Michael Moore says has Nick Berg footage

Michael Moore says has Nick Berg footage

He isn't saying what the footage covers, but he has about 20 minutes of unused footage with Nick Berg (before he was killed in Iraq). [LINK]



Belated congratulations to Michael for winning top prize at Cannes for "Fahrenheit 9/11".

Wimpy White House spokesman Dan Bartlett called the film "outrageously false". You know it's got to be a provocative work of truth-in-art to get Dan's shorts in an uproar. I hope we Americans get to see it someday...no thanks to Disney.


Dan didn't think it was true and he's really pissed.

Which Monty Python character are you?

Which Monty Python character are you?





What Monty Python Character are you?

John Kerry Reassures U.S. Military

John Kerry Reassures
U.S. Military

"Human conscience, when it works, is the most divine thing in our small segment of the universe.

In today’s world, conscience marks the difference between tolerance and terror.

We do not have to live in fear or stand alone."

The Promise:

"As president, on my first day in office, I will send a message to every man and woman in our armed forces: This commander-in-chief will ensure that you are the best-led, best-equipped and most respected fighting force in the world.

You will be armed with the right weapons, schooled in the right skills, and fully prepared to win on the battlefield. But you will never be sent into harm's way without enough troops for the task, or asked to fight a war without a plan to win the peace.

You will never be given assignments which have not been clearly defined and for which you are not professionally trained.

This Administration has disregarded the advice, wisdom, and experience of our professional military officers. And often ended the careers of those who dared to give their honest assessments. That is not the way to make the most solemn decisions of war and peace. As president, I will listen to and respect the views of our experienced military leaders – and never let ideology trump the truth.

This is not a partisan cause. Patriotism doesn't belong to any one party or president. And if I am president, I will enlist the best among us, regardless of party, to protect the security of this nation."

-John Kerry

[LINK]

The transcript of John Kerry's speech in Seattle is here.

Important points from speech:

- First, we must launch and lead a new era of alliances for the post 9-11 world. A return to the principle that guided us in peril and victory through the past century –alliances matter, and the United States must lead them. Never has this been more true than in the war on terrorism.

- Second, we must modernize the world’s most powerful military to meet the new threats. Kerry had a message for every man and woman in our armed forces (see quote above)

- Third, in addition to our military might, we must deploy all that is in America’s arsenal -- our diplomacy, our intelligence system, our economic power, and the appeal of our values and ideas. The single gravest threat to our security is the possibility of lawless states and terrorists being armed with weapons of mass destruction.

- This country is united in its determination to destroy those who employ lawlessness and terror.

- As President, Kerry will launch a global initiative to fully secure the materials needed for nuclear weapons that already exist and sharply limit and control future production.

- Fourth and finally, to secure our full independence and freedom, we must free America from its dangerous dependence on Mideast oil. A new national security policy demands an end to our dependence on Mideast oil. We have been constrained by their control over the oil that fuels too large a part of our economy. This is a weakness that this Administration has ignored – and one that must be addressed.

- We will not do business as usual with Saudi Arabia. They must take concrete steps to stop their clerics from fueling the fires of Islamic extremism.

Rush Limbaugh on Al Gore

Rush Limbaugh on Al Gore

...our adversaries and our enemies would be badly mistaken if they actually believe that Gore speaks for this nation, because he doesn't. I speak for more of this nation than Algore does, and I will say it on this program. Otherwise, why is he bothering to mention my name?

[LINK]

Mr. Limbaugh must understand that he is a very popular talk-radio show host. He has a very devoted following. Many people put their faith in him, whether they should or not. He might tell them NOT to put their faith in his credibility, but he must realize they will do so, anyhow. The devoted listener hears more of Rush than they do of their elected leaders. He speaks to them on a daily basis for hours at a time. I find Rush to be very irresponsible with many of his daily statements. For this reason, I think concerned and responsible Americans should call upon their Conservative representatives (and the media who interview them) and ask them to get a public debate started about the damaging statements made by people who rule the American airwaves (and the markets that support them).

If Conservative/Republican representatives fail to respond to citizen pleas, we can assume they support the irresponsible comments made by fellows like Rush and his ilk.

I'm glad Al Gore threw down the gauntlet.

Rush Limbaugh is mistaken...delusionally mistaken...in his thinking that Al Gore doesn't speak for this nation. This nation is comprised of millions of individuals. This is a democratic Republic..does Rush forget? Al Gore is speaking for millions and millions of people with no loud talk-radio voice. I happen to think Rush would be shocked to learn there is a massive percentage of Americans who not only wholeheartedly disagree with his ideology, but are heartily grateful that men like Al Gore are speaking intelligently on their fund-poor market-silenced behalf.

Money talks...we know it.

Rush talks....a lot.

I think Rush talks so much and so loudly that he forgets there's anyone else with whom he shares this American nation. Would that make him a selfish ball of hypocritical greed in a constant state of denial? Perhaps.

Hey, adveraries! Hey, enemies! Listen up!
Al Gore speaks for me and probably the majority of American voters. After all, the majority of Americans voted for him in 2000 and probably
would do so again, given the opportunity.

Hey, adversaries! Hey, enemies!
Ask yourselves why Rush Limbaugh cares so deeply about what you think.

Shallow America prefers politicians on the Zombie-side

Shallow America prefers politicians on the Zombie-side

From Maureen Dowd's column in today's N.Y. Times, she says of Al Gore's speech:

John Kerry's advisers were surprised and annoyed to hear that Mr. Gore hollered so much, he made Howard Dean look like George Pataki.

[LINK]

This was a very funny line by Maureen. I laughed out loud, in spite of my often-too-serious self.

They don't want voters to be reminded of the wackadoo wing of the Democratic Party.

There is a difference between strongly making your case and "going wacko".

The problem I have with Maureen Dowd (who, even though she kids, she kids not) is that she speaks for most of today's mainstream media. If our politicians do not act with an air of mind-numbing gravitas (to the point of Zombie-like droning), they are categorized as nutballs.

(Although you'll notice, in the same column, Maureen puts John Kerry in the "mind-numbing" category.)

I did not see Al Gore's speech yesterday, but I did read it (twice).

I'll tell you this: everything he said needed to be said. He spoke the truth. Perhaps Mr. Gore spoke the truth with too much emotion for some. The shame is that the mainstream prefers style over substance. It's such a shallow attitude. Often, I find it no wonder Americans are seen as shallow fools to those outside our borders.

Perhaps it isn't Maureen Dowd's job to take a serious stand on such topics. She loves to play on personalities. Yet I feel compelled to point out the fact that Maureen is just one reflection of the problem with our dreadful state of democracy today. She hasn't done all that much good for the true American spirit in her role as a very-visible (albeit silly)political commentator. I recall in 2000, when she made Gore seem like a goofy boob at every opportunity.

Al Gore knows the truth about America. I read it in his words from yesterday's speech. Without some form of public support in the media, the average American will never hear his words of warning. What a pity that Maureen (and others like her) do not appreciate a decent American's raising of issues when they have the opportunity to intelligently discuss those important issues in their professional writings. Instead, they talk about the politician's demeanor and their hair.

The slick zombie liar is preferred. It's no wonder we have no Thomas Jeffersons or Ben Franklins offering public service anymore. We do have them...we just don't value them or bring them to light.

The most ironic part is that Maureen Dowd often compared Gore to a stiff tree trunk. Now that he emotes upon the truth about the disgrace to which America has been brought, he's a 'wackadoo'.

Rush Limbaugh agrees with Maureen Dowd:

Algore, this whole speech, he went nuts. He's flailing around wildly there.

[LINK]

At least Rush goes on to actually talk about the issues that matter (to him).

General Zinni: The 10 Mistakes

General Zinni: The 10 Mistakes

At Salon.com, Gen. Anthony Zinni, former CENTCOM commander, lists the catastrophic blunders made by the Bush team that led to the Iraq nightmare. Gen. Zinni delivered these remarks at the Center for Defense Information's board of directors dinner on May 12, 2004.

The mistakes include:

-Misjudging the success of containment
-Flawed strategy
-Creation of false rationales
-Failure to internationalize the effort
-A series of bad decisions on the ground

Gen Zinni said:

"No one in the region felt threatened by Saddam."

"The idea of creating Jeffersonian democracy overnight in Iraq is almost ridiculous."

"If you find yourself in a hole , stop digging."

"If I'm a battalion commander down there in the middle of Fallujah or Najaf, I need more than some kid who happens to be of Arab descent and speaks Arabic that I dragged over there and probably doesn't speak the dialect. I would like to have five or six of these guys that I went to school with, that I know, that would be there, that would be seconded there for me as planners, advisors, and to help me in these situations."

Gen. Zinni offers productive ideas as well as criticism.
This is a must-read.

[LINK] If you don't subscribe, you will need a one-day free pass to read the entire article

Chalabi and Judith Miller

Chalabi and Judith Miller

In the Salon.com article titled Not fit to print, James C. Moore discusses how Ahmed Chalabi and the Iraq war lobby used New York Times reporter Judith Miller to make the case for invasion.

To be fair to the N.Y. Times, even the "most seasoned of correspondents and the most august of publications, including the Times and the Washington Post, appear to have been as deftly used by Chalabi as were the CIA, the Department of Defense and the Bush administration". Judith Miller is the only journalist whose reliance on Chalabi became a matter of public debate.

Moore claims that an article by Miller and Michael Gordon that appeared on the front page of the New York Times on a Sunday morning in September 2002 titled "Threats and Responses: The Iraqis; US Says Hussein Intensifies Quest for A-Bomb Parts" couldn't have done more to advance the political cause of the neoconservatives driving the Bush administration to invade Iraq.

The White House had a perfect "deal" when it came to Miller. Chalabi would provide the Bushites with the information they needed to support their political objectives with Iraq, and he would supply the same material to Miller. Chalabi would tip her on something and then she'd go to the White House, which had already heard the same thing from Chalabi, and she'd get it corroborated by an insider she'd always described as a 'senior administration official.'

I'm not certain if it was arrogant ignorance or some greed or delusional heroic motive or downright intent to deceive the American public. All I know is that George W. Bush should have known better and his administration should have known what they were doing when they gave such enormous credence to Chalabi, whose own self-interest (and past indication of poor character) was totally invested in getting the Americans to invade Iraq.

The fact that the N.Y. Times failed to point out that much of its reporting was dependent on Chalabi and Iraqi defectors (while the Bushites apparently sucked up Chalabi's lies and distortions) is inexcusable.

Where was the intellectual discipline?

At the Drudge report, Matt is saying that Howell Raines is "assailing" yesterday's mea culpa. I don't see where he'll have an intellectual or moral leg to stand on.

[LINK] You will need to obtain a free one-day pass if you do not subscribe)