I saw this AP article in the Jerusalem Post, and have been unable to find it anywhere else, not even on the main AP news page. It's about the American response to the killing of our soldiers this past week. The title is "US Pounds Tikrit," and it contains quotes such as this:
That's not the bias I'm talking about necessarily, although the author took great pains to make the soldiers sound like your stereotypical "Rambo" types:
That's still not the subtle bias I caught. That's rather overt. You'd have to be dead to miss the undertone of this article. But towards the end, this is the part that really caught my attention:
See, here's the thing. I'm coming down with a chest cold right now, and I've been coughing a bit this morning. Maybe you could all help me out a little here: How can you tell a woman's cough from a man's cough? I'm afraid I've never really heard anything but coughing, no matter who is doing it. Tone? Meter? Duration? Do women cough on a higher scale than men? Really? Because frankly, before reading this AP story, I'd have thought that a cough is a cough is a cough.
So how is it the AP reporter knew that was a woman coughing? You really have to hand it to the reporter. Or maybe it's another case of media bias. The story sounds much nastier if the mean ol' Rambos are aiming their weapons at a poor, sick woman. permalink
Yet another example of how terrorism pays: The terrorists actually admit what they're doing, and the world ignores it.
Those who insist that Arafat can't stop the terrorism are not merely wrong: They're idiots. But the idiots in the EU and in high positions in the President's cabinet, as well as the State Department, apparently are just as stupid.
The thing that amazes me, and that Arafat has been cackling about for years, is that the terrorists are able to tell us exactly what their aims arethe destruction of the state of Israeland most of us choose to ignore or disbelieve them. (By the way, watch 60 Minutes Sunday night. They're running a piece on how much Arafat has stolen from the PA.)
May I say it one more time: Die, Arafat. Die quickly, die painfully, but die soon. permalink
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is lobbying his cabinet to get them to vote for a hostage swap with Hizbullah, where Israel will release 400 terrorists in return for the bodies of three soldiers, as well as Israeli businessman Elhanan Tannenbaum, who was kidnapped after being lured out of the country on a shady business deal.
Caroline Glick says it's a bad, bad idea.
In the meantime, Hizbullah set eight bombs on the Israeli side of the Lebanese border, hoping to kidnap some more soldiers as well as murder as many as they could.
Wow, that's one hell of a threatening strategy: Protest to the UN when you have a problem like this:
I'm going back and forth on this.
I think that making this deal will absolutely encourage Hizbullahand other terrorist organizationsto kidnap more Israelis. I suppose we can only wait and see, because it seems clear to me that Sharon is going to win the approval he wants, and even if he doesn't, will make the swap. The US is urging him to do it to "increase regional stability." Someone has to explain to me how rewarding terrorists does that, because I'm missing the point. permalink
I haven't finished my response to the Kim du Toit essay on what he thinks is a real man. But many others have chimed in, and it's time to link a few of them.
Donald Sensing rebuts the essay.
Eric says Kim is a bully.
Michele responds by writing about the way she's going to raise her son. And the comments to this post have many people's responses to the essay, particularly to the excerpted part in the post. That's where my comments to date are.
Ilyka has her say here. And here. And via Ilyka, I found, another Master Of Juvenile Scorn whom I am proud to welcome to the elite club with this response to Kim's essay. And may I say: Damn, Phil. (By the way, this earlier entry proves that Phil deserves the title. And this one is a laugh-out-loud moment.) Catch Me If You Can is going on my reading list.
Kate's isn't as venomous as you might think.
Spoons chimes in.
James Joyner has the most balanced response in the blogosphere.
Matthew Yglesias routs out the liberal troop response.
Alex updates his essay on what it means to be a man.
Shell says it isn't about gender, it's about ideology.
Glenn Reynolds weighs in, links to a few of the debaters, and publishes some email.
And I think that's enough for now. That's a pretty long reading list. permalink
I know there are a lot of things going on in the big, wide world. Terrorists are blowing themselves up in Mecca. CBS has kowtowed to the critics and pulled the Reagan miniseries (wow, the Salt Lake Tribune is really pissed about it, too). A leaked memo is showing Democrats willing to use pretty sensitive national issues as partisan politics (I'm shocked, shocked, I tell youno Republican would ever do anything like that, no, never). The Russians are helping Iran build nuclear reactors and insist they won't be used for anything but nuclear power.
But I just got back from a surprise farmer's market trip with Sarah and the twins. Seems that because of the extended warm weather, the growing season was extended. And after a stop at the local health-food market, I found the prize of the day: Chestnuts.
They're an acquired taste, and my brothers and I acquired it as small children. My father loved chestnuts. We love chestnuts. Every year about this time, we scan the stores in our neighborhoods, trying to find the first chestnut of the season. When I lived in NJ, we'd call each other up as soon as we found a store that sold them. One year I discovered that an Italian deli in Montclair imported Italian chestnuts even before the supermarkets, and bought enough for all three of us before making the call.
And speaking of making the call: The timer's going off. The chestnuts are finished cooking. I'll be back later. permalink
Just don't say that Gene Roddenberry didn't warn us all years ago. Yeah, you thought that Star Trek: The Motion Picture was fiction, didn't you?
I think not.
And that's not all.
Look, I may still be around in 2020, but you never know. Kids, it's all up to you. Whatever you do, don't let V'ger come to be! Do it for the children! Oh, wait, that means you. Then do it for yourselves! permalink
An interesting article in Ha'aretz details an IDF policy that at first glance seems to be rather trigger-happy and, in fact, was reported as such by a reservist. But it's not at all what it seems.
The pals, of course, and the pro-palestinian press, report all such incidences as the IDF shooting palestinians, making it appear that the Israel army attacks innocent bystanders on a regular basis. But these are neither innocent nor bystanders. In the paragraph above, the observers were part of a team that intended to murder soldiers. They are not simply "palestinians," as in, "The IDF shot to death xx palestinians today" you see in most news stories on such incidents. The "palestinians" are part of the terrorist teams, and their deaths are casualties of the terrorist war that has been waged on Israel all these years.
On the other hand, it's fascinating that Israel also has soldiers who object to the practice and follow a proper recourse for their objections (as opposed to, say, reservists who simply refuse to follow orders).
Keep this article in mind the next time you read a Reuters story about the IDF killing palestinians who were "near a military outpost" or some such thing. permalink
The Carnival of the Vanities is at Wizbang this week. You have got to check it out, if only to see Kevin's really clever categories. The theme is voting, and there are buttons!
Michele is trying not to have her brain explode in this post, where I had a few things to say in the comments, but I'm pretty much done now. Theories unsupported by statistical evidence are my least favorite part of the blogosphere.
However, Michele has also responded to Kim's post, and I say to Michele: Good for you. DJ's got a great mom. (And by the way, my best frienda womanowns two Rhodesian Ridgebacks. They're hers, not her husband's. I'll have to tell her she's a real man.)
James Joyner goes on my links page partly due to this post, which shows a balance rarely seen elsewhere in the blogosphere. Come to think of it, I need to reorganize my links. Maybe I'll do that later today. Clean house, clean weblognot much of a difference, although I'd rather clean the weblog than the apartment. Of course, if I'd read this post first, I'd probably have changed my mind. Before the signature block, indeed. (By the way, I'm up to over 4,000 referrers and counting from James' post containing links to pictures of women bloggers.)
Lair Simon has tons of cat pictures on his blog since he got that digital camera for his birthday. This is a really cute one of Piper. He's also got partners now. Check out Milo's post on the end of the Democratic party. (As for his conclusion, I say: Phew.) This, however, is my favorite of Lair's recent posts: Lair's version of the new UN security changes ordered by Kofi Annan. It's a hoot. permalink
First, I owe a ton of people email. My apologies, and I'll try to get caught up tomorrow. (That means you especially, Francesca, but dang, that's a complicated question you asked.)
A few email hints: Please do not title any email to me "hi." That's one of the major spam subject lines. If I don't recognize the author, I delete it automatically. And I'm awfully suspicious of most email titled "re:" if I didn't send it first. I know you mean it as "In regards to Post X," but I may have reflexively deleted it by the time I realize it was legit.
Oh, and here's a big, big tip for free: If your email is titled "up yours," or something similar, I see no need to read it. Ever. If you're going to insult me, you really have to be far more clever than that. permalink
Now that I've pissed off most of the blogosphere, I'm outta here for the afternoon.
It's another beautiful day out, and I'm off to meet the G family over at Maymont for a picnic. Ooh, the last of the corned beef, Sarah, Jake, and a pair of two-year-olds. (I shall refrain from attempting to whup them upside the head when they misbehave.) This will be a good day. permalink
Kate linked to two stories last night, the responses to both of which irked me. The first was an approving link to this entry by Serenity where she has no problem with a bus driver disciplining a child by slapping him upside the head. She holds that the bus driver was in the right because the child was, in her authoritative judgment, "a brat."
As a matter of fact, no. None of my teachers were allowed to strike a student for misbehaving. In fact, there was a point in high school where my entire English class held its breath as we were sure that we were witnessing the end of our teacher's career, as he seemed about to slug one of the students who was disobeying him. But he held himself back and shouted at the student to get out of his class and go to the principal's officewhich was the right thing to do, in spite of the student's disrespectful behavior. And trust me, he had a great reason for wanting to punch the student.
The point is not that children are undisciplined. The point is that a bus driver does not have the right to discipline a child by hitting him. No, smacking the child upside the head isn't abuse. It's got a legal definition, though: It's called assault. No matter what your opinions on hitting children, when a person who is not the child's parent hits him, it's illegal and just plain wrong. (And by the way, Serenity? No way do I want you near a child of mine, not with that attitude. Or anyone else's child, for that matter. Funny, I manage to teach a bunch of active nine- and ten-year-olds without ever having the urge to smack any of them, no matter how they're misbehaving.)
The commenters for the most part think that the punishment was too harsh, or shouldn't have been leveled at all. Let's see: A teenager put his money into a soft drink machine and got two cans instead of one. He told his friends about it. They took advantage of the situation. A teacher saw the student, told him that what he was doing was stealing, and said not to tell any more students. The student disobeyed the teacher, got caught, and was suspended.
I'm missing the part where I'm supposed to feel sympathy for the child. He stole. He was told he was stealing. He was warned not to steal again. He stole again. He was punished.
In Serenity's piece, we have a lecture on how spoiled children are due to overpermissive parents. In this example, we have people saying that the child should not have been punished for his actions, and that the school was overreacting. (This boy's father wants the school to apologize to his son, by the way.) Funny, I thought the right side of the blogosphere was the law-and-order side, and the left side was the overly permissive side.
What, you mean there are examples of both viewpoints on both sides of the aisle? Color me amazed. permalink
Jeff Jarvis' report on a recent conference on journalism states the reason why, in spite of the demonization of journalists by many in the blogosphere, they are not the enemy:
Mind you, we're not talking about the Robert Fisks or the Ted Ralls or the Bill O'Reillys here. We're talking about the majority of journalists who do try to present an objective story.
One of the things that I see throughout the blogosphere is a childish sense of jealousy over professional journalists. The attitude is, "Why do they get paid when I do the same thing they do, only better?" The simple answer is that they worked long and hard to get where they areeven the most hated (on the right side of the blogosphere) opinion writers like Paul Krugman and Maureen Dowd. You simply do not get to write for the New York Times by accident, and with no previous credentials.
One of the reasons I like Jeff Jarvis is because he is a professional, both in credentials and attitude, and he has tried to explain the professional journalism side of things to bloggers, and vice-versa. I think it's a good attitude to emulate, rather than the adversarial attitude that is so rampant. (And is, frankly, the mark of the amateur.) The jealous barbs get rather tiresome after a while. permalink
I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you, that television docudrama scriptwriters and producers are making up facts about its subject. Why, that's never, ever happened in the history of television or film! It's almost as if Oliver Stone didn't exist.
There's a reason why TV executives changed the label "docudrama" to "A moment of truth film." It's because television no longer presents the facts. What surprises me is how many people seem surprised by this. There are, as of post time, 98 articles on Google News about this subject.
However, I do find it absurd that people are complaining that James Brolin can't portray Reagan properly because he's married to ultra-liberal Barbra Streisand, which presumably makes him ultra-liberal, too. (I wouldn't know, I've never read a thing about Brolin's politics.) Get real. Or was the actor who portrayed Hitler in the recent miniseries unable to portray him properly because he wasn't an anti-Semitic psychopath?
By the way, I expect all the Reagan sympathizers who are outraged over the CBS miniseries' inability to stick to the facts to stop criticizing Jewish groups who say that Mel Gibson's making up facts that portray the Jews in a bad light for his upcoming film, "The Passion." Goose, gander, etc. permalink
Tulkarm is a town in the West Bank that a lot of terrorists come from. A BBC reporter discovered it's also a town where palestinians are murdered as "suspected collaborators."
(The 70 deaths, by the way, are added to the total number of palestinians killed since the Intifada began. So are deaths as the result of "work accidents," or bombs that explode prematurely.) This being the Beeb, however, there must be an anti-Israel slant to the article.
There's a whiff of that slant.
Do they pin these deaths on the Israelis? Let's find out.
Charles says: Never trust anybody who goes by the nom de guerre Abu. Meryl says: How can you tell when a palestinian is lying? His lips are moving.
Now let's see if Abu is lying.
Whoops. They have photographic evidence of torture. That trumps Abu's claims of tea and confession. However, this being the Beeb, they have to put an anti-Israel spin on things. Tellya what, I'm tired of quoting them, here you go: Blahblahblah, Israel's fault, blahblahblah, collaborators get killed, blahblahblah, Israel's fault.
The angle of this piece is that many so-called collaborators are murdered without any respect to the rule of law, but the reporter ends the article blaming Israel for the death of actual collaborators. Yeah, whatever. War is hell, yadda yadda yadda. The solution, as always, is simple: Stop sending terrorists to murder Israelis, and the Israelis will stop needing collaborators. Everybody lives, it's a win-win. permalink
It's heading to the mid-eighties today, and this looks to be the best of the last of the warmest days of the year. I have talked Heidi into agreeing to go driving topless, so we will wait until Sorena gets out of school, get her, and the three of usyes, that's two adults and a minor childwill drive topless in my Jeep.
Go ahead, fellow bloggers, have fun with the linkage on this one, and by the way, Colin: Your comments are hosed and my email to you bounced, but there's an even more suggestive thing you could have said in your post, and it has to do with an alternative word for cat.
Y'all behave while I'm gone. I'll be back with more pictures, perhaps. permalink
The IDF and Israeli security forces are doing a phenomenal job, under the circumstances.
That would be Arafat's personal terrorist group. And look at this: A father who did not want his son engraved in Arafat's personal hall of martyrs:
Don't destroy this man's house. Send a different kind of message. See if it makes a difference. permalink
Hold onto your hats, folks, the pals are mad at the U.S.:
Sure, that would be why Saddam Hussein was paying suicide bombers' families up to $30,000 upon delivery of the Semtex to unsuspecting Israel civilians. That's why the pals are so pissed off that Husseintheir patronhas been unseated. That would be why Yasser Arafat is a near-billionaire. Because the pals don't care about money.
No, not at all. There are no palestinian terrorists in Iraq teaching the Iraqis how to make the right kinds of suicide bombs, none at all.
Okay, that one overloaded my fisking skills. The sheer, utter gall and hypocrisy of it made my brain hurt.
Have you checked the nearest lampposts for bodies?
Wah, wah, wah, we're insulted, we're humiliated. It's getting tiresome, kiddies.
Way to find the culprits. Blame Israel, then say you can't bring them to justice because they're not yours. Like we haven't heard that one a hundred times before.
Doesn't Colin Powell ever get tired of hearing this shit? Just oncejust once, I'd like to hear him say, "Hey! Morons! We're on to you, who you think you're foolin' here?"
Well, hey, when pigs fly. permalink
Everybody should hang around with teenagers from time to time. It went over 80 degrees in Richmond today, and for the third day in a row, I went driving around enjoying the hell out of our Indian Summer in my Jeep. Today, I brought along a little extra fun company.
I taught school this morning. Four of my five students earned enough points and claimed their prizes (the fifth won his two weeks ago), and a few asked if the eighty-point prize is still available. It is, I told them as we were walking to the carpool line. It's a ride in my Jeep, top down, for a duration of a minimum of 30 minutes and includes one highway, if their parents permit. Two of them said their parents had already said yes. Then my fourth-graders watched jealously as Mara (my teacher's aide) and I quickly put down the top (it went up before bed last night due to a report of light rain), got in, and drove off. Spent some time at Mara's house with her, her brother, and parents, then asked if she'd like to try driving the Jeep. She's got a learner's permit, and gee, let's think. A sixteen-year-old has the choice of sticking around the house on an 80-degree Sunday afternoon, or going for a drive in a topless Jeep. So, off we went, with Sam in the back packing his soccer equipment. The plan was to drop Sam off and drive around a while longer.
She's a pretty good driver, but was a bit nervous driving my car, and had to be urged to take it up to top speed on the highway. I treated Sam and Mara to a dose of New Jersey driving etiquette when some asshat blew his horn at Mara for having the nerve to obey the speed limit signs on an exit ramp (and she was really obeying those signs after I told her that if you go around a curve too quickly in a Jeep you can roll it over). I simply told the asshat what I thought of him and offered him (verbally) the one-finger salute. HOKE30 just kept on driving. We don't know if he heard me. I think, though, my stock went up just a bit higher in Sam's estimation. (Then again, I am the only teacher they know who drives them around in a Jeep without a top, so my stock's pretty high up there to begin with.)
It turns out even the R's cat liked my Jeep. He likes to sleep on top of their cars, and jumped onto mine and got a bit of a surprise. Whoops, where'd the roof go? Oh, well, something new to play in!
Last night on the way home, I stopped at the supermarket near dusk. It was dark when I finished shopping, and the moon and the stars were visible. There's something wonderful about being able to see the moon and the sky while you're driving, just by glancing up.
Today on the way home, it was just turning cool enough to need the heat, but I found myself wanting to keep driving for another couple of hours, blasting the radio and belting out the songs, enjoying the last warm days of the year, and watching the moon rise over the windshield.
I love my Jeep. permalink
Last week's blogs are archived. Looking for the Buffy Blogburst Index? Here's Israel vs. the world. Here's the Blogathon. The Superhero Dating Ratings are here. If you're looking for something funny, try the Hulk's solution to the Middle East conflict, or Yasser Arafat Secret Phone Transcripts. Iseema bin Laden's diary and The Fudd Doctrine are also good bets if you've never been here before.