"Aspirational" And "Fully Controlled"

From Government Foils Government Plot by Jesse Walker:

Bill Anderson highlights the most salient fact about the Riverdale Temple bombing plot, quoting a passage from a New York Times report:

A federal law enforcement official described the plot as "aspirational" -- meaning that the suspects wanted to do something but had no weapons or explosives -- and described the operation as a sting with a cooperator within the group.

"It was fully controlled at all times," a law enforcement official said.

Such stings are not unusual. The equally "aspirational" Liberty City 6 scheme of 2006, for example, would not have congealed -- to the extent that it congealed at all -- without the government's helpful informants. In the days before 9/11, agents provocateurs infiltrated militia groups; back in the '60s, they invaded the New Left. I doubt such entrapment makes anyone safer. But it does make people scared.

All of the links make for interesting reading. Episiarch wrote a comment that I really liked:

Let's see: completely incompetent plan, and the government gets in there, helps them along, and busts them. 9/11: insanely simple plan, achieves more than expected, and the government has no fucking clue.

Yeah, the government does an excellent job. Really.

Waterboarding Is Not Torture, Unless It Happens To You?

Can Bush, Cheney, Limbaugh, Coulter, et al, be next? Pretty please.

From Mancow Waterboarded, Admits It's Torture by Ryan Pollyea:

And so it went Friday morning when WLS radio host Erich "Mancow" Muller decided to subject himself to the controversial practice of waterboarding live on his show.

Mancow decided to tackle the divisive issue head on -- actually it was head down, while restrained and reclining.

"I want to find out if it's torture," Mancow told his listeners Friday morning, adding that he hoped his on-air test would help prove that waterboarding did not, in fact, constitute torture.

Turns out the stunt wasn't so funny. Witnesses said Muller thrashed on the table, and even instantly threw the toy cow he was holding as his emergency tool to signify when he wanted the experiment to stop. He only lasted 6 or 7 seconds.

"It is way worse than I thought it would be, and that's no joke,"Mancow said, likening it to a time when he nearly drowned as a child. "It is such an odd feeling to have water poured down your nose with your head back...It was instantaneous...and I don't want to say this: absolutely torture."

"I wanted to prove it wasn't torture," Mancow said. "They cut off our heads, we put water on their face...I got voted to do this but I really thought 'I'm going to laugh this off.' "

Last year, Vanity Fair writer Christopher Hitchens endured the same experiment -- and came to a similar conclusion. The conservative writer said he found the treatment terrifying, and was haunted by it for months afterward.

Catapulting The Biblical Propaganda

I really wish that I believed in the devil and hell when I hear news like this. Then at least I would have the satisfaction of believing that the entire Bush administration would eventually be burning for eternity. Alas, if only it were true!

From Iraq war briefings headlined with biblical quotes, reports US magazine by Daniel Nasaw:

One of the top planners of the US war in Iraq gave President George Bush secret intelligence briefs headlined with biblical quotations, in a bid to boost his standing with the deeply religious president but one that risked sparking a conflagration in the Muslim world if the papers leaked.

In the days surrounding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, US defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld prepared top secret briefing papers for the president adorned with triumphant images of US military personnel and adoring Iraqis, along with the quotes, according to a new article in GQ magazine.

Rumsfeld, said to be personally disinclined toward ostentatious displays of piety, included the quotes because he believed the religious message would appeal to Bush, whom he knew frequently to quote the Bible, journalist Robert Draper wrote.

Rumsfeld and other top military aides brushed aside complaints that the quotes were an inappropriate injection of religion into intelligence matters and ignored fears that if the documents leaked to the media, they would touch off worldwide fear that the US had embarked on an anti-Muslim crusade.

The previously unreleased documents are a shocking and unusual admixture of the two realms. The cover of one intelligence briefing shows US soldiers kneeling in prayer, headlined with a selection from the book of Isaiah: "Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?/ Here I am Lord, send me!" The same page is covered with the classification codes and handling instructions typical to secret US government documents.

Other cover sheets released by the magazine feature images of US military vehicles and troops trudging through desert landscapes, manning a machine gun emplacement, and US soldiers inside what appears to be a posh palace once belonging to Saddam Hussein. One shows an image of Saddam speaking into a television camera and quotes 1 Peter 2:15: "It is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men."

I believe that I do some good. Why have I not silenced at least a small portion of the ignorant talk of the foolish men of the Bush administration?

So, it appears that while Bush was busy catapulting, that he himself was being catapulted. Again, I wish we could catapult them all to hell!

Neither Snow, Nor Rain…

From Atheist preparing for the end of days:

A South Florida atheist is reaping the rewards of the coming apocalypse, charging “True Believers” for mail delivery to loved ones who get left behind in the aftermath of the “Day of Reckoning.”

Joshua Witter promises customers that he will suffer the plagues of Armageddon all in the name of a successful post-apocalyptic postal delivery.

“It’s too late for me,” Witter says. But, he adds, “I’ll do my best come hell or high water to deliver those letters.”

Redefining Truth

From Redefining 'Wealthy' by Jim McTague:

WHO WILL BAIL OUT THE TAXPAYERS WHO are paying for all those bailout buckets? Contrary to fables told to gullible voters and journos by President Barack Obama and other Democrats, the rich didn't enjoy a virtual tax holiday under George W. Bush. To the contrary, the share of the tax burden paid by households in the top 20% of U.S. income distribution -- those with average pretax incomes of $248,400 -- increased significantly between 2000, Bill Clinton's last year as president, and 2006, the latest year for which reliable data is available. You will find this in an April report of the relatively neutral Congressional Budget Office. It was brought to our attention by Curtis Dubay of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

The Obama administration is preparing to tax the upper-crusties even more, justifying it as a form of retribution for the big breaks they allegedly received from Bush at the expense of middle-class and poorer folks. Dubay's analysis of the CBO data finds that the top 20% of households in fact paid a record-high 86.3% of all taxes in 2006, versus 81.2% under Clinton.

If Democrats increase the tax burden, they risk killing the golden geese.

Is that so? I wonder how many of you who are willing to believe these numbers, also believed Bernie Madoff’s numbers at one time?

Dubay contends that shifting more of the tax burden onto high-income earners is dangerous. Those who pay little or no taxes don't feel the pain of the high cost of big government, and so they are more inclined than taxpayers to clamor for more public services. This demand for a nanny state in turn drains more money from the top 20%; it is impossible for government to go on funding itself this way indefinitely.

Those who pay little or no taxes feel the pain of having no job, nothing to eat, and nowhere to live. If the top 20% would stop hogging all the money and pay workers a decent wage, then maybe the bottom 20% would have more money to contribute to the tax base. As opposed to, like, you know, nothing.

Also, who has been on the receiving end of the bailout money? The top 20 per-centers or the bottom 20 per-centers?

More Peter King

Representative Peter King thinks that there are too many mosques in the United States. I wonder if he thinks there are too many churches as well?

In This Together?

Why would the ACLU want to attack itself?

On Face the Nation yesterday Peter King demonstrated the typical face of the Republican Party as of late. The face of a stupid, ignorant, name-calling bully. Would it have been too much for guest host Harry Smith to have pointed out to King that the ACLU consists of Americans? Just because members of the ACLU have different opinions than King does not mean that they are not Americans. This is what King is implying by saying that the American Civil Liberties Union is "tearing down the United States." Why does King need to resort to arrogance and insults? Is it because his arguments and knowledge of the facts are so weak? Why doesn’t King have faith in our system of justice? Also, why does King think that the only place the detainees can be tried is either New York or Virginia? What about an international court? What about the Hague?

From Rep. Peter King: ACLU Is "Tearing Down The United States" by Michelle Levi:

Representative Peter King (R-N.Y.) said that by opposing military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay and by advocating for the release of photographs of torture committed upon detainees, the American Civil Liberties Union is "tearing down the United States," during a heated debate with the ACLU's executive director, on Face the Nation Sunday.

The Obama administration's decision to go forward with the trials of terror suspects held at Gitmo, and to try to block the declassification of photographs of abuse, were flashpoints this week, with the president being accused by some of reneging on campaign promises to roll back the Bush administration's policies on interrogation and the shutdown of the American prison at Guantanamo Bay.

King admitted that "in every war there are going to be abuses," but added that he is not sure "what purpose the ACLU serves in constantly tearing down the United States, constantly attacking our government."

Anthony Romero makes so much sense to me. King claims Romero has “venom” for the President. I do not see it. The only venom I see is leaking from King, as if it is impossible for him to contain it. King says that there “is no CSI guy in Afghanistan” as if that is supposed to mean something. It is very hard for me to comprehend why so many dislike the ACLU so much.

No Offense?

If Carrie Prejean really meant “no offense” then why has she aligned herself to a group with a board member who is calling for the criminalization of gays?

The Photographs

From Obama is Wrong on Torture Photos:

Perhaps, what Obama’s predecessor managed to visit on America and the rest of the world in the name of fighting terror over the past eight years can never be obliterated. But this president, with his historic mandate and extraordinary global support, is at least trying. And there are signs that the world is beginning to revise its opinion about America. That is why President Obama’s decision to block the release of photographs of torture and prisoner abuse by the US soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan is unfortunate.

The Pentagon had agreed to release the damning photographs, after the American Civil Liberties Union approached a court to make them public. Now the president has used his extraordinary powers to veto the court ruling.

The right-wing argument is that releasing these photos would be harmful to the troops. Don’t the people who would want to “harm” the troops the most already know what the photos depict? After all, they are the ones living what the photos show. Or they have relatives and friends who have told them what the pictures show. It is the American people who are being kept in the dark here. Why do you suppose that is? What is it that they don’t want us to know? Could the reality depicted in the photos be worse than what we can imagine?

Two Recent News Items

From Tom Golisano "Moves" To Florida Over High NY Taxes:

The Buffalo News reports, "Golisano told a gathering of Rochester business executives that he will remain as owner of the Buffalo hockey team, but he is fleeing the Empire State to avoid paying $13,000 a day in state income taxes.

From Buffalo crash probe focuses on pilot fatigue, low pay:

Officials with Continental's regional carrier, Colgan Air Inc., acknowledged at the hearing that Shaw was paid about $23 an hour and had a salary of $16,254, although she could have earned more if she worked extra hours.

She previously had a second job working in a coffee shop.

Illogical Dick

If Torture Stopped In 2004, How Is Obama Endangering Americans By Banning It?

Sex Without God

From Why Atheists Have Great Sex by Greta Christina:

I want to offer a positive way of looking at sexuality and sexual transcendence that doesn’t involve any sort of belief in the supernatural. I want to offer a sex- positive philosophy that is entirely materialist. The materialist view of life in general and sex in particular is often viewed as cold, bleak, narrow, mechanical, reductionist, and generally a downer. I don’t think it is. And I want to talk about why.

Read more here.

Checking And Balancing

It seems to me that most Americans (except Dick Cheney) favor the systems of checks and balances that we have in place for our system of government. Why is it that so many people do not favor a system of checks and balances for our economic system? If we do not want our government to run amok, shouldn’t we also not want capitalism to run amok? In other words, why do so many fear an unrestricted government, yet they do not fear unrestricted corporations?

Carrie Prejean, Let Me Count The Ways

The first thing that made me dislike Carrie Prejean was her saying “no offense to anybody out there.” Like so many religious people she wants absolution. When she didn’t get it she acted outraged. Tough luck, Carrie. Donald may have absolved you, but not everyone will.

The second thing that made me dislike Carrie Prejean was the tone of her voice and the look on her face when she spoke. How sanctimonious can you get?

The third thing that made me dislike Carrie Prejean was her whining. Specifically her whining about freedom of speech. She seems to think that she is being punished and attacked for stating her opinion. What bullshit! It is true that, as Americans, we have freedom of speech. (Unless, of course, you went out in the streets to protest against George W. Bush. Then you were arrested, shot at, and/or jailed.) Any idiot knows that speech can have repercussions and consequences. Any idiot knows that we all restrain our speech from time to time. Like the times we don’t call our boss an asshole to his face. Certain conventions usually dictate a restraining of speech. Imagine the preacher preaching to his congregation that “Jesus was the biggest fucking asshole that ever lived.” Now imagine the reaction of the congregation. Now imagine a beauty contest where a contestant says something offensive to gay people. Now imagine the reaction of gay people. Oh wait, you don’t really have to imagine that one, do you?

The fourth thing that made me dislike Carrie Prejean was thinking about Matthew Shepard and how he might still be alive today if people didn't believe that the Bible tells wackos like Prejean that the homos are sick bastards and don’t deserve the same rights as the rest of us.

No offense Carrie, but screw you. I can’t wait for your fifteen minutes of fame to be over.

My Oh My This Is Just Plain Weird

Who the hell is Greg Gutfeld and why is he writing such crap for FoxNews.com?

From Media Questions Prejean But Not Garofalo? by Greg Gutfeld:

Two women are in the news today: Janeane Garofalo, for refusing to apologize after calling every single tea party protestor racist, and of course, Carrie Prejean, again, for answering a question honestly about her religious convictions.

Now Janeane was approached by FOX News' own perversely handsome Griff Jenkins, who had asked her if she regretted her reverse racism. To her strange, delusional credit, she stood by her original comments: that every tea party protestor hates black people.

Meanwhile, Prejean continues to be hounded over semi nude pictures — pictures I might add, that offer undeniable proof that God is a dude and he totally exists. Seriously, I am so going to church on Sunday.

Now, according to Griff, Janeane is so scared of conservatives that she confessed to cutting out chunks of her hair. Which is weird, because other than FOX News, no one in the media seems to question her comments. Garofalo, really has nothing to worry about. She's only slightly less objective than a CNN reporter.

Now I ask you: of the two, which one is uglier?

Is it the one who answered a question — rightly or wrongly — based on her religious convictions about the "opposite marriage?" Or is it the woman who, not off the cuff, stereotyped an entire group of people based on the fact they don't want their taxes raised?

The point is, the media excuses Garofalo's ugliness, because they agree with it. The witch hunt against Carrie exists only because it carries a stamp of overwhelming approval by the media.

You can't get much uglier than that. And yes, I'm including my prom photos.

And if you disagree with me, then you sir are worse than Hitler.

I almost never quote articles in their entirety, but Greg is just so darn weird, so I made an exception.

"Worse than Hitler." Is that really the best you could come up with, Greg?

Greg, it’s obvious that you think Janeane Garofalo is ugly. You’re entitled to your opinion. And I’m entitled to mine, and I think that you are a fucking pig.

Oh, one last thing,Greg. I’m glad you don’t think that you are part of the news media. I don’t think that you are either.

Similarities

I had forgotten about Anita Bryant. That’s probably a good thing.

From Carrie Prejean, Let's Talk About Milk by Anna Wainwright:

I wonder if Carrie Prejean has heard of Anita Bryant. Maybe I'm wrong in assuming that the current Miss California USA has not seen the film about the first openly gay elected official in the United States, and that she does not know much about the history of the gay rights struggle in her home state and country over the course of the last century. She may not recognize the similarities between herself and Ms. Bryant, the Evangelical Christian, Oklahoma-born singer and Florida orange juice spokeswoman, who is most famous for her tireless 1977 fight to save children from the threat of being taught by homosexual teachers. Anita became a symbol. Utterly confident in her own moral rectitude and superiority, she circled the country, campaigning on a platform of Christian virtue and warning the masses that because homosexuals could not have children, they would "recruit your own."

It is curious that Anna Wainwright left out one of the main similarities between Anita and Carrie.

From Anita Bryant:

Bryant became Miss Oklahoma in 1958 and was a second runner-up in the 1959 Miss America beauty pageant at age 19, right after graduating from Tulsa's Will Rogers High School.

Now it’s time for me to try to forget about both Anita Bryant and Carrie Prejean.

Excuse Me Your Dick Is Out

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	M - Th 11p / 10c
Excuse Me Your Dick Is Out
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Economic Crisis Political Humor

It's Alright, Ma (I'm So Holy)

“Disillusioned words like bullets bark
As human gods aim for their mark
Made everything from toy guns that spark
To flesh-colored Christs that glow in the dark
It's easy to see without looking too far
That not much
Is really sacred.” Bob Dylan

Tiny Dick

From A Very Small Man by Josh Marshall:

Cheney's conceit is that he's tough enough, perhaps best to say, icy enough to make the trip to what he calls 'the dark side' to protect America. But the picture emerging even from his own comments is very different. It's of a small and paranoid man, a half-comic character off the pages of mid-20th century anti-totalitarian fiction, with a seemingly inordinate protectiveness for torture practices that seem to have been only marginally effective at best.

You start to get the sense that just as Cheney committed his historic goof of launching off into Iraq while forgetting about dealing with al Qaida in Afghanistan and Pakistan he was doing something similar getting all wrapped up in the tough guy porn of torture that he remained ignorant of or just plain ignored the actual nuts and bolts of taking down or disabling terrorist organizations.

So by all means let him keep talking. As TPM Reader BH notes, he seems unable to maintain his famed self-discipline and indifference to public opinion as his own sorry record dribbles into the public record. The more that comes out about him, the more pathetic he seems. Paranoia, serial poor judgment, inability to distinguish desires from facts and an almost adolescent inability not to get drawn into the thrill of the 'dark side'.

An Agnostic And Atheistic Trek

Damn it Jim! I’m a doctor, not the pope!

From Why the original "Star Trek" still matters by Andrew O’Hehir:

In the middle of the Cold War, Roddenberry imagined a radical-progressive, Enlightenment-fueled vision of the human future, one in which the conflict between capitalism and communism had been long transcended, along with other earthbound forms of racial, ethnic or religious strife. Strikingly, there is no religious or mystical dimension to the "Star Trek" universe at all, at least until much later in its development. (Roddenberry regarded himself as an "agnostic atheist," and banned any religious references from the show.)