| July 2004 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
From Everything I Know is Wrong, a roundup of commentary by leading Iraqi bloggers, on the handover of sovereignty in Iraq. Just one example, of many quoted:
I turned to one friend who was a committed Sheat and who distrusted America all the way. He looked as if he was bewitched, and I asked him, So, what do you think of this man [Paul Bremmer]? Do you still consider him an invader? My friend smiled, still touched and said, Absolutely not! He brought tears to my eyes. God bless him.
Don’t miss this.
From Haloscan, inspiring words on pursuing the war on terrorists:
I read that many Americans are now opposed to our efforts in Iraq because they question the high number of American soldiers killed, which now stands at about 850. Is that a large number? During that same time period more than forty thousand Americans died in traffic accidents, AIDS killed over ten thousand and cancer over half a million. Of course we place special importance on the deaths of our heroes, but in the end all deaths are tragic.
If we as a country are ready to surrender after incurring the loss of 850 soldiers, I fear for our future. In the Revolutionary War we lost over 4,000 should we have given up and remained subjects of King George? In the Civil war almost half a million were lost, was that too many to free African Americans from the bonds of slavery? There is a terrible price to pay for freedom and the day we are unwilling to pay it, our freedom will be short lived. What would the world look like today if we had found unacceptable the deaths of several thousand GI’s on D-Day? That is several thousand in one day!
...having suffered historically miniscule war casualties, a significant portion of the American public is ready to retreat. There is a theory that when societies reach a level of wealth and comfort, they become suicidal. For the sake of my children I hope we are not there.
The war on terror is far from over and there will be many more casualties. Choosing not to fight will not save lives.
Moxie kicks Kerry’s butt all over the parking lot:
what ever you believe in, I do too
Look! LOOK at me! John Kerry! John effing Kerry folks.
– You hate guns? They kill people!
– You like guns? Hey, me too!
– You are a redneck? Me too!
– You are a rich capitalist pig? I married one!
– You hate the war? Me too!
– You love war? You may not know this but I served in Vietnam!
Jessica’s Well debunks in detail the absurd contention that parts of Iraq are worse off now than when the residents were in daily fear for their lives under Hussein:
From the Seattle Times comes an article outlining findings in the recent GAO report on the situation in Iraq and how in many areas Iraq is “worse off than before the war began last year”.
Highlights for the Seattle Times (i.e. perceived lowlights for the Bush administration) include:
* In 13 of Iraq’s 18 provinces, electricity was available fewer hours per day on average last month than before the war. Nearly 20 million of Iraq’s 26 million people live in those provinces.
Anyone remember how Saddam used the power grid to punish whole regions for their transgressions? (Beats whole regions punished for their transgressions by, say, nerve gas though, doesn’t it?) Or how whole regions would be dark to ensure Baghdad’s uninterrupted supply?
* Only $13.7 billion of the $58 billion pledged and allocated worldwide to rebuild Iraq has been spent, with $10 billion more about to be spent. The biggest chunk of that money has been used to run Iraq’s ministry operations.
We are going to be there a while. Should we have spent everything already? Given limited manpower and materials, is it even possible to have spent everything already?
* The country’s court system is more clogged than before the war, and judges are frequent targets of assassination attempts.
This is the best one of all. The court systems are clogged. Think about that for a minute. Picture the previous Iraqi “court system” and try to imagine just why they weren’t clogged. This is Mussolini making the trains run on time only it isn’t trains. It is bullets to the brain.
Happy 4th of July!
Michael Moore, on the immediate reaction at the Oscars to his 2003 acceptance speech:
March 23, 2003:
He said that, far from being appalled, many people in the audience stood up to applaud him and that he put ‘’America in a good light.’’
March 24, 2003:
Asked what he thought of the catcalls, he said, “Don’t report that there was a split decision in the hall because five loud people booed.”
April 7, 2003:
Halfway through my remarks, some in the audience started to cheer. That immediately set off a group of people in the balcony who started to boo. Then those supporting my remarks started to shout down the booers.
Okay, so as late as April 7th of last year, Moore’s story was that many more of those in attendance at the event supported him than booed him.
That contradicts his brand-new memory of the event.
July 9, 2004:
EW Let’s go back a year. Tell me about the reaction right after you gave your infamous Oscar speech when ‘’Bowling for Columbine’’ won, when you were booed for calling Bush a ‘’fictitious President.’’
MOORE From the second I walked off the stage, I felt alone. People backed away from me as I walked through the wings. The only two things that were said to me were the things that every Oscar winner hears when you first walk off the stage. There are two interns standing in the wings in evening gowns and one goes, Champagne? And the other one goes, Breath mint?
His new description of the event contradicts the ones he gave before.
This is from someone who often accuses others of lying.
Update 7-5-04: For a comprehensive list of all the baloney in Moore’s pseudo-documentary, see Fifty-nine Deceits in Fahrenheit 911.
(via LGF.)
David Nott is a registered professional petroleum engineer, as well as president of the Reason Foundation. In an article in the LA TIMES he discusses some little-recognized causes of high gas prices.
Specifically, we’re not letting the oil companies build any oil refineries:
...no new refineries have been built in this country since 1976; ... On the contrary, since 1981 the number of refineries nationally has shrunk from more than 300 to half that many.
Nott describes regulations that contribute to this tremendous drop in the number of our oil refineries:
The single biggest reason for the decrease in refineries is that extreme environmental regulations make it almost impossible for oil companies to build new facilities. Do you want one in your neighborhood? No one else does either. Never mind that you smell more gasoline at a filling station than at your typical refinery, thanks to improvements in technology and equipment.
Oil companies also want to limit their exposure and liability in overzealous lawsuits and attacks from the Environmental Protection Agency. In 1994, an independent contractor accidentally damaged a pipeline, leaking large amounts of oil into the Skagway River in Alaska. Edward Hanousek, a manager for the project, was off duty and nowhere near the accident at the time. Nevertheless, he was charged with two federal crimes and sentenced to six months in prison. The threat of lawsuits drives refineries, which are at higher risk, out of business.
When the government isn’t prosecuting employees, it is creating laws to make gas more expensive. Regulations requiring reformulated gasoline are making many older refineries obsolete…. As Congress passes pork projects that benefit individual members’ home districts like federal ethanol mandates that put corn-based products in our gas (great for Midwest farmers, terrible for drivers) it makes producing gasoline more complicated and thus more expensive.
I don’t yet have information regarding how much an increase in refineries might reduce gas prices; but I’m pretty sure we’re going to continue to need some oil refineries.
