I foresee a glorious Oregon victory over the Memphis “Paper” Tigers, although I won’t necessarily bet that way in my tourney entry.
LGM Tournament Challenge
League: Lawyers, Guns and Money
Today’s the 40th anniversary of the slaughter at My Lai. Less than a week after the episode was first reported in November 1969 — more than 18 months after the incident itself — the South Vietnamese Defense Ministry released an explanatory statement that described the encounter as an operation intended to destroy “an important Communist force” in Quang Ngai province.
When soldiers of the Task Force Barker engaged into the target they met strong resistance from the enemy. This hamlet was organized by the Communists into a good combat hamlet with good communication and an underground system. The population of the hamlet was forced by the Communists to stay in their places.
The encounter resulted in 125 enemy killed and also there were around 20 civilians killed during the fighting because of the artillery.
Therefore, reports of newspapers and of the foreign press in the past days which said that there were 567 civilians killed were totally untrue.
A few weeks later on December 8, Richard Nixon discussed My Lai for the first time, describing it during a news conference as an unfortunate but “isolated” case. He then reminded the country that the United States had built “over 250,000 churches, pagodas, and temples for the people of Vietnam.” The correct total, as it turned out, was 268.
No American president since Nixon has spoken of the incident in public.
Here’s a clip from Four Hours in My Lai a documentary produced for Yorkshire Television in 1989.
The rest of the documentary can be found here.
Going to see the Drive By Truckers tonight in Newport, so probably best that I relate my thoughts on Brighter than Creation’s Dark today, rather than later…
I didn’t love BTCD on the first few listens, and even now I’m pretty sure that I prefer both Dirty South and Decoration Day. Still, the album has grown on me. Cooley has a larger presence than on previous albums, which tended to work out well; 3 Dimes Down, Self Destructive Zones, Bob, and especially Perfect Timing are all outstanding tunes. For Hood’s part, I think that Righteous Path is one of his very best tunes; Hood excels at understanding and relating a certain perspective on politics (even though he has some distance from it), and Righteous Path is probably better than even Puttin’ People on the Moon on that score. That Man I Shot is also pretty good, even if a bit didactic. Before listening to You and Your Crystal Meth I would have doubted that Hood could write a bad song about meth, but there you have it. The Opening Act grew on me over time. The new innovation is three songs by Shonna Tucker, none of which are particularly terrible or particularly good. I’ll be curious to see how she does live.
Inevitably, I have to wonder what might have been; what if Isbell had been able to make peace with the rest of the band for at least one more album? Take the best three or four songs from Sirens of the Ditch, add them to Brighter than Creation’s Dark, and cut the whole thing down to about 14 songs or so, and you have one hell of a great album. Of course, we live in an age where such a project is indeed possible on a personal basis; here’s one possibility:
Sirens of Creation’s Dark
The Righteous Path
Brand New Kind of Actress
3 Dimes Down
Down in a Hole
That Man I Shot
Goode’s Field Road
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, along with Australian Defence Force heads, announced the discovery at the Australian War Memorial in Canberra today. He said the search body called Finding Sydney made the discovery yesterday, about 150km west of Shark Bay.
“We are one step closer as a nation to hopefully finding Sydney,” Mr Rudd said. “This is an important part in solving a 65-year-old puzzle.”
Australia’s greatest maritime mystery claimed the lives of the Sydney’s 645 crew.
The effort to find Kormoran began in earnest about two weeks ago. With Kormoran’s wreck confirmed, it seems likely that Sydney will shortly be found as well.
HT to reader AL.
UPDATE: Sydney appears to be found.
The NY Times ran an article today chronicling a spate of prosecutions in Alabama of women who carry a child to term despite a drug addiction. Greg Gambril, a local Alabama prosecutor, is bored without any murders in his sleepy town, so he has decided to prosecute women for bearing children. The women are being singled out because they are unable to kick addictions (usually to meth) during their pregnancies. The law under which they are prosecuted was passed to protect kids from meth in the home. The law makes no mention of fetuses.
In most other states, women have challenged their convictions and prevailed — courts are not any more comfortable sending drug-addicted women who should be nursing their babies not shuffling in handcuffs off to prison when treatment would be a much better (and less expensive) option. But in this Alabama county, no woman has even gone to trial. Women are pleading out and getting sentenced to a year in jail — sometimes, having been dragged away in handcuffs the day after giving birth.
What gets me: the women are being prosecuted under the pretenses of…drumroll please…protecting their fetuses, and the women themselves (sound familiar? Of, say, South Dakota circa the summer of 2006?).
Here’s what Gambril has to say:
“When drugs are introduced in the womb, the child-to-be is endangered,” Mr. Gambril said. “It is what I call a continuing crime.” He added that the purpose of the statute was to guarantee that the child has “a safe environment, a drug-free environment.”
“Our ultimate goal is to protect mothers and children,” Mr. Gambril said.
Right. So a woman is an “environment” and he is “protecting” her and her child by throwing her in jail, sending a kid into the care of a grandparent, friend, or the foster system, and ensuring that a new mother cannot be present for the first months or years of the child’s life. Oh, and making that decision for the mother because she is too…female?…to make it for herself.
The thing is, that these prosecutions are nothing new. There have been hundreds of them over the last 30 years, as NAPW is documenting. What gets me is that the Times so rarely writes about them. I guess it takes white women and meth in place of black women and crack for an injustice to be recognized.
Heading off to that Great Trench War in the Sky:
The last living man known to have served in the French army during the “war to end all wars” — he was an Italian teenager who joined the Foreign Legion at the outset, and became a French citizen in the 1930’s — died this week at the age of 110. And the man believed to be Germany’s last surviving veteran — no official records are kept there — died in January at 107 (five years after his wife of 75 years, who lived to be 102).
That leaves just about 20 remaining veterans of the war scattered around the world, one-third of whom saw no fighting in it — down from about 27 at the beginning of the year. Not surprisingly, given their triple-digit ages, even fewer are still able to show the flag in public.
Here’s the Wikipedia list of surviving veterans from the Great War. And here’s some interesting material on Frank Buckles, the war’s last surviving American veteran. I watched some of the video and listened to a few audio interview clips, and I have to say the guy looks and sounds pretty good for being 107.
Apparently one of the surviving members of the Vietnam-era Texas Air National Guard met with Buckles the other day. No word on whether the president expressed any envy for Buckles’ service in such a romantic conflict.
John McCain riding in a first-class car on the Alcela is, to an AP reporter either unfamiliar with train travel in the northeast corridor or lying about it, an example of him being “a man of the people.” The reporter was at McCain’s recent BBQ, what a coinky-dink.
This is definitely a bad variable in the general for the Democrats; the capacity of much of the press to embarrass itself about John McCain is pretty much boundless.
It’s sad and pathetic, in a truly hilarious kind of way, to watch as Stephen Hayes flails ineffectually at the notion that there was no direct connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. We’ve gone from forthright claims of a close operational connection between the two entities to shadowy intimations of third party relations derived from second hand sources:
This ought to be big news. Throughout the early and mid-1990s, Saddam Hussein actively supported an influential terrorist group headed by the man who is now al Qaeda’s second-in-command, according to an exhaustive study issued last week by the Pentagon. “Saddam supported groups that either associated directly with al Qaeda (such as the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, led at one time by bin Laden’s deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri) or that generally shared al Qaeda’s stated goals and objectives.” According to the Pentagon study, Egyptian Islamic Jihad was one of many jihadist groups that Iraq’s former dictator funded, trained, equipped, and armed.
Which amounts to: Saddam knew a guy, and this guy knew Osama, and thus CONNECTION!!!!1!!11!!; it’s like playing Six Degrees of Saddam Hussein, and about as pointless.
I know some people who write for the Weekly Standard, and contrary to common opinion in the lefty blogosphere they’re not all complete hacks; some of them make at least a middling effort at appearing to be intellectually honest. I have to imagine that they see Hayes as a pathetic figure; he built his reputation around THE CONNECTION!!1!!!1!!, and as that edifice has crumbled to the point where conspiracy theorists who believe that aliens killed JFK shake their heads and mutter “That Hayes guy… he’s really grasping at straws”, it has to be just a bit uncomfortable to keep receiving submissions delineating the relationship of Saddam’s sister’s brother’s cousin’s roommate to a guy who once parked cars outside of a hotel 6% of which was owned by a guy who went to elementary school with a guy who once knew a guy who had seen Osama Bin Laden on TV. This is not to say that Hayes will ever be repudiated; to do so would be slightly more embarrassing that continuing to publish his nonsense.
In the last 36 hours, I have:
1) woken up with food poisoning
2) spent the day vomiting
3) gone to the doctor and gotten an anti-nausea shot (and not in my arm)
4) gotten on an 8-hour plane-ride
5) slept for most of said plane-ride and shooed away the plane food (repeatedly and impatiently)
6) gotten of the 8-hour plane-ride.
Moral of the story: I’ll be traveling for the rest of the week. Will blog when possible, but probably sporadically. Enjoy any scandals that erupt while I’m gone.
I don’t mean to pile on the Mamet essay — given that it consists entirely of sophomoric cliches it will convert nobody, and as Roy says if it compels some wingers to check out Glengarry Glen Ross or American Buffalo the net effect will be positive — but since this particular foolishness gets wider circulation I figure it’s worth shooting down:
Bush got us into Iraq, JFK into Vietnam. Bush stole the election in Florida; Kennedy stole his in Chicago. Bush outed a CIA agent; Kennedy left hundreds of them to die in the surf at the Bay of Pigs. Bush lied about his military service; Kennedy accepted a Pulitzer Prize for a book written by Ted Sorenson. Bush was in bed with the Saudis, Kennedy with the Mafia.
Admittedly, some of this stuff about JFK has some merit (and, indeed, his “reverence” for Kennedy demonstrates the same shallowness as the collection of reactionary bromides under discussion). But “stole his in Chicago”? Leaving aside the fact that JFK stealing a net positive of votes in Illinois is assumed rather than proven, some simple math is in order:
1960 Election Electoral Votes
I think even a guy who couldn’t find his fuckin’ couch in the living room could figure this one out.
"You want to know what it takes to work for the Hoover Institution? It takes brass balls to work at the Hoover Institution."
I used to be a Democrat, but after reading Thomas Sowell I’m outraged by the Bay of fucking Pigs.
I don’t know what David Mamet was reading during the many years before his apparent political conversion, but he’s now convinced that Sowell is “our greatest contemporary philosopher.”
Jonah Goldberg’s “Liberal Fascism” is too rich a book to be summarized in a newspaper column. Get a copy and start re-thinking the received notions about who is on “the left” and who is on “the right.” It is a book for people who want to think, rather than repeat rhetoric.
I suppose it’s only a matter of time before Mamet discovers that Michael Medved is our greatest contemporary film critic.