September 13, 2002


: They hate America to the core. They have no feeling for their fellow man, just because they belong to a different race or creed. They cheer on murderers so that their student loans might be wiped out. They are a wretched lot.

Damian is right--Salon deserves to die.
Posted by B. Preston at 05:18 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


has just gotten weirder. It seems the three men may have been hoaxing the threat to make America "cry on 9-13." But they did blow through a toll booth. And were driving a car with tags that weren't registered to it. And copped an attitude when the police wanted to search the car--that did have explosives residue in it.

Fog of war...
Posted by B. Preston at 03:56 PM | Comments (14) | TrackBack


: Relevant, which several months back published an article of mine, comes out with a clear-eyed piece on the need to take out Saddam.

Sadly though, scroll down and read the comments posted. Too many Christians are just knee-jerk peaceniks these days, having no understanding of the need to sometimes meet evil with force.
Posted by B. Preston at 03:36 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


probably won't be a big part of the solution to Iraq--because it's big part of the problem.
Posted by B. Preston at 02:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


' blog column links the JYB today. Thanks, Joanne.
Posted by B. Preston at 01:08 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


with the World Trade Center site? I say rebuild it, towers and all (with, possibly, anti-aircraft guns on top). If that's your opinion too, go here and say so.
Posted by B. Preston at 01:05 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


: Iraq responded predictably. Bush today said he's "highly doubful" that Saddam will meet US demands. And here in the US, the Democrats are still hedging:

Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota said on Thursday there would be no rush to a congressional resolution. Bush has asked for one before Congress adjourns in October.

Daschle said before Congress votes, lawmakers need answers about how a conflict in Iraq would affect the war on terrorism, what regime would replace Saddam if he is ousted, and whether the international community will back the action.

So let's see...the world wanted the US to get multilateral, and we did with a vengeance. Bush gave the UN exactly what it had been asking for, though not what it really wanted, by making it accountable for seeing to Iraq's compliance. And on the homefront, the Dems had been hemming and hawing on Iraq, arguing that the administration hadn't "made its case." Now it has, and the question of Iraq will now become a political issue this fall--which, as the most compelling question before the nation, it should be.

This president seems to be the master at giving his opponents exactly what they wish for, with a twist that turns their wishes into curses.
Posted by B. Preston at 12:39 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack


situation looks interesting. I think this actually illustrates why we don't need a formal TIPS system--just give people easy ways to get in touch with authorities, and if we see or hear something suspicious we'll do the rest.
Posted by B. Preston at 10:54 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


: His UN speech is already altering the political landscape in Europe.

French President Jacques Chirac has proposed a new U.N. resolution that would authorize the use of force if Iraq refuses to admit weapons inspectors, and Italy's Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi says "the use of force cannot be ruled out." Spain, Portugal, Holland and Denmark are also signaling their readiness to stand by America, and Eastern European countries such as Poland, the Czech Republic and the Baltic states are discussing offering specialized forces like chemical warfare and medical teams.

The President's UN speech also managed to isolate Germany's Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, who's been sharply critical of Bush and US policy lately, by seeming to endorse the war position of his center-right rival in the upcoming elections.

Not bad for a dumb cowboy.
Posted by B. Preston at 09:34 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 12, 2002


Baltimore City Police Commissioner Ed Norris (who was instrumental in Rudy Giuliana's New York clean-up before coming here) was just on local TV. He confirmed that the men arrested did have equipment that they were using to create false IDs. Without saying it outright, Norris indicated that though the men are currently being held on immigration violations, there is probably much more to their story. I suspect we'll be seeing stories about this for weeks, maybe months, to come. Here's what the commissioner said:

"I think we have a little more than visa fraud," Norris told WMAR-TV and other television stations in an interview yesterday afternoon at police headquarters.

"I'm suspicious of these gentlemen," Norris told the stations. "If they were able to be held, I wish they would have been held."

Several of the 9-11 hijackers lived in Baltimore suburbs in the months prior to their suicide attack, so the area does have some history as a host to terror cells. Stay tuned.

UPDATE: Two of the men have already been released. Baltimore police protested, citing suspicions that the men may be terrorists. The Feds allowed the release when the two made their paltry $5000 bail, citing the fact the they hadn't done anything more than violate their visas.

Neither had most of the 9-11 hijackers. Until 9-11. These idiots never learn.

You have here a group of men of Middle Eastern origin, living in a sparsely furnished apartment. Their neighbors all describe the men as unfriendly and not engaging. One of them gets arrested for repeatedly threatening a local family. When the police arrest him, they find lots of disturbing items in the apartment, from computers that seem wired to produce false IDs to Arabic literature about jihad, to photos of US landmarks. Given all this, why was their bail set at $5000? And why were two of them allowed to walk? At a minimum, their bail should have been set much higher--like $500,000 or more each. Deportation proceedings should have been initiated for all visa violators. But two are already walking the streets, with more probably on the way.

Homeland security? Doesn't exist.
Posted by B. Preston at 11:09 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack

FINALLY has has gotten the attention it deserves. Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone was using its services to raise funds via a pop-up ad . This is the kind of stuff the good senator was linking himself with:

On one of its pages, reproduced a picture of Bush talking on the phone on Sept. 11, and sponsored a contest for the best caption indicating what Bush may have been saying.

The first entry in the caption contest has Bush saying: "But Dick, I soiled my pants when I learned about the attacks so please just let me come back to Washington for a change of underwear."

The 30 other published entries are similarly derogatory.

Republicans, in a rare display of backbone, demanded that the senator remove the ad and repudiate the site's content, which he has. Site founder Bob Fertik says he'll "research" to see whether there's a legitimate complaint, adding that he doesn't see anything disreputable about the site. I suppose not, considering it's his site.

(thanks to Chris)
Posted by B. Preston at 04:25 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

9-11 +1 FROM SPACE

: Reader Mark Rice sends in this link to IKONOS satellite views of the WTC site and the Pentagon, taken before and after the attacks. They're stunning. They speak for themselves.
Posted by B. Preston at 04:12 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


: Remember all those stories about the New York schoolboy who predicted the WTC attack a week beforehand? According to reporter Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, it's not just an urban legend. The boy's teacher, who heard and reported the prediction to authorities, stands by her account. The boy, who is Palestinian, also predicted that a plane would crash on Nov 12. That's the date American Airlines Flight 587 crashed in Queens, killing all 260 on board.

If this is true, al Qaeda's claws are much deeper in Arab-American communities than we think.

(thanks to Dave)
Posted by B. Preston at 09:38 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack


: The US House is investigating the Oklahoma City bombing, examining with particular attention the possible Iraqi angle. No word yet if hearings will take place.

They should. There's too much smoke around the Oklahoma City bombing--warnings from Saudi intelligence, after-the-fact inspections by Israeli intel, multiple witnesses who place bomber Tim McVeigh in the company of Middle Easter men in the days leading up to April 19, 1995--for there to be no fire there. McVeigh and Nichols were guilty, but it appears they had help
Posted by B. Preston at 01:22 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 11, 2002


: The old Kennedy mystique has taken some dents this year. First, there was the whole Micheal Skakel business, but he wasn't running for office--just running from the law. There were, as of a week ago, three Kennedys running for office, two of them in Maryland.

Andrew Cuomo, not a Kennedy by blood but married into the Kennedy horde, rolled up his campaign for New York governnor last week because...well, because no one actually wanted him to become New York's governnor. Bummer for him, but good for New York. That's one.

On primary day here in Maryland, Sept 10, Maryland Delegate Mark Shriver, nephew of Bobby Kennedy, took his kid into the voting booth with him to help cast his vote in a very close primary. The kid, apparently the wisest of the clan, voted for Shriver's opponent. Though Shriver got to get a do-over (what is it with Democrats and revoting, anyway?), he still lost the race. Later, while greeting voters ouside a retirement home with his mum, yellow jackets swooped in to protest Kennedy socialism, stinging the pair a few times (there were no serious injuries). That's two.

The third is Maryland Lt Gov Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, daughter of Bobby Kennedy. She outspent her Democrat primary opponent, 2300-to-1, yet the opponent managed to get more than 20% of the vote. And while voting in the primary, Townsend managed to tick off the polling judge (also a Democrat) by bringing an entourage worthy of Caesar into the polling place. By nightfall, the Townsend campaign was in damage control mode, arguing in a press release that the dozen or so aides and hangers-on that she trailed into the booth didn't threaten to disenfranchise any voters. No, it didn't. It just made the third Kennedy's candidacy teeter a little more.

With her Republican general election opponent Bob Ehrlich reportedly polling as high as 55% percent among Jewish voters and around 20% among black voters, November may allow me to type in the following phrase:

"That's three."
Posted by B. Preston at 11:28 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


: ABC News investigators were able to get depleted uranium, dress it up to look like a pipe bomb, and sneak it into the United States from points abroad, including Istanbul--the known hub of the nuke black market. Had it been the real thing in the hands of terrorists, another big chunk of New York would no longer exist.

Homeland security? Doesn't exist.
Posted by B. Preston at 10:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


The arrest of a Moroccan-born immigrant who'd been threatening to burn down a local family's home has led to the arrest of 5 more Middle Easterners who were living with him, none of whom could produce valid ID, and all of whom were apparently in the US illegally. So far, all the cops will say is that the men are being held as illegal aliens, but...they had equipment that could be used for making fake IDs, and one of the men had a couple of fake IDs on him. And according to ABC:

ABCNEWS has learned that the police raid also turned up dozens of passports, phony IDs, photographs of New York's Times Square and Union Station in Washington, D.C., and notebooks filled with Arabic writing and literature on jihad. Police are also said to have found two computers with links to a Web site called, which links to 1,700 flight schools.

Meanwhile in Charm City, I had the distinct displeasure of driving home through some sort of "peace protest." People who were apparently connected to a series of large, grand old churches I pass everyday were out in force on the sidewalks, holding signs saying things like "Give peace a chance" and "Peace is Patriotism." At first I was merely curious, then slightly annoyed. By the time I'd gotten home, and passed a few hundred of these people including a priest and a nun who were holding signs with a big pagan ankh on them, I was enraged. I was never more angry at my fellow Christians, or felt less of a connection between their faith and mine. I wanted to jump out of my car and try and talk reason with them, explain to them how non-negotiable are the demands of our enemies. But having tried that several times over the past year, I knew how futile it was. So I stayed in my car, and drove on. But while in my U2-filled canopy, I hit upon a dastardly plan to show them the stupidity of their ways.

The way to teach them reason would be to just jump out of my car and kick somebody's a$$. Severely. Preferrably an old guy, defenseless against a healthy 30-something, holding one of those signs and sporting the look of self-satisfied smugness so common to peace-niks. Of course, I'd make sure my target was surrounded by healthier, younger types, who would be sure to pull me off the guy and beat me pretty good in the process.

Then I'd say to them "What about giving peace a chance?" Of course, with my newly broken teeth, peace would sound more like "peath." And they'd say "You mugged the guy. He was standing here, minding his own business, and you just jumped out of your car and wailed on him. We're calling the cops."

And I'd say "What about peath at any cost? That's what'th on the thign he wath holding. If he really believesth that, he thould thtand there and take it, and you guys thould've made thure he did." And they'd say "The hell with that. We're pressing charges. And we're suing, too. You're toast, dude."

And I'd say "You mean, my buthting on thith old guy ith worthe than a bunch of fanatics killing 3,025 innocent men, women and children, and promithing to kill more? You're thaying we thouldn't go after them, that we thould underthtand their reathonth for killing uth. What about me? Maybe I had a reathon to thmack the geezer. Maybe I'm poor and dithenfranchithed, or mad that the U-eth backed out of Kyoto and dethided to take it out on Denture Man. Did ya ever think of that?" ("Disenfranshised" is hard to say with broken teeth.)

They'd never get it, of course. Sail right over their head, that we were mugged and raped on 9-11 and had a duty to find and stop the perps before they do it again. They'd just dust off the old guy, slap the cuffs on me and keep singing John Lennon tunes.

Man, what a stupid world we live in. Probably a good thing I just kept driving.
Posted by B. Preston at 09:42 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack


: His Cabinet has been forced to resign, en masse, following a no confidence vote by the Palestinian Parliament. The Palestinians are apparently sick and tired of corruption and lying, and sending their children off to get vaporized for no reason other than to save Saddam Hussein. Go figure.
Posted by B. Preston at 09:32 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack


. Give 'em hell, W.

Actually, here's a rundown of what he really plans to do with his UN appearance.

Tony Blair is turning out to be one clear-eyed leader:

British Prime Minister Tony Blair told a labor gathering in Blackpool, England, that without force being behind diplomatic overtures, they were useless.

"Diplomacy is vital, " he said. "But when dealing with dictators -- and none in the world is worse than Saddam Hussein -- diplomacy has to be backed by the certain knowledge in the dictator's mind that behind the diplomacy is the possibility of force."

It's the old Reagan doctrine resurrected--Peace Through Strength. Who'd have thought a Labour PM would be its champion?
Posted by B. Preston at 08:49 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


, who has been heroic in recent years as a statesman capable of making peace with those who jailed him unjustly, deserves a full-frontal Fisking. He thinks the coming Iraq conflict is based on President Bush's "desire to please the arms and oil industries in the United States of America." He thinks Scott Ritter, who resigned his post as a weapons inspector to protest the Clinton Administration's feckless approach to Saddam, but has since done a full 180 on the danger posed by Iraq, is credible. Ritter hasn't been in Iraq since 1998, and has accepted a $400,000 payment from an Iraqi source for a "documentary" he's allegedly producing about Iraq, but Mandela apparently doesn't see a connection there.

Mandela's also doing a Jesse Jackson move. From the Q & A:

So you see this as a racial question?
Well, that element is there. In fact, many people say quietly, but they don’t have the courage to stand up and say publicly, that when there were white secretary generals you didn’t find this question of the United States and Britain going out of the United Nations. But now that you’ve had black secretary generals like Boutros Boutros Ghali, like Kofi Annan, they do not respect the United Nations. They have contempt for it. This is not my view, but that is what is being said by many people.

"Being said by many people..." That's the most cowardly way of levelling a heinous charge without having to back it up with facts--you just blame it on nameless "people." Reporters, especially those that work for the NY Times, do this all the time to beat up on some Bush policy they don't like. If you're going to call us all racists, Mr. Mandela, grow a spine and do it like a man--own up to it, don't blame it on "many people." By the way, we helped people of color in Somalia (and got such wonderful, heartfelt thanks for it), and helped people of color in Haiti, and helped Muslims in Bosnia, not to mention protecting the Shiites and Kurds within Iraq from Saddam. Thanks for calling us names. It makes us soooo eager to help out in the future.

Mandela also has a problem with our Vice President:

But people like Dick Cheney… I see yesterday there was an article that said he is the real president of the United States of America, I don’t know how true that is. Dick Cheney, [Defense secretary Donald] Rumsfeld, they are people who are unfortunately misleading the president. Because my impression of the president is that this is a man with whom you can do business [I thought Bush was the man who was only concerned about pleasing oilmen and weapons peddlers--now he's being misled. What's the story here?] But it is the men who around him who are dinosaurs, who do not want him to belong to the modern age. The only man, the only person who wants to help Bush move to the modern era is Gen. Colin Powell, the secretary of State. [Would it be imprudent to point out that Powell is pro-war? Probably.]

I gather you are particularly concerned about Vice President Cheney?
Well, there is no doubt. He opposed the decision to release me from prison (laughs). The majority of the U.S. Congress was in favor of my release, and he opposed it. But it’s not because of that. Quite clearly we are dealing with an arch-conservative in Dick Cheney.

He's obviously been reading tripe. I don't know about Cheney opposing Mandela's release--if it's true, Cheney was wrong on that one. But that in and of itself doesn't make Cheney a terrible racist (which is what "arch-conservative" means here). I know it's not PC to point this out, but Mandela's African National Congress had flirted for years with Soviet-style communism before and during Mandela's incarceration. His imprisonment was unjustified, but there was reason to be concerned about the people around him. That Mandela rose above all that while South Africa's president was a credit to him. He had become a great man. Now that he thinks America--not Iraq, not al Qaeda, but America--is a threat to world peace, he's showing signs of senility.
Posted by B. Preston at 08:41 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack


is dead. He was 69 years old.
Posted by B. Preston at 08:19 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


: After President Bush's UN speech tomorrow, Gen Tommy Franks' Central Command will start moving elements to a base in Qatar. This has to be giving Saddam--and the Saudis--nightmares.
Posted by B. Preston at 08:18 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


chose to commemorate 9-11 +1 with this nonsense. Reporter Walid el-Gabry has a problem with the way the US responded to 9-11:

In June, there were raids on Brooklyn's Yemeni community by armed FBI officers and Immigration and Naturalisation Service officials. The FBI has placed Arabic-speaking agents in Arab neighbourhoods and, in March, $2m (£1.2m) in federal funds was set aside to expand Neighbourhood Watch schemes into spying. In another parallel with the McCarthy era, a website - - invites people to join the Department of Justice's terrorism prevention operation.

Well let's see...Yemen is a known hotbed for al Qaeda and its sympathizers. That's where the USS Cole was nearly sunk, as I recall. The FBI should place Arabic-speaking agents in Arab neighborhoods, both to find terrorists and to better separate them from the innocent. What should the FBI do--put in Spanish-speakers, or French? Neighborhood Watch is one of the most innocuous ways we citizens can take part in the war. It's totally voluntary, cost-effective and non-intrusive. If Arabs want to be seen as helpful, they should be among the first to get involved in Neighborhood Watch. And how is getting more eyes and ears tuned to finding actual terrorists among us akin to the McCarthy era? It isn't, but throwing up the McCarthy flag has often been the refuge of scoundrels who just won't countenance criticism.

But to Walid, it's all the Jews fault anyway:

It soon became apparent that Israel was hijacking Bush's campaign for its own ends. I was puzzled to see Benyamin Netanyahu, the disgraced former Israeli prime minister, invited to address Congress in April. He had appeared on numerous talkshows in which he equated Yasser Arafat with Osama bin Laden and asserted, unchallenged, that Muslims hold an implacable hatred for western civilisation and, by association, Israel, because it is a beacon among despots.

Interesting use of words, there, don't ya think. It isn't radicals hijacking Islam (and airplanes), but Israelis hijacking our foreign policy. And Benjamin Netanyahu, disgraced? I'd say Netanyahu has been vindicated by the past year, not disgraced. If Walid thinks Bibi's statements have gone unchallenged, he hasn't been paying attention. What have Ted Rall, Noam Chomsky and Susan Sontag been doing for a year, if not challenging the ideas of people like Netanyahu? And Israel is a beacon among despots. It is the only place in the Middle East where both Arabs and Jews can have full civil rights, can hold public office and lead a normal, productive life without having the heavy hand of government oppression always on their back. Israel is one of just two nations in the Middle East that allows Palestinians full citizenship--only one of the Arab states does, Jordan, and only because the Palestinians are the ethnic majority there.

El-Gabry's article is a highly selective reading of recent history, twisted to fit his anti-Jewish worldview. It's a shame the Financial Times gave him such a huge platform to deliver his poison.
Posted by B. Preston at 08:09 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack


that pulled into the Newark/ Port Maine terminal showing elevated levels of radiation and harboring "suspicious sounds" in its hold has been ordered back out to sea until the Coast Guard can assess its cargo.
Posted by B. Preston at 07:49 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


: While we're rightly lamenting the loss of so many one year ago, we should also remember those killed in the line of duty since. Doc has done yeoman's work to put together the list of US military members who've died in this conflict so that you and I can remain free.
Posted by B. Preston at 04:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


: A week or so back, I dashed off a little piece of alternate history, which basically examined what the world would've been like had the US of A gone into a spiral of apology as a reaction to Pearl Harbor. It was actually an angry piece, one of those that took all of 20 minutes to write because it just came pouring out of me in a rage. Once posted, it garnered little reaction, which I expected.

But...a blogger caught it, liked it and sent if off to a professor at his university. That professor shared it with a freshman class of his, and to a student they all missed the point. They thought it was a real clipping that ran in a real paper on Dec 7, 1942. Every one of 'em.

Among other things, this is a devastating critique of the educational "system" in our country. Are students today even taught history? If they were, they'd have known that England hasn't been invaded since, oh, around 1066. Has any one of these students ever heard of William the Conqueror (other than as Monica's pet name for Bill)? And what about reading comprehension skills? Would FDR have said "Whatever" or talked about his obsession with mojo?

Our educational system is a God(less)-awful mess. When our little one is of age, we're home-schooling.

(via Unsullied and Undismayed and Joanne Jacobs)
Posted by B. Preston at 01:25 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack


that won't just add to the noise today? What can I do that won't dishonor 3,000 who died a year ago today in a senseless act of cruelty and hate?

How similar is this day to that one? The weather is the same, the air is as crisp, the sky is as clear and blue. This morning my alarm didn't go off, so I was late getting up and late getting into the office. A year ago today, that simple morning disaster meant the difference between life and death for thousands. To me today, it meant sitting here a few minutes later than usual.

We are at war now, not because we love violence and death, but because we love life and peace. For us, today, the path to peace winds through horror and pain. But walk it we must, because we have no choice.

Walk on. That is the task of the living. Walk on.
Posted by B. Preston at 09:34 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack

September 10, 2002


: Another atheist is using his daughter as a weapon against faith, this time to try to get ecumenical prayers banned from a 9-11 memorial service in Chicago. Clint Harris says his 6-year-old shouldn't have to say prayers at a "religious service." Problem for him is that the service is privately funded, the prayer is interdenominational, and he has the choice to attend or not. He choose to attend, and sue the city.

And he lost, as he should've. Hopefully the court will make him pay for bringing such a frivolous suit.
Posted by B. Preston at 05:20 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack


Jeff Cooper thinks that Bush's efforts to keep collective bargaining etc out of the Homeland Security Department is "union busting." He says that like it's some kind of problem.

I say that if that is the design, go for it. We don't need to turn our nation's security over to union shops who'll tell us to file six forms for every one change we'll want to make in the department's structure and capabilities. We certainly don't want to create a union shop ethos where the average security department workers' loyalty is the the union head first and the country second. And we don't want to create thousands more unfirable Federal employees. Letting unions creep into Homeland Security pretty much guarantees that it'll become a bloated, ineffective bureaucracy. Well, it'll become even more of a bloated, ineffective bureaucracy than it would be without unions.

We should look at Homeland Security as an agency similar in mission to the military. The military's mission is to defend the United States from all enemies foreign and domestic; Homeland Security's mission is to keep enemies from getting here in the first place, or when they are found here to foil their plans. The military can't unionize for all sorts of very good reasons, not least of which is to keep personnel focused on the tasks that the military does without putting layers of union bs in the mix. Homeland Security should be kept non-union for similar reasons. It needs to be a flexible, mission-oriented agency. Allowing unions in will make it antagonistic toward the government and distract from its central mission, which is defending you and me from terrorism.
Posted by B. Preston at 05:06 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack


what the other was doing seems to have contributed as much to the intel failures of 9-11 as any other single thing. The CIA knew that two Saudis were al Qaeda members. The FBI had an informant in San Diego who rented rooms to two Saudis. The FBI never asked "Hey, who are the new guys you're bunking with?" and the CIA never checked into the guy renting the room.

That's right, the FBI could've had two of the 9-11 hijackers, Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi, under surveillance as early as 2000 if they'd followed up on their informant's associates. If the CIA had told the FBI who the two were. But it never happened.

The Homeland Security Department is supposed to fix this sort of problem. Let's keep Congress' feet to the fire so that it does.

(thanks to Dave)
Posted by B. Preston at 04:51 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack


: The NY Times may not be the most negative media gun firing against war with Iraq. From USA Today, via ShopTalk:

Conservative columnists have taken The New York Times to task lately for supposedly drumming up opposition to an invasion of Iraq in its news coverage.

But a study by the Center for Media and Public Affairs shows that, overall, the three broadcast networks have been slightly more negative: 72% to the Times' 71%. The study of 85 nightly news programs and Times front-page stories from July 1 to Aug. 25 found that 80% of stories on ABC's World News Tonight were negative about an invasion, compared with 76% on NBC Nightly News. The CBS Evening News was most balanced, with 56%. "It's not just that the Times is negative, it's that the media are negative," said the center's director, Robert Lichter.Washington Post Writers Group columnist Charles Krauthammer is not surprised. "It's well known that the networks take their agendas from the front page of the Times. You can't breathe air without knowing that." (USA TODAY)

Which means while you're lining the bird cage with Krugman, you might as well tune out Tom, Peter and Dan.
Posted by B. Preston at 02:38 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 09, 2002


. Anyone clicking into the JYB for pics of Monday Night Football's Melissa Stark--and there have been more than a few today--probably aren't getting what they're after. Think of it as a courtesy link.
Posted by B. Preston at 11:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack


: War skeptics should just go read this piece before making any more inane arguments about what the US did decades ago, or any other such distractions. As for the notion that Saddam is a secular leader (as opposed to an Iranian-style mullah):

Saddam himself may be a secularist, with his Ba'athist movement having the same Marxist-socialist roots as Nasser, but his eye is on power.

In today's world, the route to power isn't Ba'athist but Islamist. Saddam has made it clear that he intends in his madness to be the leader of the Arab world. This requires him to be the leader of the Islamist movement whose goal, clearly stated and hideously demonstrated, among other incidents, in New York City last September 11, is the eradication of the West and its values.

Go read it all. It's worth it.
Posted by B. Preston at 11:07 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack


that the US government doesn't listen to the Vatican when forming foreign policy.
Posted by B. Preston at 10:49 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack


, after six weeks in Japan (and for me, six weeks of a return to bachelorhood), so the free ice cream will be a bit light for a day or two.

Yes, I did manage to watch the debacle in Houston last night. Sigh. Only twice in NFL history has an expansion team won its opener, the 1961 Vikings and now the 2002 Houston Texans. While I'm happy for Houston and will be a fan of the Texans, do the Cowboys really have to suck so bad on offense, again, that they can't even beat a cobbled-together team consisting of a few aging stars, lots of has-beens, several scrubs and a rookie QB from Fresno State? Apparently the answer is yes, the Cowboys do have to suck that bad, again. It's going to be a loooooooong season with Quincy Carter at the helm. If he would have thrown on target just a couple of times, the Cowboys win. No, it's not all his fault (the defensive strategy made no sense, and the offensive scheme failed to adjust once the Texans' weakness on the left side became glaringly apparent), but Carter just doesn't have the accuracy we Cowboys fans had become accustomed to when Troy Aikman led the offense. On his worst days, Troy could outgun Carter. Heck, I think I could outgun Carter.

In important real-world news, al Qaeda ops interviewed and confirming that they were behind 9-11 may have slipped, referring to Usama bin Laden in the past tense. The al Qaeda planners also referred to an original plan for 9-11 that included attacking nuclear power plants, but was changed because they somehow thought it would get out of control. I think that's a warning, or at least they want it to come across as such. They want us believing that they're capable of going nuclear in some way in the near term. All the more reason to find them all and kill them, down to the last flea-infested beard.

Also, thanks to InstaPundit for the link. What a pleasant surprise.
Posted by B. Preston at 01:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

September 08, 2002


: Former Secretary of State George Schultz weighs in on Iraq. For those of you who keep wondering why the US thinks it has the authority to bomb or topple Saddam, read this piece now. Really--I'll wait, because it's important that we all get up to speed here. Iraq has been flagrantly violating the Gulf War cease-fire, which among other things actually allowed Saddam to stay in power in exchange for complying with the UN weapons inspection regime. For those of you who think "international law" should be the trump card here, well, if you really believe that then Saddam must go. He's been operating outside international for years, and the law--the cease-fire--was formed in 1991 deliberately to allow a resumption of the Gulf War should Saddam get out of line. If he isn't toppled or brought back into line now, the whole concept of international law may not matter much anymore, as other despots are watching to see what happens to the world's most dangerous scofflaw.
Posted by B. Preston at 12:30 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack


have a blog, or at least a blog about them. As a transplanted Texan who's had a hard time getting my fix of insider scoops the last few seasons, this blog is a Godsend. Fitting, that it's also about God's team. Why'd you think there was a hole in the top of Texas Stadium?

I just noticed the blog is on The Dallas Morning News' website. Hmmm...a major news outlet with its own blog. It's becoming a popular idea, isn't it.
Posted by B. Preston at 12:01 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack