Focus

Bush spent some of the morning being briefed by the State Department about Iraq for a full 90 minutes, which as we know is his limit. Then he talked to the press (didn’t take any questions, in case they quizzed him about what he’d learned in class today or what the difference between Sunnis and Shiites is), made sure to use the phrase “new way forward.”


He said, “Like most Americans, this administration wants to succeed in Iraq”. Ignoring the question of what most Americans really want, it’s funny that things have gone so badly that every time he speaks he has to say that he does really actually want to succeed.


He says that in Iraq’s “neighborhood” – and what is his allergy to the word “region”? did it not focus-group well, or is this a personal thing? – “[w]e believe that most of the countries understand that a mainstream society, a society that is a functioning democracy, is in their interests.” When exactly have countries in the Middle East demonstrated this attachment to democracy? “And it’s up to us to help focus their attentions and focus their efforts on helping the Iraqis succeed.” So the problem is their “focus,” Mister Easily Distracted By Shiny Objects?


Bush is aiming at announcing the, um, new way forward before Christmas. All things considered, I’d rather just get socks.

Wherein Rumsfeld breaks Taliban rule #9

I say Pinochet’s faking it again. Put him on trial anyway.

Sort of a Peter-Sellers-by-way-of-Mussolini look
Rumsfeld did not meet with any Iraqis on his visit to Iraq. According to his press secretary, “It was not a public trip whatsoever.” So I’m sure he paid his own expenses.

The Taliban has issued a set of rules for its members. #9: do not use jihad equipment for personal ends. Rule #18: no smoking. Rule #19: no fucking young boys. Also: all schools must be burned, but the religious books should be removed first. And beheadings should take place after the trial.

All spit

Karzai has fired the governor of Helmand province, and while there’s nothing at all in the American papers, the British ones are abuzz, since that’s where British troops operate and the Brits had recommended the guy, Mohammed Daud, as the man to clean up the province’s corruption and poppy cultivation, and he had made a good start. The Sunday Times thinks he was fired at the behest of drug lords, the Sindy says it was the Americans because Daud was coming to local truces with the Taliban, but neither have much evidence (nor an ability to read Karzai’s mind). Still, this is a significant story for what it tells us about the real balance of power in Afghanistan; it would be nice to know more. It would also be nice if the American press paid some attention to Afghanistan from time to time.

The Pentagon website says of Rumsfeld’s trip to Iraq that American soldiers treated him “like a rock star.” Possibly because Iraq looks like a hotel room that The Who stayed in, possibly because they’re hoping he’ll suffocate on his own vomit... Rummy went to Iraq to “thank servicemembers for their dedication, sacrifices and patriotism.” Although if he’d asked them, they probably would have said, no don’t bother making that long trip, we’d be perfectly happy to come to where you are, really it would be no trouble at all.

In an article about John Ashcroft I encountered a phrase I hadn’t heard before: “He’s all spit and no sidewalk.” Use it today.

Rumsfeld: by golly, it’s important

Well, the transcript of Rummy’s last “town hall” meeting is out now, although I stand by yesterday’s preliminary reaction: “oh just fuck off already.”

What struck me is how often he disparaged the press during it. For someone who’s supposed to be this blunt guy who doesn’t care what people think about him, he seems awfully thin-skinned. Examples:
-“we’ve not always seen eye to eye, I haven’t, with the press, but I still hold out hope that over time, they’ll get it close to right”
-“[Soldiers] stood guard in Guantanamo over some of the world’s most dangerous terrorists, while suffering grossly uninformed and irresponsible charges in the media from almost every quarter”
-Asked how he wants history to remember him: “My goodness. Better than the local press.”

And he described the program of bribing Iraqi newspapers as “trying to reduce the number of people getting killed over there by asking people to print the truth, and paying them to do that.”

Also, asked what was his worst day in the job, he said, “the worst day was Abu Ghraib and seeing that -- what went on there and feeling so deeply sorry that that happened.” Abu Ghraib wasn’t a day, it was long months and years of abuse and torture; by day, he means the day it came into the light; that’s what he’s deeply sorry about. Even then, he insists that Abu Ghraib “demonstrated to the world how our democracy deals openly and decisively with such egregious wrongdoing. And yes, I remember the irresponsible comments by some who tried to sully the image of the courageous and dedicated men and women in uniform who keep the American people safe.”

Rumsfeld, as we know, was never been able to comment on anything critical of him that appears in the press or in books because he hadn’t read it yet (examples here and here), and guess what, he hasn’t read all of the Baker Commission report either. But one gets the sense that he’s not terribly impressed: “And there are some people who say, ‘Well, you should do this or that or the other thing,’ and I can tell you I can’t think of a thing that anyone thought of that General Pace and General Abizaid and those folks have not been working on and analyzing and studying and adjusting to over time.” In fact, he’s not terribly impressed with anyone advising Bush on Iraq whose name is not Donald Henry Rumsfeld: “He’s been meeting with outside academics and people, so-called experts”.

So if he doesn’t read reports, newspapers, or the ISG report, what does he read? History books, he says, by which he means what your average chain bookstore means by “history books”: books about wars. The Revolutionary War, World War II, and he tried to read about the Civil War, but found it too upsetting because the people killed in it were all Americans. Yes, he really said that, the man who wants us to respond to deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq with “patience” and “staying power.”

By the way, the lesson he gleaned from reading about World War II is that we shouldn’t count the Iraq war as having lasted longer than American involvement in World War II, because that’s “totally ignoring the period after World War II, where the German government didn’t even have a government I don’t think until 1949”. 1949 was when everyone gave up on re-unifying Germany and officially formed two separate states.

His final words – and you just know one of those final words was golly – two of them, in fact – on our military adventures: “But by golly, it -- something important isn’t easy, and this isn’t easy. And by golly, it’s important, and we’d better do it right.”

Jackass. Dick. Motherless motherfuck.

(Update: and then he went to Iraq for a, um, victory lap. Can you do a quagmire lap?)

Well, if anyone knows about terrible mistakes...

If I had to watch all the Bush press conferences I blog about, I’d have drowned in my own stomach acids long ago. But if you think you can’t despise Bush more than you already do, you should look at the video of yesterday’s presser with Blair, I can’t find it as a clip but at 22 minutes in, he’s asked to prove he wasn’t still in denial about Iraq, and he snaps, “It’s bad in Iraq,” then does this sharp nod, says, “Does that help?” and then the “Heh heh heh” thing. It was bad enough in the transcript, but seeing it... could not be more loathsome.
(Update: thanks to alert reader sam_m for a link to that clip.)

Well, not without swastikas and chants of “Sieg Heil,” such as were seen at a meeting of a Polish political party, part of the governing coalition, the League of Polish Families. Swastikas in Poland!

No swastikas at Rumsfeld’s very last Pentagon “town hall meeting” today, although he did flash some sort of gang sign.


He said withdrawing troops from Afghanistan and/or Iraq would be a “terrible mistake” and bitched about American impatience and... oh just fuck off already.

There’s a funny typo in the Pentagon website article about the event: “Rumsfeld acknowledged the Iraqis who ‘through it all, believe their future is bright,’ and who ‘are working to forget something they have never had before: a free (and) representative country.’” Took me a minute to realize that must have been “forge” rather than “forget.”

Respecting people’s private spheres

The editor-in-chief of Playboy Indonesia (which started publishing earlier this year) is on trial for publishing pictures of women in underwear and, the prosecutor was at pains to point out, “inviting expressions on their faces.”

Thomas Hardy infected his wife with syphilis. College lit professors sigh at the thought of that tidbit showing up in every paper on Hardy they have to read for the rest of their lives.

The German vice-president of the European Commission, Günter Verheugen, 62 and married, was spotted and photographed, naked (except for a baseball cap, possibly worn on his head, the papers don’t say) on a Lithuanian nudist beach with his female chief of staff, 48, last August. The EC president, José Manuel Barroso, said that “people’s private spheres” should be respected, but a German magazine will publish the pictures of Verheugen’s private spheres anyway.

Bush met with members of Congress today to talk about Iraq. Afterwards, he said they should do it again some time: “And the reason you meet on a regular basis is so that the American people can know that we’re working hard to find common ground.” Yes, it’s all about looking like you’re accomplishing something, rather than actually accomplishing something. Then, Mr. “I talk to families who die” held an impromptu seance.


Hastert communed with the spirits of tuna melts past, while Frist was haunted by the ghostly hissing of spectral kitties.

One of the people the Iraq Study Group didn’t take testimony from: Juan Cole.

Nice Simon Hoggart sketch of the Bush-Blair press conference.

Bush & Blair press conference: I talk to families who die

In a press conference with Tony Blair, held in front of a humongous presidential seal, Bush again sort of praised the Iraq Study Group: “I appreciated the fact that they laid out a series of recommendations, and they’re worthy of serious study.” In fact, he’ll study the Study Group’s study, and will do so in his study. Soon loses all meaning, doesn’t it? Study study study study. A whole lot of studying going on for a test I’m pretty sure we flunked more than three years ago. George isn’t doing so well on his book report either, since the only thing he can come up with to say about the ISG report is that it lays out a series of recommendations.

Fellow students, prepare to be dazzled! Well, as Mrs. Krabappel already mentioned, the name of the book that I read was “Treasure Island.” It’s about these... pirates. Pirates... with patches over their eyes... and... shiny gold teeth... and green birds on their shoulders... Did I mention this book was written by a guy named Robert Lewis Stevenson? And published by the good people at McGraw Hill. So, in conclusion, on the Simpson scale of one to ten, ten being the highest, one being the lowest, and five being average, I give this book... a nine.

Indeed, Bush informs us that “a lot of reports in Washington are never read by anybody, but “To show you how important this one is, I read it, and our guest read it. The Prime Minister read -- read a report prepared by a commission. And this is important.” You’ll notice the premise here is that Bush reads so few things that anything he does read he must consider really important. I’m not saying that, Bush himself is saying that.



Britain’s own Mrs. Krabappel, Anthony Charles Lynton Blair, must spend these things with an imaginary blue pencil in his head, correcting all Bush’s grammatical errors, like this one: “The increase in sectarian attacks we’re seeing in and around Baghdad are unsettling.” That’s right, Mr. Blair, around here we don’t go in for that namby-pamby, la-di-da subject-verb agreement. Two countries divided by a single, or in Bush’s case half of a, language.

However, though Bush continued to speak shit while Blair spoke shite, Blair did have some difficulty with his arithmetic: “But there are only two ways that the Middle East can go. Its people can either be presented with a choice between a secular or a religious dictatorship, which is not a choice that any free people would ever choose, or alternatively, they can enjoy the same possibilities of democracy that we hold dear in our countries.” Three ways, that’s one, two, three ways.



In the q&a, Bush said, “The thing I liked about the Baker-Hamilton report is it discussed the way forward in Iraq.” Yes, and it lays out a series of recommendations. Wasn’t that the whole idea? He sounds like he’s surprised it wasn’t about trout fishing in British Columbia or something.

“Tough” was one of his favorite words today: “I understand how tough it is. And I’ve been telling the American people how tough it is. And they know how tough it is. ... And I have made it abundantly clear how tough it is. ... As you can tell, I feel strongly about making sure you understand that I understand it’s tough.” And so on. After a while, Blair started using it too.

Bush also snapped at a reporter, “It’s bad in Iraq. That help?” Um, not really.



Also, e-fricking-nough already of the talk about achieving objectives: he talked with Blair about “the way forward, so we can achieve the objective,” the Baker-Hamilton strategy to “achieve an objective,” helping the Maliki government “achieve the objective,” “do we have a plan to achieve our objective?”, Iran “would be using that nuclear weapon to blackmail to achieve political objectives,” and half a dozen more, by which time, again, copy-cat Blair was using it too.

Just like Sen. Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, who said a couple of days ago, “I talk to those who’ve lost their lives, and they have that sense of duty and mission,” Bush had his own Ghost Whisperer moment: “Make no mistake about it, I understand how tough it is, sir. I talk to families who die.”



He talks to families who die, but will he talk to Syria and Iran, as the ISG recommended? “[T]hese countries understand our position. They know what’s expected of them. There is -- if we were to have a conversation, it would be this one, to Syria: Stop destabilizing the Siniora government. ... Stop allowing money and arms to cross your border into Iraq. Don’t provide safe haven for terrorist groups. We’ve made that position very clear.” Not so much a “conversation” as an ultimatum, really.

Asked if he could admit his past failures in Iraq, Bush said, “I do know that we have not succeeded as fast as we wanted to succeed. I do understand that progress is not as rapid as I had hoped.” So that’s a “no.”



No one asked Bush (or, indeed, Blair) for his reaction to Mary Cheney’s pregnancy, I’m sorry to say.

(Thanks to this site for the Bart quote.)

The Iraq Study Group report

William Caldwell IV, Military Moron, has an op-ed in the WaPo, in which he says, “I don’t see a civil war in Iraq. I don’t see a constituency for civil war.” And he should know: “I studied civil wars at West Point”. So that settles that.

Okay, I’ve read the Iraq Study Group report (pdf). Nine months to come up with this, huh?

The funny thing is that the assessment of the situation in Iraq is actually more realistic (and depressing) than I would have expected from this bunch: grave and deteriorating situation, Shiite and Sunni politicians in the government not especially influential, militias “seen as legitimate vehicles of political action,” etc etc. It’s just the recommendations that are unhelpful and even unserious, since I can’t believe anyone who understood and accepted that assessment would also believe that the commission’s recommendations could a) be implemented, b) help much if they were.

Most of the focus on international diplomacy (“The United States should immediately launch a new diplomatic offensive to build an international consensus for stability in Iraq and the region”) is DOA. Bush won’t talk with Iran and Syria, they won’t join any “Iraq International Support Group,” there will not in fact be an Iraq International Support Group. Bush isn’t going to spend his last 2 years in office solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. By the way, these are the juicy incentives the ISG suggests we offer Iran and Syria:

i. An Iraq that does not disintegrate and destabilize its neighbors and the region.
ii. The continuing role of the United States in preventing the Taliban from destabilizing Afghanistan.
iii. Accession to international organizations, including the World Trade Organization.
iv. Prospects for enhanced diplomatic relations with the United States.
v. The prospect of a U.S. policy that emphasizes political and economic reforms instead of (as Iran now perceives it) advocating regime change.
vi. Prospects for a real, complete, and secure peace to be negotiated between Israel and Syria, with U.S. involvement as part of a broader initiative on Arab-Israeli peace as outlined below.

Dude, you had me at “enhanced diplomatic relations with the United States.”

By the way, it doesn’t really have 79 recommendations. Some of them are repetitive, and one (#24) just says that the timetable for the benchmarks in #23 may be unrealistic.

A bunch of them relate to oil, you’ll be surprised to hear. Otherwise, it’s mostly all about training and embedding (or, as the ISG put it in order to emphasize their maverick independence, imbedding). They seem to put rather a lot of faith in the power of the proximity of an American or two to improve the characters, competence and courage of any Iraqi in their vicinity. Honestly, I’ve been near Americans my entire life, and I don’t know that it’s made me a better, braver person (and yes I will cut out the alliteration now).

It’s not just the Iraqi military that needs the purifying power (that one just came out) of “imbedded” Americans, but every branch of government. For example, “The ethos and training of Iraqi police forces must support the mission to ‘protect and serve’ all Iraqis. Today, far too many Iraqi police do not embrace that mission”. Also ag, oil, whatever. Of course those require Americans who aren’t in the military and may not really want to go to Iraq. So #74 suggests simply ordering civilian government employees into Iraq anyway.

As I said, it took them nine months to come up with this. It’s a paean to, indeed a fetishization of consensus, anywhere and everywhere: “reconciliation” in Iraq itself, the “new international consensus for stability in Iraq,” and in the US (“success depends on the unity of the American people”). This should come as no surprise after the ISG developed their own consensus through nine endless months of team-bonding and trust exercises – rope courses, drumming, falling backwards into Ed Meese’s arms, etc.

It wasn’t worth it.

Some really very interesting proposals

Bush has received the Baker-Hamilton Commission report.


I can’t wait to color it in.

He says, “It is a report that brings some really very interesting proposals, and we will take every proposal seriously and we will act in a timely fashion.” Not without a time machine.



He suggests that Congress also “take this report seriously” and lectures them, not at all in the slightest bit condescendingly, that “The country, in my judgment, is tired of pure political bickering that happens in Washington, and they understand that on this important issue of war and peace, it is best for our country to work together.” And what better way to get people to work with you than to accuse them of pure political bickering.

What Americans are trying to figure out is why Iraqis are killing Iraqis when you have a better future ahead

Fiji has indeed had a coup. As is the custom, Australia was asked to send troops to prevent it and, as is the custom, it refused. An interesting sidebar: Fiji is a COW (Coalition of the Willing) country. What happens to its troops, currently helping bring democracy to Iraq?

By the way, I misread the title of the coup leader: he’s Commodore Bananarama, not Commander Bananarama. I’m not sure any coup has been instigated by a commodore before, although there was a flight lieutenant (Ghana).

According to the Guardian, Iran’s President Ahmadinejad is under attack from, how shall I put this gently, the religious loons who normally back him, because he attended the opening ceremonies of the Asian Games, which featured women singing and dancing, and he did not immediately run from the stadium (he claims he had already left).

Yesterday, Bush met with Abdul-Aziz Al-Hakim, head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). I’m not sure if his chair was facing the Christmas tree, and if so whether he was more put off by the tree or by the expression on Sadly Hadley’s face (possibly Hakim had just told him that Santa isn’t real?).



Bush said afterwards, “I told His Eminence that I was proud of the courage of the Iraqi people.” Proud? Like he’s responsible in some way for that courage? Granted, he is responsible for the need for courage.

Later, Bush told Fox News, “what Americans are trying to figure out is why Iraqis are killing Iraqis when you have a better future ahead.” Yes, that’s exactly what Americans are trying to figure out.

In a speech later in the day, Hakim also took a position against Iraqis killing Iraqis, calling instead for Americans to kill Iraqis (Sunni Iraqis, of course): “The strikes they are getting from the multinational forces are not hard enough to put an end to their acts.” He made this speech to the US Institute for Peace.

In that Fox interview, Bush praised Maliki: “I think he is -- I know he is prepared to take on the fact that there are murderers inside that society. What I’m looking for is somebody that says, a society in which murder and assassination takes place is not acceptable, regardless of who’s doing it. And I absolutely believe that the prime minister and Mr. Hakim are committed to ending murder. The hard work is to get it done, particularly when you have outside influences like al Qaeda stirring up sectarian violence, these suiciders are spectacular death.”

Bush praised John Bolton for choosing “to leave gracefully”. Who says “this business about graceful exit just simply has no realism to it at all”? Bush blamed “the shallow politics of the Senate”. He also portrayed Rumsfeld’s resignation as entirely Rummy’s decision after the two of them had “a very heart-to-heart.” Adding, “One thing about Don Rumsfeld is he understood mistakes.”

Asked again whether Iraq is in a civil war: “Listen, I’ve heard a lot of voices say that. And I’ve talked to people there in Iraq who don’t believe that’s the case. For example, some would argue that the fact that 90 percent of the country -- let me just say this -- most of the country outside of the Baghdad area, is relatively peaceful, doesn’t indicate a civil war as far as they’re concerned. And by the way, I get briefings all the time about where the level of violence is and the American people I think would be interested to know, most of it occurs around the Baghdad area. And therefore they don’t get to see, kind of the normalcy of life outside of the Baghdad area.”

Once again denied that his father was bailing him out, says he didn’t even tell him in advance that he’d be appointing Gates. Also, he just knows more stuff than his father: “Listen, I love my dad. But he understands what I know, that the level of information I have relative to the level of information most other people have, including himself, is significant and that he trusts me to make decisions.”

Speaking of that level of information, he described both the Rumsfeld memo and the Baker Commission report and so on as “advice documents.” “It’s very hard for me to, you know, prejudice one report over another. They’re all important.” Although the one he asked the Pentagon to write, to counter the Baker report, may just be that little bit more important.

He said that he “feels” that people are praying for him. Not that he knows it because people say they’re praying for him, but actually feels it. “Because the load is not heavy, I guess is the best way to describe it. Look, somebody said to me, prove it. I said, you can’t prove it. All I can tell you is I feel it. And it’s a remarkable country when millions pray for me and Laura. So therefore I am able to say to people that this is a joyful experience. Not a painful experience.” So glad he’s enjoying himself.

Chimpy & the chocolate factory

This morning Bush had over to the White House some children whose parents are serving overseas in the military for a production of “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.” He told the kids “I know it’s tough to have your mom or dad overseas, and we wish you all the best.” Yeah, good luck with that. “But it’s really important work. And so we wanted to welcome you here to the White House to, first of all, thank you for your strength, and so that you would do me a favor and email your mom or dad who is overseas how much the Commander-in-Chief respects them, admires them and supports them.” Then they all met Santa Claus, possibly played by John Bolton (Bush also issued a statement blaming Democrats’ “stubborn obstructionism” for “disrupting” his vital work of stubbornly obstructing the United Nations). Anyway, here are some pictures for you to caption. Try not to make fun of the kids. Their names are Addis Bugg and Chauncey Liscomb. Really, try not to make fun of the kids – did I mention that their names are Addis Bugg and Chauncey Liscomb? (Chauncey, by the way, is the white one)

The question every Fijian is asking

The thing about coups in Fiji (one of which seems to be going on now, rather slowly) is that the people who lead them have really fun names, like Commander Frank Bainimarama (pronounced just like it’s spelled, at least on Radio Australia) or Sitiveni Rabuka (pronounced just like it’s spelled). Total assholes, of course, like Bibi Netanyahu, who left office the same week as Rabuka in 1999, but really fun names.

I just did a search for Bainimarama, and Yahoo asked: “Did you mean: Bananarama”

Cut and run is not his cup of tea

Stephen Hadley, on the Sunday talk show circuit run, said that Bush won’t use the Iraq Study Group commission as cover for withdrawal from Iraq: “That isn’t graceful withdrawal, that’s cut and run. And, of course, as the president’s said, cut and run is not his cup of tea.” Best... mixed metaphor... ever!

Tim Russert asked Sadly Hadley (I’ve decided Hadley needs a nickname; his name also rhymes with badly and madly – and nadly, which isn’t a word but suggests a certain gonadal quality – but somehow I suspect I’ll wind up using “Boo” Hadley) if the thing about taking our hand off the bicycle seat in the Rummy memo didn’t imply that the Iraqis were like children. Hadley: “I think what’s interesting about the meeting the president had with Prime Minister Maliki this week in Amman, Jordan, is that it was Prime Minister Maliki who came in to the president and said, ‘We in the Iraqi unity government are ready to take more responsibility for our own future.’” Stevie, that just makes Maliki sound like a kid giving a speech about why he needs a larger allowance.

Hadley blamed the current dismal security situation on Saddam Hussein’s army for losing to us so quickly: “You know, Tim, people forget that, that we had hoped to have 150,000 to 200,000 Iraqi army forces to help in the security proposition, and those forces melted away at the close of the war.” Well that was just plain naughty of them. Now, even ignoring that Bremer dissolved the unmelted parts of the Iraqi army, is Hadley really suggesting that the plan was to defeat the Iraqi army and then the very next day put it to work under our command?

Caption contest: Hadley ran into Holy Joe Lieberman before “Face the Nation” (they appeared in separate segments). What are they saying?

Correction

In the last post, my outrage level was incorrectly set at too low a level. Let’s try again: “rewarding bad behavior” in Fallujah, Rumsfeld? RE-FUCKING-WARDING BAD BEHAVIOR IN FUCKING FALLUJAH??!!!

Go, Fighting Minimalists!

Anarchomuslim followed up on my previous post and found a picture of those Santas doing the Nazi salute (which I now know is called a Hitler-Gruß). I dunno, it could be a “Today the Arctic Circle, tomorrow the world” thing, or he could be warning of plummeting poop from a flying reindeer.


Still, there is a worse idea than a goose-stepping Santa, and it’s coming to Broadway: Tony Danza is Max Bialystock in The Producers.

Still, if there was worse casting, it was Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of War (he might make a good Max Bialystock, though)(Colin Powell as Leo Bloom, maybe?). Before he was fired, Rummy wrote a memo (unclear if this was an attempt to save his job, give advice to a successor, or burnish his reputation in some way) suggesting various possible changes to his failed Iraq policy. Benchmarks, increased training & embedding, send troops to the Iranian and Syrian borders, yadda yadda yadda. There’s an odd mix of tactics which involve the US acting like pouty children, taking our toys and going home: “Initiate an approach where U.S. forces provide security only for those provinces or cities that openly request U.S. help and that actively cooperate, with the stipulation being that unless they cooperate fully, U.S. forces would leave their province” and tactics which treat the Iraqis like pouty children: “Stop rewarding bad behavior, as was done in Fallujah when they pushed in reconstruction funds”, “Begin modest withdrawals of U.S. and Coalition forces (start ‘taking our hand off the bicycle seat’), so Iraqis know they have to pull up their socks” (or use bicycle clips, those are also useful).

There’s that old perennial, bribery: “Provide money to key political and religious leaders (as Saddam Hussein did), to get them to help us get through this difficult period.” Finally, someone’s trying to learn from the master.

Speaking of learning from the master, here’s one from the Clinton playbook: “Initiate a massive program for unemployed youth. It would have to be run by U.S. forces, since no other organization could do it.” Yes, midnight basketball.

Finally, Rummy focuses on the really important thing: making the US not look like big ol’ losers: “Announce that whatever new approach the U.S. decides on, the U.S. is doing so on a trial basis. This will give us the ability to readjust and move to another course, if necessary, and therefore not ‘lose.’ ... Recast the U.S. military mission and the U.S. goals (how we talk about them) — go minimalist.” Rummy, just go.

Actually, the document doesn’t look like what Bush calls “a plan for victory.” It’s not a coherent whole. You could implement every one of his suggestions and it wouldn’t stop Baghdad being a living hell (he specifically argues against sending in more troops to “attempt to control” Baghdad), wouldn’t stop death squad activity, etc.

At last, an exit strategy: a coin toss.
Must-read London Sunday Times article, “Death Squads Roam Baghdad’s Hospitals.” “The life of a human being was worth $600 and there were many people willing to kill patients for money.”

Unsettling

Reuters article: A German chain of shops has removed miniature wooden Santa Claus figures from its shelves and destroyed them after complaints by customers that they appeared to be giving the Hitler salute, which is outlawed. A Rossmann spokesman said: “We were astonished. He is just pointing at the sky.”

Bush’s weekly radio address, on the other hand, pointed at Iraq. He said he “recognize[s] that the recent violence in Iraq has been unsettling.” Gosh, is that what it’s been? The victims of today’s bombings in Baghdad might have a different word for it (er, the survivor’s might, the 43+ dead obviously not so much, got carried away with my own rhetoric there), but of course he meant unsettling for Americans. Those of you who have been unsettled by violence in Iraq for quite some time might wonder about the reference to “recent violence,” but the new Bush line is that everything was going just fine up until the Samarra bombing in February. He is relying on Americans regarding anything that took place farther back than 10 months as boring old ancient history, like the Peloponnesian Wars. Usually works.

Increasingly I just want to see Bush forced to define his terms, such as the “national reconciliation” he keeps saying he wants in Iraq. “Security in Iraq requires sustained action by the Iraqi security forces, yet in the long term, security in Iraq hinges on reconciliation among Iraq’s different ethnic and religious communities.” You know what doesn’t tend to lead to reconciliation? Sustained action by security forces.

Cocktails, salad and quiddich at Guantanamo

The Pentagon website has an article about how guards at Guantanamo are hurt that they have been unfairly portrayed. Says one of these sensitive souls, anonymously of course, “I wish they could see how much we care for these individuals. We pay so much attention to these detainees. Our care for them is very extensive. If a guy’s salad isn’t right, I’ll make a phone call to try and get him the correct salad.” I’m not sure what “salad” means in the no-doubt-colorful Gitmo prison lingo.

Sadly, the prisoners are inexplicably ungrateful for all the care taken over their “salads,” and often throw various bodily excreta, mixed together in a “cocktail,” at the guards, who are the true victims in all this.

As in all such articles, Guantanamo officials like to mention that Harry Potter books are special favorites among the enemy combatant set. I haven’t read the books, but Hogwarts is basically a British public school, isn’t it?, Eton with magic, so I’m guessing Harry would know what “getting him the correct salad” means.

Comfortable in his own mind

On the trip back from Jordan, Stephen Hadley admitted to reporters that the leaked memo was his, but said it didn’t affect the summit, and Maliki, “a really class act,” didn’t knee him in the groin even once.

He said Bush would react to the Baker Commission report (by the way, Bush this morning referred to the Iraq Study Group as, I’m paraphrasing slightly, a bunch of guys outside of government; he no longer ever says the name James Baker out loud, just as he avoided using Kerry’s name during the election campaign) in weeks rather than months. “It’s really going to be when the President is comfortable in his own mind”. That is an example of a straight line so pure and perfect, the Platonic ideal of a straight line, if you would, that it would be unnecessary, redundant and even a little cheap to respond to it.

Prodded to provide a little “color” about the summit, Hadley admitted that the table was rectangular, but, consummate diplomat that he is, evaded the questions, “Were there peanuts?” and “Did you have Coke, or what did you do?”

Speaking of having coke, a guy in Florida smoked some crack and decided to go skinny dipping. An alligator tried to eat him. There’s probably some sort of lesson in there somewhere.

So this 17-year-old high school student is given one of those dolls that teaches you what a pain in the ass babies are the responsibilities of parenthood. A few minutes later she’s driving along on the I-580, and the thing suddenly starts crying. She’s startled, bounces off the guard rail and hits a pickup truck. “When officers arrived, she was still caring for the baby,” according to a CHP officer, but didn’t have a driver’s license. There’s probably some sort of lesson in there somewhere.

The pope, visiting Turkey, attempted to make amends for saying bad things about Islam by visiting a mosque. He promptly burst into flames. There’s probably some sort of lesson in there somewhere.

Bush meets Maliki: This business about graceful exit just simply has no realism to it at all

Mikhail Gorbachev is in hospital with a blocked artery in his neck. He was crushed to learn that he was no longer important enough for Putin to have assassinated.

By the way, just how much of London did Putin have irradiated to kill one guy?

Read Andrew Cohen’s op-ed piece in the WaPo on the Guantanamo kangaroo courts.

Bush and Maliki finally met in Amman. Stephen Hadley was also present. That must have been awkward. But none of that awkwardness was displayed in Maliki’s expression or body language.





Bush and Maliki had a press conference.



After the mysterious leaking of the Hadley memo, Bush went out of his way to praise Maliki as “the right guy for Iraq” and “a strong leader.” Really? In what way is he strong? Or a leader?

Actually, a reporter asked him that (and with Maliki standing right there): “what gives you such confidence today to think that he can achieve what he hasn’t done over the last six months?” Bush said, “The first thing that gives me confidence is that he wants responsibility. A sign of leadership is for somebody to say, I want to be able to have the tools necessary to protect my people. One of his frustrations with me is that he believes we’ve been slow about giving him the tools necessary to protect the Iraqi people.” In other words, he’s actually a weak leader, who needs to be “given” tools. Or, in the word de jour, “accelerating” his capacity. Indeed, “As opposed to saying, America, you go solve the problem, we have a Prime Minister who’s saying, stop holding me back, I want to solve the problem.”



I won’t have much to say about Maliki’s remarks, which appear in the transcript as badly-translated bluster: “So everybody who is trying to make Iraq their own influences appear on the account of the Iraqi people needs to recalculate for it will not happen.” One can only hope Bush and Maliki’s translators did a better job. On the other hand, badly-translated bluster may be the only language Bush speaks fluently.

Bush: “I know there’s a lot of speculation that these reports in Washington mean there’s going to be some kind of graceful exit out of Iraq... this business about graceful exit just simply has no realism to it at all.” Is there anyone who actually expects a graceful exit from Iraq? Marines performing grandes pliés while holding on to the runners of helicopters taking off from the embassy roof, perhaps?



Asked about a time limit on meeting his goals, Bush helpfully said, “As soon as possible. But I’m realistic, because I understand how tough it is inside of Iraq.” Which is why 500 miles away in Jordan is as close as he’s gonna get. “No question it’s a violent society right now. He knows that better than anybody. He was explaining to me that occasionally the house in which he lives gets shelled by terrorists who are trying to frighten him.”

All time tables do, he said, “is set people up for unrealistic expectations.” And if there’s one thing Bush never sets people up for, it’s unrealistic expectations.



Finally, Bush demonstrated his sophisticated understanding of the Middle East: “Well, first of all, there’s no question that if we were able to settle the Palestinian-Israeli issue, it would help bring more peace to the Middle East.” “I believe it’s in the Palestinian people’s interest that they have their own state.” He even has advice for Condi to bring to Olmert and Abbas: “My advice is, support reasonable people and reject extremists.”

I always thought Bill Frist’s centeredness was fueled by the still-dripping heart of a kitten

Bill Frist will not be running for president. According to his statement, “We will seek the best opportunity to serve mankind.” OH MY GOD! IT’S A COOKBOOK!! A COOKBOOK!!!

Every recipe in which begins “First catch your kitten...”

He says he will “stay actively involved in formulating innovative solutions to the seemingly insurmountable problems that face Americans every day,” such as “the threat of radical Islam.” I’m looking forward to hearing his innovative solution to the threat of radical Islam, aren’t you?

He says, “I, of course, will immediately resume my regular medical mission trips as a doctor around the world to serve those in poverty, in famine, and in civil war. That is where my centeredness is fueled.” Say, I can think of a civil war I’d like to send him to. Just to fuel his centeredness, of course...

Also, why does he need to take trips around the world? Can’t he just diagnose them on video?

The Hadley memo

The NYT prints all of Stephen Hadley’s Nov. 8 secret memo on the conclusions he formed on his trip to Iraq. Maliki, who has been known to call Bush up in a panic asking to be reassured that the US still backs him, will be reading this right before what I’m guessing will be a rather awkward meeting with Bush.

The big surprise is that the memo blames everything on George Bush. Wasn’t it brave of Hadley to write this about his boss?: “The information he receives is undoubtedly skewed by his small circle of... advisers, coloring his actions and interpretation of reality. His intentions seem good when he talks with Americans... [b]ut the reality on the streets of Baghdad suggests [he] is either ignorant of what is going on, misrepresenting his intentions, or that his capabilities are not yet sufficient to turn his good intentions into action.” OK, I probably didn’t fool any of you, that was about Maliki not Bush, but I think I made my point.

The “Steps Maliki Could Take” section includes:

The Clintonesque: “Announce an overhaul of his own personal staff so that ‘it reflects the face of Iraq.’”

The humorous: “Demand that all government workers... publicly renounce all violence for the pursuit of political goals as a condition for keeping their positions.” Because they might associate with militias and death squads, but they wouldn’t, you know, lie.

The fantastical: “appoint... nonsectarian, capable technocrats in key service (and security) ministries.” For fifty years, US officials have said that what Latin American, African, Asian, etc countries need is to be run by technocrats, near-mythical beings whose only goal in life is to make the railroads/sewers/banking systems etc run properly. I’m not saying there are no technocrats, I’m saying there are maybe 6 in Iraq.

Stay the course: “Declare that Iraq will support the renewal of the UN mandate for multinational forces”.

Tear everything down and start over: “Declare the immediate suspension of suspect Iraqi police units and a robust program of embedding coalition forces into MOI [Ministry of the Interior] units while the MOI is revetted and retrained.”

The “What We Can Do To Help Maliki” section mostly involves building up his image: “let Maliki take more credit for positive developments” (notice who is “letting” who take credit). But just when you’re thinking that this is the most realistic statement about Iraq you’ve seen from within the Bush administration, it suggests that the US can “help him form a new political base among moderate politicians from Sunni, Shia, Kurdish and other communities. Ideally, this base would constitute a new parliamentary bloc that would free Maliki from his current narrow reliance on Shia actors.” Total fantasy. Even if there were a sizeable constituency for such a party, how on earth could we create it (oh, wait, it says later on that “We would likely need to use our own political capital to press moderates to align themselves with Maliki’s new political bloc”; see, I knew there was a reasonable answer, we’d just use our political capi–- wait, our what now?) (also, money, and lots of it), and how would it grow and become strong enough to serve as the basis for a legitimate government without the existing parties, parliament and cabinet noticing, and doing something violent about it? It says that such a realignment could take place without an election (the next one isn’t scheduled until 2009), but it would require getting Sistani’s permission.

All of this would require Maliki to be much bolder (or you could say more foolhardy and quixotic) than he has appeared to be to date. My first impression of Maliki was that he was a blowhard, and I’ve seen nothing since then to alter that impression.

(Update: as I was writing, news came that the Maliki-Bush talks were postponed until tomorrow. Something’s up.)
(Updatier: Dan Bartlett explains: “I just said that [Maliki] had a meeting -- he had a bilateral earlier today with the King [of Jordan]; they had a very good conversation, and afterwards they felt, well, since we had good conversations, we addressed issues, there was not an agenda for the three for a trilateral that they felt was necessary.”)

Caption contest, Latvian style

Pictures from the NATO summit in Riga, for your captioning pleasure. The women are respectively Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freiberga (try saying that five times fast), German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and an unidentified scary black chick.

Wherein I must allude to disemboweling, and not the fun kind of disemboweling

So I’m reading down the table of contents page for Wednesday’s Independent, and there’s this lovely headline from Afghanistan: “Disembowelled, Then Torn Apart: The Price of Daring to Teach Girls.” In one of those speeches in the Baltics yesterday, Bush bragged that there are now 2 million girls being taught in Afghanistan, whereas under the Taliban there were 0. I’m pretty sure he didn’t say anything about the whole disemboweling thing. (If you read the article you may notice a similarity between the description of what the Taliban did to one of the four teachers they killed in Ghazni and what the French did to Robert Damiens in 1757 for the attempted regicide of Louis XV) (only with motorbikes instead of horses).

Anyway, on the Indy’s contents page, that story is followed by a palate-cleanser, “Bollywood Breathes Sigh of Relief as Idol Is Cleared of Bombing,” and then it’s on to “Five Young Girls Killed in US Attack on Iraqi Insurgents.” Let’s stop presenting our military adventures as acts of feminist liberation, is all I’m saying.

The Guardian also has a long article on the position of women in Afghanistan.

Following Bush on his expedentions abroad

Like Stephen Hadley, Bush today referred to Iraq as being in a “phase” rather than a civil war. A phase of what, he didn’t say. Phase of the moon, phasers on stun, whatever. He’s putting a lot of emphasis on who started the “phase” (“There’s a lot of sectarian violence taking place, fomented, in my opinion, because of these attacks by al Qaeda, causing people to seek reprisal”), which wouldn’t be particularly relevant to stopping it even if he were right. He says, “You know, the plans of Mr. Zarqawi was to foment sectarian violence. That’s what he said he wanted to do.” “[W]e’ve been in this phase for a while,” since the Samarra bombing (everything was going perfectly in Iraq until February), which was intended by Al Qaida “to create sectarian violence, and it has. The recent bombings were to perpetuate the sectarian violence.” That’s funny, because I thought all those things actually were sectarian violence. He seems to think that violence and civil war is an end in itself to the bad guys, forgetting that some people actually prefer to finish wars.

Bush grudgingly admits that he can’t really object to Iraqi leaders talking to Iranians: “Iraq is a sovereign nation which is conducting its own foreign policy. They’re having talks with their neighbors. And if that’s what they think they ought to do, that’s fine. I hope their talks yield results. One result that Iraq would like to see is for the Iranians to leave them alone.”

He praises Estonia for being a COW (Coalition of the Willing) country: “And the interesting contribution that a country like Estonia is making is that, people shouldn’t have to live under tyranny. We just did that; we don’t like it.”

Asked about the Russian attempts to subjugate Georgia, Bush is clearly bored with the whole subject, unwilling to criticize Putin, and may possibly have forgotten a few words into his answer which conflict he’d been asked about: “Precisely what we ought to do is help resolve the conflict and use our diplomats to convince people there is a better way forward than through violence. We haven’t seen violence yet. The idea is to head it off in the first place.”

In Latvia, he said that “Europe no longer produces armed ideologies that threaten other nations with aggression and conquest and occupation,” while lauding NATO’s armed occupation of Afghanistan in the name of freedom and the transformation of NATO into an “expedentiary” alliance, and he demanded that members increase their military budgets so they can participate in these, um, expedentions I guess.

Mortis

Bananas redux

I seem to be unable to leave the idea of the humor inherent in the word banana alone today, so here is a column from the October 29 1997 London Times, by Matthew Parris:

Blair’s eloquence slips on a banana skin

Yesterday Tony Blair said “banana” in the Commons.

It sounded odd from this Prime Minister: somehow beneath his dignity. The leader’s Brighton speech had been a triumph. “Vision ... passion ... the British soul ... beacon to the world ...” had echoed round the hall. “Fear lost. Hope won. The giving age began!” he had cried. “Britain! A young country!”

Now here he was, looking tired, minus yet more tufts of hair, and saying “banana”. Not the giving banana, the young banana or the beacon banana. Just banana.

The occasion was a statement to the Commons on the conclusion of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting. Mr Blair began gurgling away in grand style: “Delighted to welcome Commonwealth Heads ... my thanks to the people of Scotland...” he gushed.

“Warmth of Her Majesty’s reception ... Economic Declaration on ‘Promoting Shared Prosperity’ ... Harare Declaration of 1991", the Prime Minister rumbled, as the capital letters rolled. “Arrangements for African, Caribbean and Pacific ...”

But oops! What was this? We sensed a tiny frisson of alarm ruffle Mr Blair’s composure as his eye caught the next word. He almost gulped. “... banana exporters.” He said “banana” very quickly and rather quietly, anxious to move on. Mr Blair soon recovered his dignity and his capital letters. “Code of Good Practice ... South Asia Regional Fund ... every Highly Indebted Poor Country ...” But once you have heard a person say “banana”, a sliver of the awe in which you had held them is lost, never to be recovered. Something similar happened when John Gummer said “porpoise” at the dispatch box, twice, in 1993.

And there was more to come. Perhaps in some schoolboy pact to make Blair say “banana” as much as possible, Tory backbenchers kept asking him about the Caribbean. John Wilkinson (C, Ruislip Northwood) demanded to know how the Prime Minister would “safeguard the banana regime”. Blair refused to say “banana regime” but could not avoid saying “banana” once again in his reply.

Bowen Wells (C, Hertford and Stortford) leapt up. Did he understand the importance of this fruit to Commonwealth nations? “Economies,” said Blair, pained, “that are completely dependent on, er, one particular, er, form of produce ...”

A new phase characterized by this increasing sectarian violence that requires us obviously to adapt to that new phase

Today Bush signed the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, which somehow I hadn’t heard of before, which classifies as terrorism, and increases the penalties for, any acts against “animal enterprises” (i.e., companies that use or sell animals) which reduce their profits, including non-violent acts such as blockades, trespassing, freeing animals, “threats,” etc. Terrorism.

Actually, acts of animal terrorism are committed twice daily in my home when I give my cat her pills, although she and I might have differing ideas about which of us is committing the terrorist acts.

The White House website also informs us that Thursday is “National Methamphetamine Awareness Day.” So don’t forget to be aware of meth on Thursday. The proclamation informs us that “Chronic use can lead to violent behavior, paranoia, and an inability to cope with the ordinary demands of life”... oh, you’re all way ahead of me, aren’t you?

NBC has decided to use the term “civil war” to describe the situation in Iraq. Did they even consider my compromise alternative, “crapfest”?

National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley disagrees, but does say that “We’re clearly in a new phase characterized by this increasing sectarian violence that requires us obviously to adapt to that new phase”. Not very Ken Burns-y, is it? Cue plaintive violin music: “My dearest Martha: this new phase characterized by this increasing sectarian violence that requires us obviously to adapt to that new phrase drags on, and I grow weary...”

Hadley continued, “Obviously, everyone would agree things are not proceeding well enough or fast enough.” You’ll notice the word “enough” assumes that things are in fact proceeding in the right direction and at a measurable pace.

He also said that while “there’s been a lot of discussion within the American press about the need to adapt our strategy, a lot of discussion about Baker-Hamilton, a lot of discussion on talk shows... it’s important, I think, for the President to send the message to Prime Minister Maliki that while he is listening to all of these voices for ideas, is open to ideas, that in the end of the day to reassure Prime Minister Maliki that it is the President who will be crafting the way forward on Iraq”. Yes, George W. Bush crafting the way forward, how... reassuring.

At that briefing, Tony Insert-Snow-Related-Pun-Here denied that there was a civil war in Iraq because it was not, he said, a battle for territory. “What you do have is sectarian violence that seems to be less aimed at gaining full control over an area than expressing differences”. Expressing differences. Like a letter to the editor, but slightly more horrific.

Robin Wright and Thomas Ricks of the WaPo say, without sourcing or further explanation, that Cheney was in fact “basically summoned” by Saudi Arabia.

Bush, meanwhile, was in Estonia today, meeting with Estonian President Herman Munster.



Everyone assumes that Alexander Litvinenko received the fatal dosage of radiation poisoning in that London sushi restaurant from an agent of Putin, but has anyone asked whether he ordered the Godzilla sushi?

In Ecuadoran presidential elections, Rafael Correa defeats “pro-American banana tycoon” Alvaro Noboa. I don’t have any analysis of that, I just wanted to be able to say “pro-American banana tycoon.”

“Banana magnate” is also funny.

“Banana baron.”

Really, anything in the whole banana area is amusing.

Banana banana banana.

Just saying.

They want to drag you all into angry reactions

Maliki went on Iraqi tv again, to issue a joint statement with Talabani and the speaker of parliament declaring that the civil war is the result of lack of unity. No shit. “The terrorist acts,” they say, “are a reflection of the lack of political consensus.” Again I say: no shit. “Do not let those who are depriving you of security impinge on your unity. They want to drag you all into angry reactions.” Well, Iraqis are displaying a certain unity in that they’re all reacting angrily.

For example, the Iraqis who stoned Maliki’s motorcade when he ventured into Sadr City yesterday to visit the families of victims of Thursday’s violence. Shiite victims, of course; he wouldn’t have dared visit Sunnis.



Er, isn’t the “thumbs up” sign considered obscene in Iraq?

We’ve requested the Americans not to do it again

The London Sunday Times (no one else seems to have this story) says that the bombing of that Pakistani madrassa last month, killing 82, was actually carried out by American warplanes, but according to its source, described by the paper as a key aide to Gen. Musharraf, “there was a lot of collateral damage and we’ve requested the Americans not to do it again.” So that’s okay then.

New York police shot up some people leaving a bachelor party at a strip club, killing the groom. They say they were acting to “prevent an incident.” I don’t know, shooting 54 bullets at a car full of people seems to me rather like an “incident.” As always with one of these incidents, nearly as horrifying as the number of rounds let off is the number which missed. It sounds like the cops hit the target – a car which was no longer moving – only 21 times, while hitting a lot of other cars and an apartment window.

Cheney’s visit to Saudi Arabia is now concluded, and no one will say what he actually discussed with the members of the royal family he met, although it is suggested that he asked them to rein in the Sunni insurgents in Iraq. It’s news to me that the House of Saud actually has that sort of influence, and possibly it was news to them as well (the Sindy refers to Riyadh’s “tribal connections” to the militias).


Cheney doesn’t do the hand-holding thing, you’ll notice.

In a WaPo article on the Iraq Study Group, Robin Wright quotes one of the “experts” as saying that James Baker “doesn’t tolerate fools.” Of course he doesn’t.

Breaking curfew

A mention of this on today’s Now Show reminds me that I forgot to relay the story that the manufacturers of “Welsh Dragon Sausage” are in trouble with the trading standards people because the name inadequately describes the product. As the Now Show put it, the dragons from which the sausage is made are not in fact Welsh.

Iraqi President Talabani says that an emergency security conference was a success. Hurrah! Evidently, “All parties agreed on the importance of working together and really participating in Nouri Maliki’s government of national unity.” Gosh, I’m sure everything will be fine now. I don’t know why no one thought of holding a pointless conference in order to mouth platitudes before now.


New White House spokesmodel Scott Stanzel says that this certainly isn’t a civil war (“We’re constantly asked that question, and while the situation is serious, Prime Minister Maliki and President Talabani have said they do not believe it is a civil war.”), but all this killing and shit is bad. “It is an outrage that these terrorists are targeting innocent civilians in a brazen effort to topple a democratically elected government.” You’re missing the point, Little Scotty II: no one needs to topple the “government” because it is irrelevant. Also, of course, the militias are associated with the parties and politicians who constitute the government – any day I’m expecting to read about a firefight between the Health Ministry and the Ministry of Education – with the difference that the militias can actually get things done, albeit evil things. The government can’t fill in potholes; the militias can, but, like those Welsh Dragon Sausages, you really don’t want to know what they’re filled with.

Sorry. I made that joke but even I was grossed out by it.

I’ve read several stories about Iraq today that begin like this one: “Defying a government curfew, Shiite militiamen stormed Sunni mosques in Baghdad and a nearby city on Friday, shooting guards and burning down buildings...” Etc, etc. Every one of these stories insists, for some reason, on mentioning along with all the other atrocities, the wanton disregard of the curfew. Does their wickedness and perfidy know no bounds? Did they also run any red lights on their way to pour kerosine on Sunnis and burn them alive?

There was an exception to the Baghdad curfew, according to the BBC: “The only vehicles allowed out were those carrying the coffins of Thursday’s bombing victims.” So, um...

Provocation

My theory: Cheney was supposed to make a “surprise” Thanksgiving visit to Iraq, but cancelled when they started setting off car bombs every 15 minutes.

While the authorities in Britain are deciding how to perform an autopsy on Alexander Litvinenko without killing everyone in the room, Putin denounces the late Litvinenko’s statement blaming him for his murder, saying “It’s extremely regrettable that such a tragic event as death is being used for political provocation.” So maybe you shouldn’t have had him killed, huh Vlad?

Speaking of provocations, here are some more London Review of Books (LRB) personal ads:

Young, charming, thoughtful, attractive, sporty, zesty, intelligent. None of these are me, but if you’d like to spend an afternoon or more considering alternative adjectives to be applied to 53-year old cantankerous dipshit, write now to box no 2202

I wrote this ad to prove I’m not gay. Man, 29. Not gay. Absolutely not. Box no. 2205

They don’t call me naughty Lola. They call me Brian. Brian, 57. Box no. 23/07

Normally I wait until I have more than that, but I thought I’d mention, for those looking for Xmas presents, that there is now a book of LRB personals (which I just ordered, but haven’t seen), They Call Me Naughty Lola. (Mysteriously, that Amazon.com page thinks the book should be bought along with “Home Comforts: The Art and Science of Keeping House.”) Or for free there’s always my own compilation page, currently experiencing a small surge of Google popularity following an article Monday in the NYT on the LRB personals phenomenon.

I’m very sorry, fake sincerity. Oh, I wasn’t supposed to say that part out loud?

Honestly I couldn’t give a shit about the Michael Richards incident, but I do wonder what is revealed about our society by this headline: “PR Expert to Help Richards Apologize.”

Or this one: “Iraq Logs 400 Casualties; Marines Enjoy Turkey.”

Speaking of turkeys, George Bush phoned ten members of the military to, I don’t know, tell them the story of Thanksgiving or something. I’m not sure who selected the ten lucky callees (2 from each service), if there was a whole team sifting through dossiers, or if a PR expert helped Bush apologize, but the White House did issue a picture of him making the calls.


One of my favorite actors, Philippe Noiret (Coup de Torchon, The Clockmaker of St. Paul, Life and Nothing But, Birgit Haas Must Be Killed, La Grande Bouffe, Cinema Paradiso, Zazie dans le Metro, etc etc), has died.