So now that what will be the final resolution has been passed, and with a US victory in securing freedom to act regardless of what France and the rest of the SC desires, the spin is starting to come fast and furious.
For instance, there’s this piece in the New York Times by Elaine Sciolino, who ardently tries to make it seem that the resolution was a joint France-US effort of harmony and cooperation, characterized by deep mutual respect and for each other in seeking an optimal solution, and more importantly, a roughly equal place of prominence in the decision making. Her desperation in trying to set up this house of cards is rather embarrassing, and she makes numerous claims that are happily and obliviously preposterous to anyone who didn’t have their head in some fanciful cloud of Franco-American puppy dog love.
FOR eight tumultuous weeks, the French and the Americans played a magnificently elegant diplomatic game. They feinted. They sparred. They shared their feelings and pledged their trust. But they never threatened. And they never leaked the secrets of their talks.
I’m not exactly sure how Sciolino knows all these in-depth details of how happy and civilized these negotiations were, especially since neither side “shared the secrets of their talks.” Without further evidence, an equally plausible scenario is that France and the US had constant screaming matches at each other and were shattering empty liquor bottles against the walls of their trailer, they were merely decent enough to send the kids to the neighbors while it was going on.
Of course France is going to characterize the situation as Sciolino does above, whether or not it was actually true (and I think there is a preponderance of evidence that it wasn’t). Suppose France was completely against the resolution that eventually came about, but was eventually cowed into acceptance because they realized that if the US was really determined to oust Saddam, Bush and Co. could do it happily without the consent of the UN, and certainly without the approval of the French, leaving them stripped naked on the stage of global affairs, having had their last vestements of international importance torn from their shivering, weak body. This way, Madame France gets to keep some of her clothes on. It doesn’t mean that everyone isn’t perfectly aware of what’s under there, just that no one has to acknowledge it in public, if they feel so politely inclined.
In the end, just days after elections in which President Bush’s party solidified its control of Congress, the two sides suddenly reached agreement on a resolution in the Security Council giving Iraq “a final opportunity” to disarm peacefully or face “serious consequences.”
That’s a funny coincidence, isn’t it?
Chirac was crossing all his fingers and some of his toes in hoping that the American people would repudiate Bush and his policies on Tuesday, and maybe knock some sense into the reckless cowboy. Instead, the President grabbed a victory that many people, history included, were not expecting. When that didn’t happen, Chirac decided that he was in fact never going to be able to influence Bush, not after being roundly approved of by both Congress and the American public (indeed, in reality, Chirac would not have been able to dissuade Bush even if Tuesday hadn’t gone so well for him, but I think he was still working off that belief until recently).
So “the two sides suddenly reached an agreement” to the extent that one side essentially capitulated and accepted some token cosmetic changes to make it sound as if the SC plays a much larger role than they would, with language that leaves the US completely free to do as it intends, at worst requesting that it listen to the complaints of its “allies” (as if we haven’t gotten used to that already over the last 14 months).
The six-page measure leaves the United States free to attack Iraq without Security Council authorization. But it accommodates the French demand for a two-stage process in which the Security Council has the chance to assess the seriousness of any Iraqi violation and to consider how to respond. In another compromise that would declare Iraq in “material breach” of its United Nations obligations, the United States changed the wording to allow United Nations inspectors to determine whether Iraq had violated its obligations.
Again, the Security Council can assess the situation merrily to its heart content. They’ll just be doing that while the US is gassing up its bombers and greasing the axles on its tanks.
They can decide to attack Saddam. They can decide to not attck. They can decide to discuss it for another month or so. Or they can decide to put Jello down their pants and dance on table-tops singing the French national anthem sex with male and female dog. No matter what they say or what further resolution they decide to pass, it will not affect what the US does in Iraq one whit. This is why I think it’s possible that Bush will discreetly inform the UNSC that he intends to start the military campaign on day X, and the SC will dutifully pass a resolution authorizing, advising, perhaps even mandating that action begin on day X to respond to Saddam’s refusal to follow the stipulations for inspections, and we will be once again greeted with editorials like Sciolino’s telling us how important and vital the warm, mutually respectful Franco-American relations in the SC are. The French and the rest of the SC will do this to retain their veneer of importance. Bush will do this either out of genuine magnanimity, or perhaps just cuz he gets off on throwing France a bone every once in a while.
That sounds crude and overly harsh doesn’t it? But there’s still some good, rational sense there. For Bush, it is doubly rewarding. On the one hand, he gets to look like the generous consensus builder, by letting others play an important role, and on the other, he only reinforces through his generosity the fact that he is the one in a position of real power, and France et al get to participate at his say-so. Caesar did the same thing when presented with those who had fought against him in the internecine wars of Rome, deciding to grant them clementia rather than have them executed. Sure, their lives were spared, but it was very clear that this happened at Caesar’s command, and throughout their entire life they and others were well-aware of this fact. Sometimes being nice isn’t really so nice as you might think.
At times during the negotiations, it appeared there would have to be a winner and a loser. French President Jacques Chirac made clear he detested the Bush doctrine, which said the United States would be justified in using pre-emptive force. He felt that only the United Nations had the authority to decide what to do about Iraq. Mr. Bush said that if the rest of the world didn’t have the courage to move against Iraq, the United States would do it by itself.
But from the outset, France and the United States were determined to stick together.
Ok, this just plain doesn’t make any sense, and I wish I was as clever as Lileks and could mock it appropriately, but I’m not clever, so you’ll just have to do with me simply pointing out the obvious point that the US telling France to piss off and going it alone no matter what criticisms or pronouncements or resolutions they breathlessly fire off is a mite short of the two countries sticking together like bosom buddies.
First, Mr. Chirac left open the possibility of military action against Iraq, even as he said the Security Council should have a late-in-the-game chance to disapprove of any use of force. Then, a few days later, in his speech to the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 12, Mr. Bush left open the possibility that he was willing to work through the United Nations as an alternative to acting alone.
What one has to believe in order to not condemn Ms. Sciolino as hopelessly naive is that she knows full well that this talk on both sides was diplomatic rhetoric intended to make it seem as if both sides were assuredly moving toward a mutual solution, each giving in considerable concessions in the spirit of multilateralism. The separate reasons why Bush and Chirac would each do this were already explained above.
The UN has enough translators that they are able to take a speech being made in any language and translate it into the language of each member of the General Assembly, but what they could really use is kind of program set up whereby they remold the diplospeak into plain language, without all the articifices that diplomacy requires. If they had such a thing, Chirac’s pledged openness to a military solution would go something like this: “I’d rather cut off my own ear than go into Iraq and forfeit all the billions of dollars that France has invested there over the last 10 years, during which time we hoped to capitalize on the US’ refusal to deal with Saddam and Iraq as long as they were in breach of UNSC resolutions; not to mention the fact that I and millions of my fellow Frenchmen are deathly afraid that all the unassimilated Arabs from our former colonies who are now living in France will suddenly decide to take a holiday from civility and turn every inner city area in France into Los Angeles, circa April 1992.”
And in turn, Bush’s apparent willingness to forego any of kind of military action would sound something like this: “We’re going in there, no matter what that frog Chirac wants. Sure, it would be nice if we could be absolutely sure that Saddam had completely disarmed and stopped supporting any terrorist organizations (assuming there was any chance in hell of him doing that in the first place), but that could only happen if we moved to Fantasyland, USA, and I’m staying put right here.”
For France, the bargaining that followed was not just a matter of pursuing its principles, but a chance for the center-right government of Mr free gay zoo story. Chirac to negotiate directly and at the highest levels with the United States - which it did, passionately and seriously. By accepting the tough approach of the United States on the need to rid Iraq of its weapons programs, the French helped shift the emphasis away from the initial American demand that Saddam Hussein be removed from power.
Again, Sciolino accepts the delicate diplomatic veneer for the core reality of the situation. She seems to do this a lot. Maybe she’d be interested in buying a bridge or two from me. I’ve got the deeds to some good ones.
The American emphasis was always the same. Always. In effect, the French convinced the Americans to shift their position from saying, “We are going to do X,” to “We are going to do X, but only if the sun rises tomorrow. We swear. Scout’s honor.”
Sciolino conveniently forgets that it is the French who had made any of kind of non-trivial shift in their stance, since for most of the time they were committed to not allowing any kind of military action outright no matter if Saddam lines up each weapons inspector and shoots them in the back of the head. They wanted a further debate initiated at that point, and they wanted the US to be completely restrained by what decisions that debate came to. Now the debate is still there, but it’s utterly meaningless. It’s a discussion completely for show. Letting the kids hold their model UN and make lots of important and grave-sounding speeches while you make preparations for war isn’t much of a concession, in my humble opinion.
As for the Americans, they get almost all of what they demanded: an understanding from every major power that whether the world likes it or not, they stand poised to invade Iraq unless Mr. Hussein takes the unlikely step of disarming.
Exactly. How Sciolino thinks this is anything short of American unilateralism, with the rest of the UNSC going along merely for appearances, is utterly beyond me.
Throughout the process, both the Americans and the French recognized that diplomacy works best when it is backed by force, so they weren’t working at cross purposes after all.
This is simply not true.
France has made it abundantly clear that it believes in force only up to the point that it is never actually going to be used, and that is no force at all. You can have all the weapons you like, but when you have demonstrated that you’re not going to use them come hell or high water, they might as well be paper weights. I think it is perfectly believable to posit that, were Chirac the dominant force in the SC, the negotiations and repeated failed inspection cycles could last literally 10 years into the future, easy. That is assuming of course, that Saddam’s nuclear programs wouldn’t have already come to fruition by then, which they likely would have, and then all bets are off.
If the diplomatic part of the equation succeeds and Saddam Hussein disarms, the Americans can still claim a victory for their forcefulness (the regime has changed - isn’t that regime change?), while the French can claim credit for their wisdom.
Oh dear.
“Isn’t that regime change?”
I suppose we could also see if Saddam will give us some quarters for a dollar. That would be even easier, and isn’t that “regime change” as well?
“It was essential for France to play this diplomatic game because we had to save the United Nations,” said Claude de Kemoularia, a former French ambassador to the United Nations zoophilia and women and dogs.
No you didn’t.
All you did was save the United Nations from putting out into the open what everyone knows already: that it is an irrevelant organization, at least as far as threats to security go.
“So we should be happy about the outcome. The best diplomacy is when both parties are convinced that they have succeeded in presenting their points of view and everyone leaves the room satisfied.”
A slightly less ideal outcome that you will have to live with in this situation is when one party realizes that it has no ability to restrain the actions of the other party, and that the best (but by no means good) solution is to act as if you’ve wrung some sort of concession from the other side and declare a victory.
off a bunch of secretaries and other office workers who probably agree with them on the war anyway will further theireconomic stupidity, especially when their ideas would do such a better job of it by themselves. Case in point:
I see. Did you talk to this "everyone" at your International Socialist Organization direct action planning seminar or
we despise no less the coward and the voluptuary. No man is worth calling a man who will not fight
Do you mean the Muslim world that celebrated 9/11, saying the US deserved it all along? Or perhaps you mean the Muslim world
on the civilized world. And when I resort again to that frame of mind, it will be because I realize, intellectually and
cutting-edge performance art group impersonating real anti-war folks, as the whole ordeal seemed to approach parody. No,
economic stupidity, especially when their ideas would do such a better job of it by themselves. Case in point:
What it does not mean however, is that this suddenly signals that we are going to be going after China, Saudi Arabia, Cuba
Well I'm far far far too petty a person to do that.
Saddam is so hot to get his grubby hands on nukes is enough evidence of aggression. What's he going to do with them once
That is, until this morning. Now I'm glad to say that I've gotten over getting over it, and am thoroughly pissed again.
Why are you still here?!
course grew out of the experience of 9/11.
"Standing in the foyer of the Bounty Hotel, people were just walking in, blood dripping off them, burns to their face, skin
which is all about the biggest threat to the security of all companies: their own employees.
trying to get an education
them into a thin paste of protein on a cave wall, to wipe out every last vestige of the disgusting stain they have left
Heh. Didn't Nostradamus write something about "a bespeckled plague rising in the West..."?
...but there's no shame in being a follower when those you're following make such damn good points.
of the mass moron movement.
During that protest, my girlfriend had to take a midterm in Wheeler auditorium and had to step over the bodies lying in
And exactly how do you go from no "final proof" to there being no evidence of impending aggression? The very fact that
military action to counter the Soviet threat was not possible, because of their equal capacity to destroy us through
Finally, long after the fad has grown tiresome, everyone's attention turns to another scrap of dogma for the next decade.
without end is causing traditional friends of the United States to
So seeing as how we've got massive approval from the House of Representatives and similar support in the senate is likely,
Mr Mitnick even had to get permission from his probation officer to use a computer to write his book, The Art Of Deception,
In your face, Space Coyote!
Hey, didn't there used to be a city where this smoking crater is?
we could go and stop the Soviets and all their expansionist hijinks, but then we'd like, have to go all the way over to
But it's not really fair to denigrate someone's ideas just because they themselves come from an organization riddled with
of the mass moron movement.
a careful, precise argument, what point is there in engaging them verbally anymore?
And exactly how do you go from no "final proof" to there being no evidence of impending aggression? The very fact that
that continues to characterize the US as the Great Satan and preach jihad against all things Western? Oh I know, the Muslim
one of the most fad-driven enterprises imaginable. It produces a new catechism each decade, which everyone dutifully recites.
curiosity that trumps any sort of legal resriction placed on him, but it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that he's
So seeing as how we've got massive approval from the House of Representatives and similar support in the senate is likely,
President Bush says he wants to avoid "a future of fear." It's an admirable goal, but one hardly served by this new doctrine.
jerkwad I encounter, an order for them to be beheaded with extreme prejudice until the the point at which they are dead
"What I found personally to be true was that it's easier to manipulate people rather than technology," he said.
War, by three fellows that hail from Global Exchange. You know who I'm talking about. The folks that want to "build an
that has the temerity to look at us cock-eyed.
, "I don't believe the American people support this war. Everyone I've talked to is against it!"
of righteousness; and it becomes a very evil thing if it serves merely as a mask for cowardice and
vulnerability.
she can last 6 hours). I make this declaration keeping in mind that this does not imply a judgement on the Idiotarian
over the heads of the world's nations as threat so that he can act willy-nilly in whatever new adventure captures his
One of the great advances of the modern era has been the spread of the rule of law. This is the now common idea that
Now of course I'm sure that these open-toed folks have a flurry of perfectly well thought-out reasons as to why pissing
only be revealed as more useless than it already seems), there is right now a coalition prepared to go into Iraq with the
So I hereby declare myself Ayatollah Mustardah of Blogistan. From this day forward, I will call down, on any Idiotarian
Those people are especially useful when they have access to the core computer systems that hackers would otherwise struggle
of a lack of imagination or basic humanity; the fact that it's difficult for me to feel deeply for people suffering unless
that has the temerity to look at us cock-eyed.
why she thought there weren't more stories about protests going on in the news, "Well, because the media is corporately
obviously they have lost loved ones or friends."
However, several of the exchanges I have had have definately been with those you might describe as "challeneged" in
I finally went and did it.
psychopathic fancy without fear of retribution.
a terrorist and an envoy of Iran's supreme leader reportedly called for his death.
...but there's no shame in being a follower when those you're following make such damn good points.
At the very least, don't let me hear any of these things when you're standing in my presence, unless you want a faceful
A taste, just a taste...
And exactly how do you go from no "final proof" to there being no evidence of impending aggression? The very fact that
nuclear weapons. Containment was born out of a realization that we were effectively restrained by our lack of strategic
War, by three fellows that hail from Global Exchange. You know who I'm talking about. The folks that want to "build an
he is willing to act aggressively and recklessly and cannot be reasonably deterred and 2) is working to get and use nukes
University or Diversity
sloth, or as an instrument to further the ends of despotism or anarchy.
vulnerability.
Well, being the abject conformist that I am, I would like to welcome all new and oldcomers to my new blog, which will
I strongly suspect TR had access to some sort of time machine and traveled into the furture about a hundred years.
a terrorist and an envoy of Iran's supreme leader reportedly called for his death.
According to the president, "we cannot wait for the final proof" that Saddam Hussein's government is planning an imminent
again soon, didn't we?"
Diversity. More than motherhood, it is the one unassailable concept these days. Open any teaching publication, and you will
and make them wish that congress had instead passed a resolution authorizing military force against people
Many in the global community also distrust the Bush administration's expanding war aims. It is not easy for our friends around
join the majority of the world's nations in distancing themselves from Washington in a fashion not seen since the Vietnam War.
Now at this point, most people would just say, "let it go, and move on."
Containment and deterrence were responses to US weakness, you silly-headed dunderpate. It was obvious that using direct
I urge anyone in the bay area who has the time on the 16th to come as well and lend credence with your example to the
In theory, I was of course angry, but I had a vaguely detatched sense about the whole thing. A large part of that of
Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard at 12:47 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
threaten the United States, he said we must "assume the worst." Essentially, the White House is proposing that the
But anyway, right there you've got yourself eight nations total in the coalition, hailing from North America, both western
who has been deprived of food for at least 6 hours - sounds like an unusually cruel thing to do, I know, but I'm sure
who like to chant slogans and can't come up with any better rhyme than something that has to do with the number "four" and "war."
about equal probability.
Sorry folks, but slippery slope arguments don't hold water by themselves. We're going after Saddam because he 1) has shown
I see. Did you talk to this "everyone" at your International Socialist Organization direct action planning seminar or
anger that is so justifiable -no, demanded- by these despicable acts, but if that must be the case, then from on, I'll be
to get a good smack upside the head (or as I call it, a "hippie hello"), but that was apparently too much for the niggardly
Also, I've printed out and made a bunch of copies of some flyers from this site and will be passing them out.
way why we're doing all of this, and why, if they still choose to berate us about "root causes" and "birds coming home
going to be monitored so closely that I'd be surprised if he were able to put in a phony name at a porn site and not have
"Standing in the foyer of the Bounty Hotel, people were just walking in, blood dripping off them, burns to their face, skin
Mr Mitnick even had to get permission from his probation officer to use a computer to write his book, The Art Of Deception,
trying to get an education
Hey, didn't there used to be a city where this smoking crater is?
destroying the technological infrastructure of Western civilization again. And it's only 3 months away!
agree that [insert additional badly-forced car metaphor here]!
the real fault of that government or its citizens, or the West in general, or capitalism, or any other ridiculous boogeyman
Wheeler Hall last spring.
vaunted proof of yours. Then you could be really sure.
he revealed himself to be a seriously dishonest debater (that, or he was so stupid that it wouldn't be safe for him to
fact that these people are thugs, bullies and liars.
Please. I can't swing around a dead Saddam on a rope without hitting this argument these days. At bottom, it's a slippery
a representative of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was quoted as saying.
United States invade a distant country without any evidence of impending aggression.
However, several of the exchanges I have had have definately been with those you might describe as "challeneged" in
Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard at 09:13 PM | Comments (4)
I strongly suspect TR had access to some sort of time machine and traveled into the furture about a hundred years.
a terrorist and an envoy of Iran's supreme leader reportedly called for his death.
But it's not really fair to denigrate someone's ideas just because they themselves come from an organization riddled with
At the very least, don't let me hear any of these things when you're standing in my presence, unless you want a faceful
conflict.
Hesiod over at Counterspin Central is one such fellow. Not only with myself, but in his conversations with Den Beste,
something-really-awfuls, BlogSpot.
Please. I can't swing around a dead Saddam on a rope without hitting this argument these days. At bottom, it's a slippery
"The death of that man is a religious duty, but his case should not be tied to the Christian community," Shabestari,
by both Instapundit and Cold Fury (and probably by sundry others by now):
In fact, the idea of pre- emptive attack depends on fear. It presupposes insecurity and assumes we will always be threatened.
and that it wasn't fair for these people to stop them, the girl started literally screaming at her about selfish she was.
"to prolonged indulgence in luxury and soft, effortless ease, or to the deification of a warped and twisted sentimentality"?
we could go and stop the Soviets and all their expansionist hijinks, but then we'd like, have to go all the way over to
You mean everyone in America aren't like San Franciscans?
to really concern yourself with, except in a somewhat general, theoretical way.
a careful, precise argument, what point is there in engaging them verbally anymore?
computer systems.
I was already in a state of "moving on" and being "over it" before I even heard about the Bali attacks, with the result
My sentences, thus decreed, will be subsequently carried out by my elite brigade of Beheading Gnomes, whom I made up
course grew out of the experience of 9/11.
occurred, smashing the window of their hotel room.
you could see stink lines of self-satisfaction coming off her so that he could simply get to his job. She of course started
and eastern Europe, Australia and the middle east. Is that not multilateralism?
and you'll get diversity in the speech by the politician, in the one by the principal who welcomes him and in the one by
I strongly suspect TR had access to some sort of time machine and traveled into the furture about a hundred years.
it is shoved, in all its detailed horror, right into my face.
Kevin Mitnick will be able to use a computer again in approximately 3 months.
only be revealed as more useless than it already seems), there is right now a coalition prepared to go into Iraq with the
have democratically elected rulers I'm sure doesn't throw any flies into your ointment.
computer systems.
being the reaction described above.
Why are you still here?!
Don't you people ever get tired of just pulling shit out of your asses?
"Standing in the foyer of the Bounty Hotel, people were just walking in, blood dripping off them, burns to their face, skin
which is all about the biggest threat to the security of all companies: their own employees.
The Muslim world -- whose support is vital to any real effort to end the causes of terrorism -- is adamantly opposed.
faith at large, since many of them are peaceful, albeit intellectually stunted, people.
in words so much more exacting than even those who actually live in that time would be able to produce?
I wish that I could just be told "Hundreds of people died in a terrorist bombing today," and instantly feel the kind of rage
The BBC has a story about the so-called "master hacker", in which it does a good job of destroying the mythos that
The experience made me think of the instructions from all corners of the media after 9/11 that what we, as Americans,
find testimonials to diversity. Flip through any recent social sciences or humanities textbook and diversity pops up with
serves? As far as I can tell, all they did was take some people who were probably overwhelmingly against the war anyway,
Heaven forfend them not being on board with us!
You mean everyone in America aren't like San Franciscans?
owned," she pontificated, in that snotty "52% of my clothes are made of hemp which therefore makes me morally superior
Yes, well I suppose you're suggesting that we would be well-served to wait for this "final proof," then? Very well. I'll
You must be triple jointed to be able to twist words like that.
Also, I've printed out and made a bunch of copies of some flyers from this site and will be passing them out.
morally, that this is the right thing to do.
curiosity that trumps any sort of legal resriction placed on him, but it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that he's
Such as this quote by Teddy Roosevelt concerning his acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize, posted now
or any other simply crappy country in the world, because none of them satisfy both those propositions.
getting an education. When she tried to talk to one of the organizers after her test about how some people were just
support (in the small, mostly insignificant ways that are possible for one such as myself)
The article also points to this site, which maintains a running clock of how long it will be until Mitnick can start
about equal probability.
the real fault of that government or its citizens, or the West in general, or capitalism, or any other ridiculous boogeyman
, "I don't believe the American people support this war. Everyone I've talked to is against it!"
making a point of reading in depth about any such future atrocity to ensure that I don't allow myself to be instantly "over it."
Those people are especially useful when they have access to the core computer systems that hackers would otherwise struggle
I urge anyone in the bay area who has the time on the 16th to come as well and lend credence with your example to the
way why we're doing all of this, and why, if they still choose to berate us about "root causes" and "birds coming home
Stand up to these thugs This Wednesday, the 16th at noon, an apparent composite of the Students for Justice in Palestine
"Standing in the foyer of the Bounty Hotel, people were just walking in, blood dripping off them, burns to their face, skin
which is all about the biggest threat to the security of all companies: their own employees.
I suppose you mean that it's not "multilateralist" unless France says so?
faith at large, since many of them are peaceful, albeit intellectually stunted, people.
Either that, or I now have to admit the existence of clairvoyance.
democratically decided laws - - not the capriciousness of individual rulers -- should govern human affairs.
to the San Francisco federal building to protest the passage of Bush's resolution for action against Iraq.
I see. Did you talk to this "everyone" at your International Socialist Organization direct action planning seminar or
I guess not. The fact that the UN is anything but democratic since the vast majority of countries represented there do not
news editors of Cannel 7 to allow, as the segment ended right there.
Many in the global community also distrust the Bush administration's expanding war aims. It is not easy for our friends around
that has the temerity to look at us cock-eyed.
and the UC Divestment folks will be holding a rally for what looks like the primary purpose of protesting the fact that
coming off them. It was really a terrible sight," she said. "You could just hear people crying up in the Bounty foyer -
The book details the ways that employees can inadvertently leak information that can be exploited by hackers to compromise
Well I wouldn't be surprised if this Wednesday at Sproul there will be similar behavior, and I plan to be there. Maybe
"I said it's being taken care of, dammit. Mind your own business."
When they aired some actual interviews with the protesters, I started to honestly think they were part of some sort of
Another Australian tourist, 18-year-old Rachel Hughes, said she and her boyfriend had just arrived in Kuta when the blast
At the very least, don't let me hear any of these things when you're standing in my presence, unless you want a faceful
A taste, just a taste...
And exactly how do you go from no "final proof" to there being no evidence of impending aggression? The very fact that
I tried to present my ideas in an honest and truthful way, and not be seriously offensive, even when he acted in ways
Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard at 09:37 AM | Comments (0)
join the majority of the world's nations in distancing themselves from Washington in a fashion not seen since the Vietnam War.
University or Diversity
sloth, or as an instrument to further the ends of despotism or anarchy.
vulnerability.
Also, I've printed out and made a bunch of copies of some flyers from this site and will be passing them out.
Bush also spoke of an "international coalition" that would disarm Hussein. Bush knows the American public is loathe to
and the decisions to do so would based on (as in this case) measured calculations of the relative benefits and costs,
According to the president, "we cannot wait for the final proof" that Saddam Hussein's government is planning an imminent
I've been blogging since July 2005, and in that time, I've had a few inter-blog arguments with the folks on the other
Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard at 09:13 PM | Comments (4)
act such as this. In a few days or weeks, I'm sure it will subside to a colder, more focused resolution to continue to
that blatantly called for some rhetorical bitch-slapping.
agree that [insert additional badly-forced car metaphor here]!
If and when you find one, that means that I'll be perfectly willing to advocate an attack against them as well.
I see. Did you talk to this "everyone" at your International Socialist Organization direct action planning seminar or
have democratically elected rulers I'm sure doesn't throw any flies into your ointment.
news editors of Cannel 7 to allow, as the segment ended right there.
fact that these people are thugs, bullies and liars.
way why we're doing all of this, and why, if they still choose to berate us about "root causes" and "birds coming home
the Feds know about it.
During the last half of the 20th century, this principle was expanded internationally through the United Nations. The U.N.
which is all about the biggest threat to the security of all companies: their own employees.
I'll get a chance to ask why they've been glorifying images of Hamas murderers on their flyers.
Hey, didn't there used to be a city where this smoking crater is?
cutting-edge performance art group impersonating real anti-war folks, as the whole ordeal seemed to approach parody. No,
democratically decided laws - - not the capriciousness of individual rulers -- should govern human affairs.
I don't know about you people, but I'm already stocking up on extra food, water, and electrons.
To quote a boozed up, cynical and misanthropic individual whom I greatly admire: "Making fun of these people is like
But I am thankful that at least for now, I've been able to summon that deep-seated, personal wrath so appropriate to an
and make them wish that congress had instead passed a resolution authorizing military force against people
So welcome. If this is the first and/or only post you can see, it means I haven't imported my archives from Blogspot yet,
to roost," those sniveling, carping appeasers,
and the UC Divestment folks will be holding a rally for what looks like the primary purpose of protesting the fact that
weapons inspections in Iraq represent a good example of how the rule of law has been used, and can be used again, to avert
to get a good smack upside the head (or as I call it, a "hippie hello"), but that was apparently too much for the niggardly
the teacher trying to impress both of them.
destroying the technological infrastructure of Western civilization again. And it's only 3 months away!
Replace "powerful" with "crazy and armed with nukes" and you'd be right. Otherwise, your statement is nonsense.
No nation deserves to exist if it permits itself to lose the stern and virile virtues; and this
faith at large, since many of them are peaceful, albeit intellectually stunted, people.
Heh. Didn't Nostradamus write something about "a bespeckled plague rising in the West..."?
...but there's no shame in being a follower when those you're following make such damn good points.
At the very least, don't let me hear any of these things when you're standing in my presence, unless you want a faceful
the All Men Are Rapists self defense workshop? Surely that must be a representative sample of the country!
No nation deserves to exist if it permits itself to lose the stern and virile virtues; and this
nuclear weapons. Containment was born out of a realization that we were effectively restrained by our lack of strategic
about equal probability.
both at home and abroad, can go heartily fuck themselves, or jump off a cliff, or shoot themselves in the head. I don't
and the UC Divestment folks will be holding a rally for what looks like the primary purpose of protesting the fact that
Maybe I can't change the fact that I have to be intimately confronted with the death and pain in order to really feel the
vulnerability.
I'll get a chance to ask why they've been glorifying images of Hamas murderers on their flyers.
of constant uncertainty and increased insecurity where almost anything could lead to war.
lap dance.
by both Instapundit and Cold Fury (and probably by sundry others by now):
I've been blogging since July 2005, and in that time, I've had a few inter-blog arguments with the folks on the other
getting an education. When she tried to talk to one of the organizers after her test about how some people were just
they're done, hang them on his wall next to the framed heads of Iraqi dissidents and say to himself, "Well, I can check
superiority.
about equal probability.
he is willing to act aggressively and recklessly and cannot be reasonably deterred and 2) is working to get and use nukes
Wheeler Hall last spring.
making a point of reading in depth about any such future atrocity to ensure that I don't allow myself to be instantly "over it."
You must be triple jointed to be able to twist words like that.
something-really-awfuls, BlogSpot.
Please. I can't swing around a dead Saddam on a rope without hitting this argument these days. At bottom, it's a slippery
why she thought there weren't more stories about protests going on in the news, "Well, because the media is corporately
by both Instapundit and Cold Fury (and probably by sundry others by now):
In fact, the idea of pre- emptive attack depends on fear. It presupposes insecurity and assumes we will always be threatened.
the teacher trying to impress both of them.
that off my list of things to do. Now, on to learning how to square-dance."
I figured that was the way to go. But then I read this.
Sure, it'd be nice to be a leader...
Already, even if the UN thumbs its irrelevant nose at the idea of going after Iraq (and if it actually does, then they'll
Now at this point, most people would just say, "let it go, and move on."
vaunted proof of yours. Then you could be really sure.
I tried to present my ideas in an honest and truthful way, and not be seriously offensive, even when he acted in ways
50 Ways to Leave Your Folly Common Dreams, that goldmine of general silliness, showcases this piece, The Folly of Pre-emptive
In theory, I was of course angry, but I had a vaguely detatched sense about the whole thing. A large part of that of
So seeing as how we've got massive approval from the House of Representatives and similar support in the senate is likely,
President Bush says he wants to avoid "a future of fear." It's an admirable goal, but one hardly served by this new doctrine.
Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard at 09:13 PM | Comments (4)
Saddam will use these nukes when he gets them, whether that use takes the form of vaporizing a city or merely being hung
Shiite Muslim clerics in Lebanon and Iran have reacted with rage at the Rev. Jerry Falwell for calling Islam's prophet
Anyway, take the new site for a test drive. Take her easy on the clutch and go steady on the hills, and I think you'll
Don't you people ever get tired of just pulling shit out of your asses?
I'm going to be checking the weather channel for reports of snowflakes in Hell, but meanwhile you should go read it now.
satisfy you. I'd be much more amendable to the idea however if you were willing to be a personal eye-witness to this
to elicit empathy had been raised considerably since 9/11,
just now. Admittedly they do face significant challenges in carrying out their duties due to their imaginary nature,
In theory, I was of course angry, but I had a vaguely detatched sense about the whole thing. A large part of that of
not just "fear," as if we're going to indiscriminantly nuke the floor under our beds because monsters might be hiding there.
lying in order to gain information that gave him access to restricted systems.
needed now was healing, closure; in short, to "get over it" and "move on."
she can last 6 hours). I make this declaration keeping in mind that this does not imply a judgement on the Idiotarian
and make them wish that congress had instead passed a resolution authorizing military force against people
rivals.
to the San Francisco federal building to protest the passage of Bush's resolution for action against Iraq.
US: Italy, Australia, Poland, Spain, Qatar, Kuwait and, of course, Britain. I know it's hard to find out this kind of
conflict.
"What I found personally to be true was that it's easier to manipulate people rather than technology," he said.
Heaven forfend them not being on board with us!
slope proposition, claiming that because we go after Saddam, we'll suddenly be all aggro-ed up to obliterate any country
the Feds know about it.
looks like a green light, no?
Mr Mitnick even had to get permission from his probation officer to use a computer to write his book, The Art Of Deception,
and eastern Europe, Australia and the middle east. Is that not multilateralism?
them into a thin paste of protein on a cave wall, to wipe out every last vestige of the disgusting stain they have left
When they aired some actual interviews with the protesters, I started to honestly think they were part of some sort of
One of the great advances of the modern era has been the spread of the rule of law. This is the now common idea that
Now of course I'm sure that these open-toed folks have a flurry of perfectly well thought-out reasons as to why pissing
Wheeler Hall last spring.
And at most, UN weapons inspectors have delayed conflict by a few years, not averted it. In actualyity, I think they have
Those people are especially useful when they have access to the core computer systems that hackers would otherwise struggle
fact that these people are thugs, bullies and liars.
way why we're doing all of this, and why, if they still choose to berate us about "root causes" and "birds coming home
and the UC Divestment folks will be holding a rally for what looks like the primary purpose of protesting the fact that
last update : 7-2-2012
