the finger at another country for brutal executions (which Nigeria is indeed guilty of) isn't something Bush can do, for lack of any moral high ground.
Likewise, any harping on the fact that adultery isn't a severe enough crime to warrant execution will raise the eyebrows of any listener with a memory, since the conservatives impeached Bill Clinton for the same "crime" a few years ago.

Whether Nigeria carries out this sentence or not, it should be an eye-opener to all Americans. First, it shows--once again--how our own leaders have no moral authority in the rest of the world anymore. And second, it's another reminder of the kind of nation John Ashcroft and his "christian" coalition want to build here in the US.

What they aren't telling us.

So, how many Americans are really dying in Iraq. We may never know. Hesiod over at Counterspin has pointed out one case that has come to light about an attack not being admitted to until the soldiers were shown the videotape (made by the Iraqis who carried out the attack) two weeks later.

Anyone with a memory that goes back thirty to fourty years (or, more importantly, the ability to consult the historical record) will remember the absurd body-count reports the US did from Vietnam every week.

You can rest assured that someone has calculated the "minimum acceptable casualty quotient" that the American public can handle and that's what they're letting leak out. There are many casualties we're not hearing about. The first casualty of war is the truth...always has been, always will.

Straight out of your pocket and into Haliburton's coffers

If you really want to be depressed, check out this article at Forbes. Not only are taxpayers paying just under a BILLION dollars (by the time you read this, it may well pass the Billion mark), but Haliburton is doing such a great job of rebuilding Iraq's oil infrastructure, that the country with the second larges oil reserves in the world is IMPORTING oil and gas to the tune of 6 million dollars a day!

President tries to clear up his own spin

The "president" actually came out and addressed one of the most-widely believed myths which his own administration has planted in the minds of average Americans, admitting that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with the September 11th attacks. However, while he did acknowledge what all educated and/or sane observers have long pointed out, he's still clinging tightly to the widely-dismissed idea that Saddam and Bin Laden were allies.

--"There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaeda ties," --

---

Blix weighs in with a note of sanity.

Hans Blix spoke shortly after "presidnt" Bush's momentary--but short-lived--attack of honesty. Among other inteligent comments, Blix likens the behavior of Bush and Blair to medieval witch-hunters. He also points out the blatant hypocricy of the pair, who have met "where are the WMD?" questions with evasive answers about the search for evidence taking time: "The patience that they require for themselves now was not anything that they wanted to give to us," said Blix.

Nothing new...so Impeach the Bastard!

I haven't been motivated to sift threw the mountain of bad news out there in the past few days, so there's nothing new here.

Still, if you missed it the first time around, this Post a month or so back is worth reading: impeach Bush...two different movements you can participate in.

Ann Coulter flips out on the air.
PLEASE tell me you saw the CNN Q&A segment hosted by Jim Clancy just now (it just aired in Europe, anyway). Ann Coulter just absolutely lost control, pulled off her microphone and stormed out of the studio. This after she was asked a question about whether or not the right should be more inclusive and--rather than answering the question--responded by rattling off a jumbled tirade about Hillary Clinton and the Democrats railroading a "fine Judge...just because he MIGHT disagree with a 30-year-old Supreme Court decision". I only caught the last two minutes, which was lucky, becasue if I'd tuned in earlier, I would have surely turned away in disgust and missed the fun.

Even before storming out, Ann looked like a wreck and was fidgeting and scoffing and smirking sarcastically the whole time. Really, she made Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly look balanced and measured! If you didn't see it, check it out and get the transcript. It's sure to make for great blogger news!

Update: Well, the transcipt is up, but it doesn't do justice to the performance. Of course, none of the smirks, snorts, eye-rolling or other juvenile antics are recorded, nor is Ann's beligerent tone, which she adopted when the host had the nerve to counter one of her statements with some actual evidence from US soldiers ("Excuse me, Ann, but I have spoken to...") From that point on, she did nothing but make sarcastic quips and didn't even try to answer the question posed to her. Most of it, unfortunately, just appears as "(crosstalk)" in the transcript.