podpolia

It’s very sad that the British media are now more free (or at least, more willing) to criticize the U.S. President than the American media generally seem to be.

UPDATE 8/13/10 18.35: I was very amused by one commenter on this article:

The 11th reason is because Obama is a “Pole Turtle”. If you ever see a turtle sitting on top of a fence pole you know the following: He didn’t get up there by himself. He doesn’t belong up there. He doesn’t know what to do while up there. He certainly isn’t going anywhere and you have to wonder what kind of dumb ass put him there in the first place.

Certainly sums that up.

Well, my health insurance just went up another 15%. Yeah, those of us who like our insurance can keep it, alright, but we have to pay an arm and a leg for it.

This seems to explain quite a bit.

The Jawa Report has had a number of interesting posts on the incident on the Mavi Marmara recently. I thought I would hit a few highlights:

The story is really coming in from the commandos’ point of view now, and at least one of them is being considered for a medal of valor. The story includes much more information about what was happening in the first seconds on board the ship than I’ve seen anywhere else (including details on the shots fired at the commandos and the fact that the attackers were apparently trained and well paid). Naturally, it doesn’t fit the narrative that much of the media has already created, so it’s being brushed aside.

Another interesting bit is a translation of a speech made by the organizer of the flotilla – definitely provides some perspective.

It would be interesting to analyze the progression of the story from the initial reports to the current narrative, and see how the story has changed. How does the narrative actually change as new details come out? Have individual organizations / governments / media outlets actually corrected previous inaccuracies, or have they simply shifted the story and assumed people would catch up? How much of the shift is intentional, and how much unconscious? It would probably make an interesting paper. (In fact, if anyone wants to collaborate on such a paper, let me know!)

I had seen this elsewhere earlier, but I’ll give the hat tip to the Jawa Report.

UPDATE: YouTube has pulled this video because apparently they don’t understand the Fair Use Doctrine. There’s another copy of the video here, but I’ll leave up the original embedded video as a reminder of YouTube’s perfidy, and my own laziness.

The international media is and world governments are currently pretending to be shocked that both Israel and anti-Israel protesters did what they said they would do, and that the inevitable clash happened. Amazing how little is being made of the “peaceful protesters” who attacked the Israeli troops, and how Israel had offered a peaceful solution whereby the ships would deliver their cargo to the Israeli port of Ashdod “and from there [the Israeli government] guaranteed that all humanitarian cargo would be transferred to the people of Gaza.” (Of course, this media circus was never intended to be about the actual aid – especially considering the actual situation in Gaza.) Both sides of the story are likely to come out eventually, but it likely won’t effect the narrative now being created. Probably unsurprisingly, the Israeli media seems to be the only ones who are actively contemplating what this might mean for the future.

More concerning overall is the situation that Israel has found itself in even before the current problems. The Obama administration in Washington is beginning to engage in dialogue with Hamas (which, the last time I checked, was still officially classed as a Foreign Terrorist Organization), and is oscillating rapidly on whether or not to support Israel’s status in regards to their nuclear power status. It’s no wonder that Israel currently feels the need for a more iron-clad assurance of its ability to defend against Iran. I wonder how soon Obama will realize that allowing Israel to be pushed into a corner in dealing with Syria and Iran could be a very bad thing.

Tomorrow (20 May 2010) is up on some calendars as “Draw Mohammed Day,” a movement largely popularized on Facebook. The most coherent explanation of what it is and why it’s being done that I have seen is this video:

(hat tip: The Jawa Report)

The concept is definitely getting some attention – the Pakistani government has blocked Facebook for the rest of the month for allowing the page to stay online. In the mean time, some Muslims are continuing the same things that sparked the backlash to the backlash:

I started to worry when Obama signed an executive order some months ago allowing INTERPOL to operate in the United States. Things like this are one of the main reasons why. While it still seems to be true that INTERPOL wouldn’t be allowed to arrest anyone on American soil, it’s still worrisome that the organization can convince banks to close your accounts and refuse to allow you to open a new one. While the director of INTERPOL in the US says that the executive order “give[s] them the same authorities and immunities that any international organization that’s based here in the U.S. has, nothing more, nothing less” (does anyone else find it odd that he’s the director and he refers to the organization in the third person plural?), it doesn’t quite ring true. Other international organizations aren’t very likely to shut down your bank accounts and threaten to arrest you, now are they?

I ran across an interesting article today about what’s wrong with the CIA. Definitely worth a look – this is what happens when over-beaureaucratization is allowed to interfere with American security.

There are some pretty hair raising descriptions of what is currently going on for Rep. Massa from New York. From what I’ve read so far, it looks like he’s being slimed out of Washington using absolutely disgusting political tactics. I just wrote him an email, and thought I would share it:

Rep. Massa,

Despite not being one of your constituents, I felt that I should still write to offer you encouragement. The situation you currently find yourself in in Washington, while the result of your actions, is not YOUR fault. It is the fault of what you correctly term the toxic atmosphere of Washington, D.C. When the words and actions of an individual are taken in ways entirely beyond the way in which they were clearly meant, merely for partisan political purposes, the political culture is out of control. We need to find a way to correct that. Your willingness to take responsibility for your own actions shows that you ARE one of the people we need to have in Washington — someone who feels their responsibility to their constituents and to the nation.

While we may not necessarily agree politically, I would like to ask you to continue standing up for your principles in the nation’s capitol, and rescind your resignation. Your decision to stay and stand up against the corrosive politics there would be a brave act, and I believe would be appreciated accordingly.

UPDATE 4/13/10 18.35: Sounds like Massa’s problems WERE his fault. Should have known that a politician appearing principled was just a deception.

Good riddance.