Assume the Position

Thursday, June 05, 2003
Funny How That Worked. Howell Raines is out as executive editor at The New York Times before any woman is in as a member at Augusta National Golf Club. I wonder if Raines ever considered that when you "flood the zone" you're liable to be caught in the backwash. Meanwhile, Hootie Johnson is still chairman of Augusta National and the success of the recent sponsor-free, commercial-free Masters Tournament telecast has prompted him to announce it will continue to go without televison sponsors and the Masters broadcast will be commercial-free again next year.

Tuesday, June 03, 2003
Why would you read the Washington Times story by Bill Gertz, "CIA says al Qaeda ready to use nukes" (via Drudge) when you can just go to the CIA website and read the pamphlet, "Terrorist CBRN: Material and Effects," for yourself? Could it be, so that six-months or a year from now when al-Qaeda hasn't nuked anything, you can moan that the Administration "lied" to you because someone repeated the headline from the Gertz article?

Funniest line in the Gertz article: "The unclassified report was produced by the CIA's intelligence directorate, and a copy of it was obtained by The Washington Times."

Whoo Hoo! Well, you too can obtain your own "copy" at the above link - which neither Drudge nor Gertz listed.

Monday, June 02, 2003
What Would You Do For A Klondike Bar? Well…I'd eat a submarine. (Via ParaPundit.)

Sunday, June 01, 2003
Yeah, What He Said. What I wrote yesterday morning about the reasons for the war:

But when all of those reasons are put together, it [the combination] tipped the balance; and the prohibited weapons programs provided the best (and probably, only) handle under international law because of the original Gulf War cease fire agreement.

Tony Blair, reported today from a Sky News interview sometime yesterday (emphasis added):

Downing Street has been hampered in its argument by repeated suggestions from the Bush administration that WMD may never be found. Paul Wolfowitz, deputy to the US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, suggested last week that WMD were a bureaucratic pretext to start a war.

Blair told Sky that WMD were the basis in law for taking military action - but 'that's not the same as saying it's a bureaucratic pretext'.

I'd like to find the actual quote of what Blair said, since it's hard to trust the Guardian/Observer's paraphrase while they continue to push the distortions about what Wolfowitz said. Sky News does have this story reflecting some of Blair's remarks:


The Prime Minister has dismissed as "completely absurd" the notion that western intelligence agencies invented evidence of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction to justify the war in Iraq.

At a news conference in Poland with Prime Minister Leszek Miller, Mr Blair said he had "no doubt at all" that evidence of weapons would be found.

But he said that with Saddam gone the priority was rebuilding Iraq, not finding the weapons, and he warned his critics they might have a long wait before evidence came to light.

Opponents of the Iraq war were "now trying to find fresh reasons why it was not the right thing to do," he said.

That story links to a video from the news conference, and this story links to a video of part of the Blair interview, but neither has the part where Blair references WMDs as providing the basis in law.

Ah, The Irony. As Porphyrogenitus says:

What's the first thing you do when you're contemplating a major covert operation aimed at toppling another country's government?

That's right: you tell ABC News.

He also nails Ted Turner:

That's the real, underlaying message in his article, all the pablum about concern over "suppressed views" to the contrary, Turner is clearly upset that for the first time in recent memory, his slant on things, CNN's slant on things, Peter Jennings' slant on things, the LA Times' slant on things (which are all indistinguishable), wasn't the only voice out there.

Original content copyright © 2002-2005 Lynxx Pherrett. All rights reserved.