Reported bin Ladin transcript released

Here it is: ["New OBL Tape: Iraq, Democratic Control"]. I don't know how to take this. I'm really confused. Is he just hunkered down in a bunker somewhere, spewing out Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh talking points about the Democrats for the hell of it? Does he even really exist at this point? Can any of this be trusted? Why is he blathering about taxes?
Maybe this is a super-double-secret-distraction tactic on his part. He must be thinking, 'Hey, I will agree with the neo-cons' enemies on some things and this will create a reverse opinion shift in the minds of the American people to keep their war going so I can keep jihad going. This way, I can continue to perform chaotic hell on the unbelievers ... [add evil laugh here].'
Or, maybe he is putting out this tape after seeing the Saturday Night Live skit with Horatio Sanz playing Saddam and Jimmy Fallon playing Osama, where Saddam keeps saying, 'Shut up, Osama,' Because he doesn't want to be bombed into oblivion and Osama keeps talking about all the things they did together. Hilarious. Maybe bin Ladin saw that skit and thought, 'Hmm, this is a good idea, I will keep blathering about the economic collapse of the United States and then they have to accept Islam. Yeah, yeah, then I will prevail!! [add evil laugh here].'
Does anyone else have an explanation? I can't think of anything else. Can you? All I can say is that this whole thing is ridiculous.

Maybe Michael Moore was right, Part 2
Questions Pentagon attacks
Filmmaker Michael Moore, in a post-"SiCKO" movie preview interview, talks with some of those folks from the 9-11 Truth Movement: ["Michael Moore: 9/11 Could Be Inside Job"]. Interestingly, the interviewers actually get him to talk about stuff, after he refused to do it [Amy Goodman, a witness to the WTC7 demolition, also refused to talk with the interviewers, which was disappointing to see. She actually agrees to talk to them, but when they mention WTC7, she skirts away]. But then, Moore comes back and decides to talk to the filmmakers. On the Pentagon attacks, Moore says this:

"I've filmed there before down at the Pentagon--before 9/11--there's got to be at least 100 cameras, ringing that building, in the trees, everywhere.They've got that plane coming in with 100 angles. How come with haven't seen the straight--I'm not talking about stop-action photos, I'm talking about the video. I want to see the video; I want to see 100 videos that exist of this," Moore said.

This is amazing because I've been saying the same thing for years. I just can't believe that the best footage they have is this four frame stop motion film from one camera in the parking lot which doesn't show a plane at all. In addition, the FBI reportedly took video from area businesses, including a 7-11 and a Sheraton Hotel, all which has been reported in the mainstream press [so, this isn't some "conspiracy" theory. It did actually happen].
Here is another point, stressed in some of the "conspiracy" books about 9-11:

"Why don't they want us to see that plane coming into the building? Because, if you know anything about flying a plane, when you're going 500 miles per hour, if you're off by that much, you're in the river. So, they hit a building that's only 5 stories high...[unclear] that expertly. I believe that there will be answers in that video tape and we should demand that that tape is released."

Again, any pilot will tell you the same thing. There is no possible way an expert pilot can whip a 757 around at a 45 degree angle at 500 miles per hour ... never mind amateur pilots, with little to no experience, flying the jet into a five story building. It is just impossible. Here are the most realistic options: The hijackers were either super-trained pilots doing an extraordinary feat flying into the Pentagon; the plane was flown by remote control or automatic pilot to be perfectly executed, which brings up a whole slew of other questions; or it wasn't a 757 at all but it was a missile or smaller plane and they won't release the video because it will then lead to a whole slew of new questions.
Moore is correct: There needs to be a REAL investigation of the entire situation, without anyone connected to any administration or corporate interest. The investigation also needs to look at how a $500-plus-billion a year defense, intelligence, and military industrial complex, could allow our country's air defenses to be penetrated by a whole bunch of clowns with Exacto blades. And no, this has nothing to do with the so-called Peace Dividend which never really happened either. Anyone who looks at the country's budget and defense appropriations over the last 15-plus years knows that the money from closing American bases never went to social spending - it was transferred to overseas operations.

Is all lost?
Interesting headline yesterday morning: ["Field commanders tell Pentagon Iraq war 'is lost'"].

An apology: I also forgot to post this a couple of weeks ago: ["AN APOLOGY FROM A BUSH VOTER"]. I especially like this quote:

"With a belated tip of the cap to Ralph Nader, the system is broken, so broken, it’s almost inevitable it pukes up the Al Gores and George W. Bushes. Where are the Trumans and the Eisenhowers? Where are the men and women of vision and accomplishment? Why do we have to settle for recycled hacks and malleable ciphers? Greatness is always rare, but is basic competence and simple honesty too much to ask?"

The perfect Father's Day gift: ["Special forces to use strap-on 'Batwings'"]. Well, so long as you actually aren't in battle with those wings on getting shot at!

Political roundup: GOP straw polls are yielding some unusual results: ["Tancredo wins straw poll in Michigan"] and ["Gingrich is delegates favorite of 2008 presidential race"]. Thinking about Tancredo, this might be something to ponder: ["Fake ID Sellers Dismiss Tamperproof Push"]. I can't believe reporters are floating this one: ["OBAMA IN '08?"]. The guy has barely been a senator. Please. But do check out this interview with former Sen. Mike Gravel: ["Long-form interview with Sen. Mike Gravel"]. And leave Al Gore alone already!: ["Lights, Camera, Al Gore!"]. And the over-rated "netroots" which can't take the place of a good field organization in any election: ["A New Open-Source Politics"].
Speaking of the "netroots," here is a lot of croaking about some of the recent primaries, including the Bilbray-Busby CA-50 race which was held last night. Kos, the most popular mouth piece of this "movement," and his buddy Matt Stoller, go off on it here: ["CA-50: Post-mortem"] and here: ["Progressive Messaging Wins: Tester, Angelides, Winograd, and Bilbray? "].
They are dead-on correct about how a pol crafts a message, what the person stands for, and the insidious beltway mentality [they are a little late to this boat. Some of us have been talking about this for years and years and years ...].
But the problem with much of these post-mortem comments is that these are the same people who were this woman's cheerleaders for months and months and months - writing pieces on her, begging people to give money and lend time to the effort, etc. Kos had her up on his "Netroots Endorsed" list [like somehow he and his fans can stake claim to the name Netroots or something, or can be the only ones who can endorse someone from the netroots ... Ugh, another insiders club?]. And every time Kos talked about the race, he put up a beg link to Busby.
In other words, even though the consultants were blowing through millions and possibly weren't advising this woman properly, they didn't say jack. They kept cheerleading and now they are kicking the woman while she is down and out. It is pretty pathetic if you think about it and goes to the heart of why we should wonder about these folks just a bit before you buy the book or fall into lockstep with them.
Of course, the woman had problems - like this, right before Election Day, blasted all over the Drudge Report - where she is telling illegal aliens that they didn't need papers to vote: ["Busby on defense, says she misspoke"]. But still, there is no reason to be kicking this woman around so much even though she lost in a Republican district by a sliver.
Is the Netroots a "movement"? I don't know. Are a bunch of people in front of their computers anything more than a bunch of people in front of their computers? People in front of computers can write interesting things, create campaigns, talk about strategy, but they won't - and can't - replace a field organization or a real campaign and I don't really think they are a movement per se.

RFK going off on election results: ["Was the 2004 Election Stolen?"]. Call me stupid but I just don't believe the election was "stolen." Were there things done which shouldn't have been done? Absolutely. You can chalk it up to a whole lotta other folks - including Democrats - who have "stolen" elections over the years.

One of my favorite new bands: [The Glass Set]. I love this new band fronted by bandaphrenic Leah Callahan and a former bandmate of mine, Allen Esser, a great drummer. I've been listening to their demo for weeks now. It is pretty good - with strong songs, decent vocals, nice guitar work, and a new band feel not like a lot out there right now. Although, I think the production leaves a tad to be desired. It sounds too much like spackle on the wall - like the band put each piece of the music together track by track. I wonder what they would sound like live - or what they would sound like if they recorded sections of each track live.

2002 - A year of conspiracies

Mike Ward, a film critic with PopMatters.com, has prepared a pretty good collection of oddities and strangeness surrounding the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in his year end column ["Of Big Oil, By Big Oil, For Big Oil"].
As someone who likes challenges to the mainstream press, doesn't believe Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols acted alone in blowing up the Murrah Building, and thinks there is more than meets the eye with Sept. 11, this is a welcome collection. However, it is doubtful we will ever get the truth in the end.
Post far and wide.