Becoming Relevant

Another interesting moment from last night’s press conference.
The standard rightist talking point after the U.N. failed to endorse Bush’s invasion of Iraq was that the organization had become “irrelevant.” Imagine the surprise last night when this came out:

Q. Mr. President, who will you be handing the Iraqi government over to on June 30?
A. We’ll find that out soon. That’s what Mr. Brahimi is doing. He’s figuring out the nature of the entity we’ll be handing sovereignty over.

Let me get this straight. After expending hundreds of American lives and over $100 billion on this effort in Iraq, we are now relying on someone from the irrelevant U.N. to come up with the plan to fix up the mess?
I just don’t understand it.
UPDATE: In a press conference today, Brahimi expressed confidence that an interim Iraqi government could be in place by the scheduled transfer of power on June 30.

Belated Spamiversary

Better late than never:

On April 12, 1994, a pair of attorneys in Arizona launched a homemade marketing software program that forever changed the Internet.
Hoping to drum up some business, Laurence Canter dashed off a Perl script that flooded online message boards with an advertisement pitching the legal services of Canter & Siegel, the law firm he ran with his then wife, Martha Siegel.
The response was immediate and harsh, offering one of the loudest signals up to that point that unchecked marketing would not be tolerated in the new medium. Thousands of recipients registered their displeasure, and a new label for the burgeoning business of unsolicited mass Internet advertising was coined.
“Send coconuts and cans of Spam to Cantor & Co.,” one outraged Usenet reader wrote amid the uproar that followed the Canter & Siegel message. “(Be sure to drop the can of Spam on its seam first.)”

Celebrated responsibly.

Shorter Bush: “I Did Nothing”

Since the Presidential Daily Briefing was released, the Bush administration has tried to dismiss its importance because it didn’t lay out the time, place, and manner of the September 11 attacks. Which indeed it did not. But it did warn of hijackings. Thus the question naturally follows: how did the president respond to a threat of hijackings? After all, measures to prevent hijacking might have inadvertently thwarted the 9/11 plot.
Last night at the press conference someone posed this to Bush. See if you can locate the affirmative step(s) he took:

Q. You’ve talked � I’d like to ask you about the Aug. 6 P.D.B.
A. Sure.
Q. You mentioned it at Fort Hood on Sunday. You pointed out that it did not warn of a hijacking of airplanes to crash into buildings, but that it warned of hijackings to obviously take hostages and to secure the release of extremists being held by the U.S. Did that trigger some specific actions on your part and the administration since it dealt with potentially hundreds of lives and a blackmail attempt on the United States government?
A. I asked for the briefing. And the reason I did is because there had been a lot of threat intelligence from overseas. And part of it had to do with the Genoa G8 conference that I was going to attend. And I asked at that point in time, let’s make sure we are paying attention here at home as well. And that’s what triggered the report.
The report itself, I’ve characterized it as mainly history. And I think when you look at it you’ll see that it was talking about a ’97 and ’98 and ’99. It was also an indication as you mentioned that that bin Laden might want to hijack an airplane, but as you said, not to fly into a building but perhaps to release a person in jail. In other words, serving as a blackmail. And of course that concerns me. All those reports concern me.
As a matter of fact, I was dealing with terrorism a lot as the president when George Tenet came in to brief me. I mean that’s where I got my information. I changed the way, the relationship, between the president and the C.I.A. director. And I wanted Tenet in the Oval Office all the time. And we had briefings about terrorist threats. This was a summary.
Now in the, what’s called the P.D.B. there was a warning about bin Laden’s desires on America. Frankly, I didn’t think that was anything new. I mean major newspapers had talked about bin Laden’s desires on hurting America. What was interesting in there was that there was a report that the F.B.I. was conducting field investigations. And that was good news that they were doing their job.
The way my administration worked was that I met with Tenet all the time. I obviously met with my principals a lot. We talked about threats that emerged. We had a counterterrorism group meeting on a regular basis to analyze the threats that came in. Had there been a threat that required action by anybody in the government, I would have dealt with it. In other words, had they come up and said this is where we see something happening, you can rest assured that the people of this government would have responded and responded in a forceful way.
I mean one of the things about Elizabeth’s question was I stepped back and I’ve asked myself a lot, Is there anything we could have done to stop the attacks? Of course, I’ve asked that question as have many people of my government. Nobody wants this to happen to America. And the answer is that had I had any inkling whatsoever that the people were going to fly airplanes into buildings we would have moved heaven and earth to save the country. Just like we’re working hard to prevent a further attack.

No, I see a step taken against hijackings in that answer, either. It’s nice to know Bush was “concerned” when hearing reports entitled “Bin Laden planning multiple operations,” “Bin Laden network’s plans advancing,” “Bin Laden threats are real,” and, of course, “Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US.” But what did he do? Obviously, if he had taken some sort of aviation-related precautions, we would have heard of them by now.
What did Bush do following the August 6th P.D.B? Dana Milbank and Mike Allen take us back in time:

President Bush was in an expansive mood on Aug. 7, 2001, when he ran into reporters while playing golf at the Ridgewood Country Club in Waco, Tex.
The day before, the president had received an intelligence briefing — the contents of which were declassified by the White House Saturday night — warning “Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US.” But Bush seemed carefree as he spoke about the books he was reading, the work he was doing on his nearby ranch, his love of hot-weather jogging, his golf game and his 55th birthday.
“No mulligans, except on the first tee,” he said to laughter. “That’s just to loosen up. You see, most people get to hit practice balls, but as you know, I’m walking out here, I’m fixing to go hit. Tight back, older guy — I hit the speed limit on July 6th.”

Fore!
One last note on this question and answer. It’s ironic that Bush made reference to the G8 conference in Genoa, since the threat feared at that event was . . . a terrorist attack using suicide-piloted airplanes.
No one could have imagined. . . .

Announcing Intentions

Then:

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late.

President Bush
“State of the Union” Address
January 28, 2003
Now:

There was nothing in there that said, you know, there’s an imminent attack. There was nothing in this report to me that said, oh, by the way, we’ve got intelligence that says something is about to happen in America. That wasn’t what this report said. The report was kind of a history of Osama’s intentions, I guess is the best way to put it, kind of a history of what the agency had known.

President Bush
On his non-reponse to the August 6, 2001 Presidental Daily Briefing
April 12, 2004

Sperm Race

I guess this would qualify as reality TV:

Digital TV channel BBC Three is to broadcast what it says is the first televised sperm race later this month.
The race, to be shown as part of the educational Lab Rats series, will pit the sperm of presenters Dr Mike Leahy and Zeron Gibson against each other.
It will be filmed inside two tiny glass tubes by a microscope and relayed to a crowd watching a pub’s big screen.
. . .
They will then have their sperm measured and tested by fertility expert Allan Pacey from the University of Sheffield, who will predict which man is likely to win.
The programme will be shown on 15 April at 2330 BST and is one of a four-part Lab Rats series.

Alas, no BBC Three TV for me. I wonder if there is a betting line on this one.

Vice President Petition

Someone in a volunteer organization from Senator Edward’s presidential campaign has e-mailed out links to this petition and this website in an effort to generate public support to put Senator Edwards on the Democratic ticket. As a supporter of Edwards during the primaries, I have mixed feelings on this, and I’m not even certain he wants to run of vice president. But there’s no question he would be an asset on the ticket.
Speaking of the presidential race, the main argument touted in favor of the condensed primary season by the Democratic party command center was that it would be good for the party to rally around the nominee early. The early selection has provided a focal point for fund raising, and that’s probably the only thing the DNC cares about. But Senator Kerry has hardly used this early period to generate campaign momentum. While the Bush administration has been imploding, Kerry has (1) been off on a sky vacation, and (2) had surgery. Time to get things in gear.