Friday Special: Cat in A Box

I'm not sure but I think this might be a metaphor for the Bush Administration:

[myspace]http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=45785085[/myspace]

Condi's Interview: The Opening Reactions

CONDI ON CIVIL RIGHTS:

"I remember telling my European colleagues that I know they always think that America is going to be more aggressive on fighting extremism than they. But you know, we could never, within our context, have passed the law like the basic incitement laws that the British have passed.(4) The first amendment would have prohibited it."

READERS REPLY:

"Yes, because Bush Administration was known for respecting the Constitution..."

"...by introducing Acts such as the Patriot Act."

"Viva la Constitution!"

"She's right. Canada's hate crime laws also wouldn't be constitutional in the U.S."

"Maybe this quote should be read as a lament on her part or an expression of envy?"

CONDI'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

"It’s really recognizing that this is about a single answer to what is the right form of government, and that’s democracy."

READERS REPLY:

"Thanks. You've set a fine example the last eight years. Don't let your door hit you on the ass on your way out."

CONDI ON THE FREEDOM AGENDA

George W. Bush deserves credit for recognizing that the terms were now going to be set for the next big historical evolution. The president recognized that freedom was something that was not just desirable but essential for the United States; that it meant not just freedom from tyranny but also freedom from disease, from poverty. And that if you were going to have democratic leaders, they had to be able to deliver for their people. Thus the president supported the millennium challenge and the H.I.V. AIDS and Malaria project. And linking up the great compassion of the United States with our security interests. Making it about democracy, defense and development. We’re at the beginning of that historical transformation, and yes, sometimes it’s lonelier at the beginning than at the end.
It’s really recognizing that this is about a single answer to what is the right form of government, and that’s democracy. It takes different forms: there is Japanese democracy, and there’s American democracy, and there are fragile democracies, and there are emerging democracies, and there are states that are trying to find some form of popular legitimacy.

READERS REPLY:

Could this be more vomitous?

Condoleezza Rice in the New York Times

While I've been discussing Marx, Hitler, and Stalin with sixth-formers (high school seniors), another deep political thinker has been chatting with the New York Times.

Condi Rice's interview has sparked a firestorm of discussion amongst colleagues. While I'm catching up, here's an introductory tribute from Mr Steve Earle:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avwJPNmCDh0[/youtube]

CIA Director Steps Back In Time

This morning I've been reading the reaction to CIA Director Michael Hayden's talk on 'The State of al Qaeda Today'. The BBC provides a good summary here, and there's a short video at the Atlantic Council's site.

Aside from the expected appraisals- cause for optimism, support for al-Qaeda falling in Muslim nations, bin Laden on the run- a number of Hayden's assertions really jar. For me his analysis is stuck some time in late 2001, back when we thought we could declare war on terrorism and actually win. Despite his mention of "core al-Qaeda" and "unaffiliated extremists", Hayden really seems to think of al-Qaeda as a single, unified terrorist army- bin Laden is its "iconic" leader, and "this is an organisation that has never been through a change at the top". Is he serious? Does he really believe that if bin Laden had been caught at Tora Bora that the bombers of, say, Bali or London would have given up and, lacking a leader, drifted apart? But the platitudes don't stop there. According to Hayden's view the 'war on terror' is as simple as ever- the "civilised world" is going to defeat its barbaric enemy, the terrorist. And while we don't know what would happen if bin Laden was killed or captured, he's "willing to bet that whatever happens, it would work in our favour." If only it really was that simple.

[Photo: Atlantic Council]

Fact x Importance = News: If Only the New York Times Were Real

Here's the front page of the "New York Times" handed out to commuters on Wednesday:

OK, OK, it's the work of "pranksters" --- the word used by the supposedly-authentic New York Times --- but can't I just hold on for a moment to "The Iraq War Ends" and "Nation Builds Sane Economy" as real?

After all, it's not like the supposedly-authentic New York Times hasn't dabbled in a bit of fake news. (I know, you're way ahead of me.) Which do you prefer: Wednesday's front page or the one by Judith Miller on the Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction?