Friday, January 18, 2008

Ridge: ‘No doubt…waterboarding is torture.’. Former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge told the AP in an interview, “There’s just no doubt in my mind — under any set of rules — waterboarding is torture.” He added, “I believe, unlike others in the administration, that waterboarding was, is — and will always be — torture. That’s a simple statement.” In a separate interview with The Associated Press on Thursday, the current Homeland Security secretary, Michael Chertoff, refused to say what he thinks of the interrogation technique. [Think Progress] 7:28:45 PM    comment []

Sara Whitman: Stoned and Drunk and Messing with Tigers. I read the headline "Mauling Victim Taunted Tiger" and my first response was to check it off to one weird headline in the newspaper. But then I read it because the picture of the victim made me realize he was very young. Not much older than my kids. Young men at the San Francisco zoo on Christmas day, mauled, one killed by a tiger they were taunting. I could only respond from my place in the world as a mother. Did I have to tell you NOT to do that? What about getting high, drinking and driving was not enough of a blatant disrespect for rules? You had to go and taunt a tiger? I'm not trying to be funny. It's a nightmare to me as a parent. What do I have to say, what have I missed and my god, when does common sense kick in? I'm horrified to imagine one of my kids could do something so dangerous. And not have a clue how dangerous it was. Their friend is dead. The tiger is dead. The EMT's and Police that came were put at risk not to mention the countless people who witnessed the gruesome event. It makes me scared. Scared as a parent of three boys. What do I have to say to them? What kind of culture continues to encourage the level of risk taking seen in these young men, continually, all over the country? The blame, as it is being bantered across many blogs, misses the mark. The victims, regardless of their behavior, were still attacked by a wild animal. Stupid, irresponsible, no question. A wild animal did what it is meant to do. I'm not sure how a zoo could be prepared for someone standing on a railing, drunk, high and creating a kind of disturbance that would trigger a wild animal's instincts. I'm stuck on the drinking, getting high and driving. The blood alcohol levels above legal limits. Pot in the car. And the lying. Their friend was dead and they lied about what happened. I know there is a dramatic rise in violence and outwardly destructive behavior in girls, and it's not all about gender roles, but it is about gender roles. What it means to be a "man." Where does it start? Showing off, playing among friends, who can be bolder, crazier, sillier? For girls does it become a contest of who can get away with the most makeup, the shortest skirt while boys end up taking more physical risks? I don't understand why anyone would stand on a railing of a tiger enclosure and shout. When does the bravado become uncool? When someone is dead? I hope someone has the answer because as a mother, I can only ask why? [The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com] 5:43:40 PM    comment []

Tom Cruise Scientology Video: All Over Today, Absent From GMA. What's been the bigger sensation this week, the Tom Cruise Scientology Video and just-released unathorized biography or the release of the movie Mad Money — starring Katie Holmes, Ted Danson, Diane Keaton and Queen Latifah? If you gambled multiple segments of your very competitive morning show on the latter — you goofed! This week, it's been all about the Tom Cruise and Scientology, which has created an internet sensation between the original posted-then-pulled video on YouTube, cease-and-desist-defying version on Defamer, and an hour of follow-up footage on Gawker — all providing fodder for Andrew Morton, author of Tom Cruise: An Unauthorized Biography, to discuss on the Today Show. Let's back up. This week, ABC's Good Morning America kicked off with an interview with Katie Holmes, wife of Tom Cruise and mother of Suri Cruise and, oh yes, actress co-starring in Mad Money. The interview was all about motherhood and the movie...but not Morton, or that book — for which interviewer Diane Saywer and ABC News took some heat the next day in the New York Post. GMA subsequently aired interviews with Diane Keaton, Ted Danson, Queen Latifah Tuesday through Thursday. Also, all the Mad Money stars except for Keaton went on to interviews on Live with Regis & Kelly. In none of those interviews was the Cruise Scientology book mentioned, the Scientology video or Scientology itself. Meanwhile, over at NBC's Today Show they were less, shall we say, reticent: On Tuesday, Morton visited the Today Show for a lengthy sit-down, spread across three hours and different hosts. On Wednesday, Today looked at Cruise's religion in a report by Kerry Sanders pegged on the Scientology video. Today, Gene Shalit put a cherry on top of the cake by reviewing Mad Money...and calling it a "waste of time." Ouch. Upshot: Exclusive Mad Money sit-down with four stars including a Diane Sawyer one-on-one with the almost-reclusive and highly inaccessible Katie Holmes? A great idea — in any week other than the week that a blockbuster secret video of Tom Cruise proselytizing for Scientology over nine mesmerizing, can't-look-away minutes happens to tear up the web. We're guessing the ratings will reflect it. Oh well. Better luck next time, ABC! And if you did make a deal not to mention Scientology, the book, or Katie's marriage to the scion of the first and subject of the second, well then, serves you right. Related: Fascinating interview with Andrew Morton in the Globe & Mail here. Apparently, the Today show gave him a tough pre-interview. Also, apparently Bert Fields sent Morton lots of letters. In other news, in this AP interview Morton discusses the persistent rumor that Suri is actually the child of Holmes and Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard via the latter's frozen sperm. We're not saying it's a true rumor, just that he discusses it. [The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com] 5:38:39 PM    comment []

Joe Conason | What They Call "Progress" in Iraq. On Truthdig.com, Joe Conason writes: "As America marks the first anniversary of the troop escalation in Iraq, at least one thing has become clear. Although the 'surge' is failing as policy, it seems to be succeeding as propaganda. Even as George W. Bush continues to bump and scrape along the bottom of public approval, significantly more people now believe we are 'winning' the war." [t r u t h o u t] 12:50:17 PM    comment []

Harry Shearer: Keeping Our Eye Off the Ball. American media woke up to the story of Pakistan momentarily, when Benazir Bhutto was assassinated. But, just as quickly, Pakistan disappeared from the U.S. media radar screen. This week, the NYT led its Tuesday front page with a story both stunning and obvious to Pakistan-watchers -- that former intelligence agents of that country were now admitting that the ISI, the nation's powerful intel agency, had lost control of the jihadist militants it had long been supporting and financing. Yet the other media, which normally and almost slavishly use the NYT's news agenda to set their own, ignored the story. Since 2001, when the administration and the media colluded in a single-minded focus on Iraq, Pakistan has lingered at the outer edges of American awareness, even though that country did indisputably meet the three criteria President Bush invoked for the invasion of Iraq (support for terrorists, invasion of a neighbor, possession of WMDs). It's hard to keep your eye on Pakistan, I guess, when at least one network (NBC) "covered" Bhutto's killing via a correspondent just a few thousand miles away in London. But the NYT story this week made it abundantly clear that the country's intelligence establishment has, as its critics have long said, had close supportive ties with jihadist militants on its own soil as well as in Afghanistan, and that that relationship, very much like the one the U.S. had with such groups during the 1980s Soviet occupation in Afghanistan, has begun to backfire with ominous implications for the future. Better to concentrate on the polls in Nevada and tax cuts in Washington. [The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com] 12:48:20 PM    comment []

Linda Keenan: Bernanke's Message to Americans: Run, Run for Your Lives!. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke delivered some classic Fed-speak to homeowners, shareholders and Congress on Thursday.. As a former economics writer, I thought I'd translate what Chairman Bernanke said to struggling Americans, and what I heard. What Bernanke Said: "The virtual shutdown of the subprime mortgage market and a widening of spreads on jumbo mortgage loans have further reduced the demand for housing, while foreclosures are adding to the already-elevated inventory of unsold homes." What I Heard: "I'm crapping my pants, you should be, too." What Bernanke Said: "As investors lost confidence in their ability to value complex financial products, they became increasingly unwilling to hold such instruments. As a result, flows of credit through these vehicles have contracted significantly." What I Heard: "Banks have no clue how bad this is, and you know what, Sherlock? I don't have a fuh-REAKING clue either. Think you're getting a new HELOC for a shiny new kitchen? Forget it, sucker." What Bernanke Said: "....a number of factors, including continuing increases in energy prices, lower equity prices, and softening home values, seem likely to weigh on consumer spending as we move into 2008." What I Heard: "Remember the late '70s? No, of course not. You know nothing about a real recession. Tell you what. Ask Gramps to get out those big-ass sweaters from the Carter years, forget about the mall, and snuggle on up in your newly chilly McMansion, which is losing value by the minute." What Bernanke Said: "..any tendency of inflation expectations to become unmoored or for the Fed's inflation-fighting credibility to be eroded could greatly complicate the task of sustaining price stability and reduce the central bank's policy flexibility to counter shortfalls in growth in the future." What I Heard: "Go ask Gramps what STAGFLATION means. In two words, it sucks." What Bernanke Said: "To be useful, a fiscal stimulus package should be implemented quickly... What I Heard: "I need help from Congress, like, right now. Like, right the F--- NOW. Can I go back to being a professor now? Please? None of this is my damn fault! Say to together, people: take your bitchin' and moanin' and belly achin' and big bad toxic mortgage to GREENSPAN. I'll get you his number." ' What Bernanke Said: "Market participants still express considerable uncertainty about the appropriate valuation of complex financial assets and about the extent of additional losses that may be disclosed in the future. On the whole, despite improvements in some areas, the financial situation remains fragile " What I Heard: "Did you look at what your 401K did today? For the year? I dare ya. I double dog dare ya. Start lovin' you some of those canned goods, everyone. Peace out." [The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com] 10:20:46 AM    comment []

Gareth Porter: Investigate the Pentagon's Strait of Hormuz Scandal. The Pentagon has been caught with its pants down on the bogus story of Iranian boats threatening to "explode" US warships in the Strait of Hormuz January 6. Now that that patently false story has blown up in its face, Congress should find out who is responsible and make them accountable. Here's a tip for anyone in Congress who cares about the public trust: the trail of lies and fabrication in this case leads to Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates. As I reported earlier this week for Inter Press Service, the lurid press stories of an Iranian threat to blow up U.S. ships that began the coverage of the incident did not come from some rogue freelancer. They were a direct result of Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Bryan Whiteman's briefing for the Pentagon press corps on the morning of January 7. It was Whitman who supplied all those juicy details that filled the press stories, including the Iranian phone threat, the objects dropped in the water which reporters were told could have been explosives, and the titillating story that at least one Iranian boat was "a heartbeat from being blown up," as reported by ABC News. All of which turned out to be flatly untrue. Whitman could not have given that briefing, however, without the authority of the Secretary of Defense himself. The responsibility goes to the top of the Pentagon. Equally blatant in its intent to deceive was the decision to put together a short video clip of the incident in which a mysterious voice seems to issuing a taunting threat against the U.S. ships. That voice was grafted on to the soundtrack of the video in order to dramatize that element of the story. The question many were asking when it became clear that the voice on the video was that of the "Filipino monkey" - the heckler or hecklers who have been horning in on ship-to-ship communication in the area to hurl insults, threats and racial epithets for many years - was who was responsible for fabricating such a ridiculously lurid and obviously phony video. When I started to investigate that question, the Pentagon press office referred me to the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet information office in Bahrain. But both that office and the Navy's Office of Information steered my back to the Office of the Secretary of Defense. And sure enough, the press office at the Pentagon, which is part of the OSD, confirmed that the "leadership" of the Department of Defense was in on the decision on what to release to the public. So Gates was in on both the original decision to disseminate a false account of the incident in the Strait and the decision to release a video that was deliberately rigged to dramatize the supposed threat by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps navy to blow up a U.S. warship. In both cases there can be no doubt that the decisions made only after consulting with the White House. Could Gates and the White House have been taken in by reports from overeager commanders in the Gulf who sent panicky reports that presented an exaggerated sense of threat - like the nervous sonarmen who thought they were under attack in the Tonkin Gulf in 1964, at least for an hour or so? Not very likely. The commander of the 5th Fleet, Vice-Admiral Kevin Cosgriff told Pentagon reporters on January 7, "I didn't get the sense from the reports I was receiving that there was a sense of being afraid of these five boats." Furthermore, an official at the 5th fleet headquarters told me that everyone there knows about the "Filipino Monkey" problem. Anyone who has ever transited the Strait is told to expect such taunts and threats over the ship-to-ship channel. It is inconceivable that any of the naval officers involved would have failed to make clear in their reports on the incident that they believed the threat that came over the VHF channel was probably that of the infamous heckler. When high officials are caught deliberately creating a phony threat to American ships, Congress has a duty to investigate. It seems very likely that laws were broken in this bumbling effort at deception. But thus far we have had only pained silence from the Democratic leadership in Congress. And apparently there are no plans by either the Senate or House committee on Armed Services to carry out an investigation into the outrage. Are the Democrats protecting Bob Gates? He has been widely credited with helping to restrain Dick Cheney's desire for military action against Iran, which men of good will must applaud. It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that Gates is also personally responsible for using the Pentagon's propaganda machine to support a political line - both at home and abroad -- aimed at keeping up political pressure on Iran, even it means doing violence to the facts. In the post-NIE phase of American policy toward Iran, protecting Gates from the consequences of the Strait of Hormuz scandal no longer a matter of preventing a war. It will only implicate the Democrats in the administration's broader anti-Iran scheme -- and all the lies that seems to require. [The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com] 10:16:41 AM    comment []

Chris Kelly: Mitticisms: "Running". Ever since Tuesday's Michigan Miracle -- when Mitt Romney won his home state, and all it took was outspending his three closest competitors combined -- Romney has a new campaign persona: Shrewd Businessman. Forget the wacko who wants to send Juno to Gitmo. (And she did the right thing in the end anyway, wasn't that cute?) The new Mitt is all about economics. Which is why you keep seeing him make his stump speech in the toner aisle at Staples. The difference between toner and Mitt's core beliefs? Changing toner takes a little time. John McCain may have the VFW, and Mike Huckabee has the church; Mitt's America is a place where you can buy Post-Its in bulk. So you can understand why Mitt got miffed when a reporter ruined his photo opportunity yesterday, by sassing back at a Staples in Columbia. It was like talking in temple. If you haven't seen the video, here's the exchange: Romney: "...rather than continuously look for partisan opportunities for score settling and for opportunities to link closer to lobbyists. I don't have lobbyists running my campaign. I don't have lobbyists that are tied to my --" Glen Johnson (Associated Press): "That's not true governor. That is not true. Ron Kaufman's a lobbyist. How can you say that you don't have lobbyists?" Romney: "Did you hear what I said? Did you hear what I said Glen?" Johnson: "That you don't have lobbyists running your campaign." Romney: "I said I don't have lobbyists running my campaign and he's not running my campaign." Johnson: "He's one of your senior advisers." Romney: "He's an adviser, and the person who runs my campaign is Beth Myers..." It's too bad Johnson cut Romney off before he could finish the sentence: "I don't have lobbyists that are tied to my..." because unless the next word was "car" he was heading for a blatant lie. Ron Kaufman is the chairman of Dutko Worldwide. They're lobbyists, mostly for HMOs and the telecommunications industry. Another Romney adviser is Vin Weber, of Clark & Weinstock. His lobbying clients include a French bank tied to Saddam Hussein and the UN oil-for-food scandal. He also represents clients in the arms industry and pharmaceuticals - which should cancel each other out, when you really think about it. When Mitt Romney was born, his father was working as a lobbyist for Alcoa. Does that count as "ties?" And that really happened. There are pictures and everything. Unlike the time he and Rosa Parks went on safari. But Romney didn't get to finish his thought. So instead, we get to enjoy what Aristotle (yes, him again) called The Fallacy of Accent. The Fallacy of Accent (350 BC, and still fresh!) is the difference between "Lobbyists aren't running my campaign" and "Lobbyists aren't running my campaign." (Technically, Aristotle was describing how changing the inflection of a Greek word could change its meaning. But that's not how we use it. Which isn't to say you can't use it that way. Knock yourself out.) We use it to describe how the emphasis on one word or another in a statement can create ambiguity. What Johnson heard was Mitt saying he didn't like lobbyists. What Mitt meant was he didn't like lobbyists in charge. Gosh! My campaign is crawling with them like maggots on road kill and I couldn't be happier! But running the joint? Heavens no! What did you think I meant? Was ever a conman so misunderstood? It takes a really practiced scamp to pull off the Fallacy of Accent. But it's sooo rewarding, once you get the hang of it. Let's take a hypothetical example: "You'll never catch me lying about being a total dick." It could mean: "There are some people who are total dicks, and they lie about it." The way the lobbyist thing was dig at John McCain. But it could also mean: "You'll never catch me lying about being a total dick." Okay, I'm a bit of a dick. Aren't we all? Or: "You'll never catch me lying about being a total dick." Yeah, I'm a dick, but at least I'm upfront about it. Or: "You'll never catch me lying about being a total dick." I might be a dick, but I have an escape plan. Or: You'll never catch me lying about being a total dick. I'm a dick, but I'm smarter than you, Glen Johnson. The possibilites are endless, as long as the truth doesn't matter. So maybe it's okay that Mitt Romney lives every waking minute like a linguistic leprechaun outsmarting treasure hunters; at least it's a change of pace from our current president, Hulk Smash. What gets me down about the new video is how huffy he gets when confronted. That's gonna get old. WHAT MITT MEANT: I've got more lobbyists than Grandpa had wives. But running things? That's all controlled by Kolob, through the Quorum of the Twelve. HOW TO USE "RUNNING" AT HOME: Was I running around with my secretary? No, of course I wasn't running around. Not with my secretary... [The Full Feed from HuffingtonPost.com] 9:36:00 AM    comment []

Canada Places US, Israel on Torture Watch List. Canada’s foreign ministry has put the United States and Israel on a watch list of countries where prisoners risk being tortured and also classifies some U.S. interrogation techniques as torture, according to a document obtained by Reuters on Thursday. The revelation is likely to embarrass the minority Conservative government, which is a staunch ally of both [...] [CommonDreams.org » Headlines07] 9:32:19 AM    comment []