The Blog with No Name

The US isn’t doing enough in Sudan, but at least we’re trying to do something. But, once again, the UN stands in the way of making it an international effort (my emphasis):

Having faced opposition from seven countries in the 15-member U.N. Security Council, U.S. officials on Thursday revised the draft resolution for the third time and deleted the word “sanctions.”

But the measure still carries the threat of unspecified sanctions against Khartoum in 30 days through more cumbersome language, such as pointing to provisions in the U.N. Charter on economic, communications or diplomatic sanctions.

“The initial draft included the word sanctions. It turns out that the use of that word is objectionable to certain members of the Security Council,” U.S. Ambassador John Danforth told reporters. “They would rather use ‘U.N. speak’ for exactly the same thing.”

The feet draggers are Pakistan, Russia, China, Brazil, Philippines, Angola, and Algeria. Interestingly enough France now says it will co-sponsor the measure. Good for them.

Meanwhile, Sudan fires back with a threat to sue BBC.

At end of her chapter on Iraq, Samantha Power, in her book A Problem from Hell writes, “To this day, however, no Iraqi soldier or political leader has been punished for atrocities committed against the Kurds.”

That was written in 2002. Now, things have changed. Now, those ******* will see justice. I hope no mercy is granted and the strongest possible punishment is given to all the monsters that perpetrated the genocide of the Kurds.

It’s tough reading this book. It’s hard to learn about the inaction and inertness of our country when such great, heinous evil was going on abroad. And the thing that really pisses me off is that it’s happening again in Sudan, and Bush is doing nothing about it. This angers me to no end. I am seriously considering not voting for him if does nothing about it. There is no word I can use to condemn inaction strongly enough.

It is not a stretch for me to say that my whole view of Bush will fundamentally change if he continues to ignore what is going on in Sudan. Start reading about it here.

UPDATE: Instapundit points to an editorial about Sudan. It’s encouraging to know that we’ve already given $130 million to help the situation in Sudan, but I would say this is not enough. We need boots on the ground there. Also note France is opposing the wimpy UN trade sanctions. Why?

France led opposition to US moves at the UN over Iraq. As was the case in Iraq, France also has significant oil interests in Sudan.

The French are despicable. Screw the French, and screw the UN. We don’t need them to solve this problem either.

UPDATE AGAIN: Cox and Forkum illustrate the situation well.

This is interesting:

Former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, the hero of 9-11, is being secretly courted to become President George W. Bush’s running mate in the November election, The ENQUIRER has learned.

If this is true, at least this will get liberal wieners to shut up about Halliburton . . . maybe.

So, the right-wing nut-job bloggers are going crazy over this picture, I figured I might as well join the fray too. Is this Kerry’s Dukakis moment? Compare here. I’m guessing somebody in the Kerry Kamp is getting the boot for letting this happen.

I like Greg Piper’s take on it.

To put things in perspective once again. There’s really nothing I can say about this:

If Idrissi seems a bit callous about the fate of the Iraqis in US-run jails, he has probably earned the right to differ. He recalls a day in 1982, at the General Security prison in Baghdad:

“They called all the prisoners out to the courtyard for what they called a ‘celebration.’ We all knew what they meant by ‘celebration.’ All the prisoners were chained to a pipe that ran the length of the courtyard wall. One prisoner, Amer al-Tikriti, was called out. They said if he didn’t tell them everything they wanted to know, they would show him torture like he had never seen. He merely told them he would show them patience like they had never seen.”

“This is when they brought out his wife, who was five months pregnant. One of the guards said that if he refused to talk he would get 12 guards to rape his wife until she lost the baby. Amer said nothing. So they did. We were forced to watch. Whenever one of us cast down his eyes, they would beat us.”

“Amer’s wife didn’t lose the baby. So the guard took a knife, cut her belly open and took the baby out with his hands. The woman and child died minutes later. Then the guard used the same knife to cut Amer’s throat.” There is a moment of silence. Then Idrissi says: “What we have seen about the recent abuse at Abu Ghraib is a joke to us.”

I wasn’t going to say anything about this because I think it’s a non-issue, but the ending paragraph is such a non-sequitur. The article is about Teresa Heinz telling a reporter to “shove it,” which is entirely understandable in my view, but then the story ends with a whole paragraph about Cheney’s recent outburst. What? Where did that come from? Maybe they should have tacked on Kerry cursing at one of his secret service agents too. I’m sure they could have had a whole chain of political outbursts going all the way back to when Burr shot Hamilton.

Mom can we make this when I come up there? Mmmm, mmm, mmmm!

Pilfering follows:

1 cup water

2 tablespoons cornstarch

1/2 cup sweetened condensed milk

1 1/2 cups evaporated milk

1/4 teaspoon salt

1/2 cup sugar

1/2 cup Guinness stout

In a heavy saucepan whisk together the water and the cornstarch and simmer the mixture over moderate heat, whisking, for 2 minutes. Add the milks, the salt, and the sugar, heat the mixture over moderately low heat, whisking, for 1 to 2 minutes, or until the sugar is dissolved, and remove the pan from the heat. Let the mixture cool completely, stir in the Guinness, and freeze the mixture in an ice-cream freezer according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

Makes about 1 quart

Finally, one of NYT editors addresses media bias. Is the NYT a liberal paper? “Of course it is.”

Money quotes:

. . . for now my concern is the flammable stuff that ignites the right. These are the social issues: gay rights, gun control, abortion and environmental regulation, among others. And if you think The Times plays it down the middle on any of them, you’ve been reading the paper with your eyes closed.

. . . It’s one thing to make the paper’s pages a congenial home for editorial polemicists, conceptual artists, the fashion-forward or other like-minded souls (European papers, aligned with specific political parties, have been doing it for centuries), and quite another to tell only the side of the story your co-religionists wish to hear. I don’t think it’s intentional when The Times does this. But negligence doesn’t have to be intentional.

I think it’s an intentional bias, but, obviously, it’s almost impossible to prove this unless some reporters become extremely honest.

Okrent does make a good point that the NYT’s bias stems from its location. It shouldn’t be any surprise that it reflects the leftier, urban sensibilites of its home town. But he also doesn’t think this is an excuse for its biased coverage. He concludes, “Taking the New York out of The New York Times would be a really bad idea. But a determination by the editors to be mindful of the weight of its hometown’s presence would not.” If they want to become an even larger national paper, then they should definitely work harder at this. Besides, God forbid New Yorkers read a story that might make them think twice about an issue.

Don’t worry, Ralph, the GOP gots you covered.
First graph says it all:

Consumer advocate Ralph Nader’s quixotic presidential campaign says it submitted about 5,400 signatures to get on the Michigan ballot, far short of the required number of 30,000. Luckily for him, approximately 43,000 signatures were filed by Michigan Republicans on his behalf, more than meeting the requirement.

Clearly the Republicans see Nader as part of the team. While Bush seeks to gain ground from the right side, Nader slices off some from the left side. A political pincer movement! I love it!

The latest polls in the UK give “Teflon Tony” Blair 30% of the vote. Looks like he’ll get a third term as Prime Minister. A couple of interesting things in this article. First, 59% of the voters believe he lied about weapons in Iraq. I find this astonishing, especially after intelligence commissions from both the US and the UK found there was no deception by Bush or Blair. Second, the article states that Blair has brought the Labour party out of the “political wilderness” by moving the party right-ward:

Under Blair the party has moved to the right, dumping many of its old socialist tenets and traditions — much to the dismay of older party loyalists and trades unions who want more left-wing polices reintroduced.

This ain’t your daddy’s Labour party.

Oh look at that! Look at the jet stream just avoid me like the plague! That’s fine, I like the heat. I love the heat. I think it’s the best when it’s 95 degrees, and I get all sweaty even when I take a nap.

Please tell me you can do better than this, President Bush.

Have we learned no lessons from all the genocides in the past century? We must move quickly and with confidence. The situation in Sudan is bad, nobody is denying that, and going through the UN for some type of sanctions is stupid and wasteful. This is a great moment for Bush to once again to prove the uselessness of the UN. If they want to dick around in their little discussions while thousands of people perish, let them. We can and should go in there and protect these oppressed Christians.

I’m seriously considering writing a letter to the White House about this. This is completely unacceptable.

Nader is so funny.

In a letter, Nader said, “your party [the Democrats] underlings are maliciously trying to keep the Nader-Camejo campaign off the ballot” and added that Kerry was “inviting a mini-Watergate if you do not put a stop to these actions.”

Because the Democrats are stealing all of Nader’s votes! The nerve! Nader is so photogenic too!

Yes, the US does rock. Picture originally pulled from here. View more Apollo 11 shots here. Thanks, Slashdot!

Heres’ a nice shot of an earthrise:

If you want the whole sequence of this earthrise in hi-def pictures I put them all in this little file (2.2 MB zip).

I know this is a couple of days old, but I’m playing catch-up.

Here’s the SteevAK-version:

Sharon: “French Jews should come to Israel to escape increasingly virulent anti-semitism.”
Chirac: “You think we’re anti-semitic? Well, you can stay out of our country!”

Yeah, that sure will prove to him that you’re not anti-semitic . . .

Of course, Sharon didn’t offer really good advice anyway: “Leave France where Jews face random acts of harrassment, and come to Israel where Jews get blown up.” What?