>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^Yogi:
>> ^NetRunner:
@Yogi, so you're jumping on the same moronic bandwagon, and spreading lies to boot?
Awesome.

Nothing I said was a lie, it's history. Obama has been ordering targeted assassinations with drones. Clinton was responsible for the sanctions against Iraq which saw 500,000 Iraqi children die. This figure and the reasons for it were accepted by his secretary of state Madeleine Albright.
You wanna dispute either of those facts I'll refer you to Professor Chomsky and you can tell him how wrong he is.

What you're saying doesn't establish a similarity, it establishes your willingness to ignore evidence that contradicts your preconceptions.
For example, economic sanctions = war to you now? They're "Clinton's" economic sanctions, and not something the UN imposed before Clinton was President? That's before we even delve into your claim that the economic sanctions killed more children than 10 years of war killed.
That aside, what you need to prove for equivalence is that there's no difference. Not that you can argue that maybe on some subject that they have similar views (and it's hard to even do that, without relying on hasty generalizations), but that on every subject they agree, with no counterexamples.
So here are three counterexamples:
Democrats want universal healthcare, Republicans don't.
Republicans want to privatize Social Security, Democrats don't.
Democrats want to regulate banks, Republicans don't.
If you can't deal with those, and every single one anyone can come up with then the equivalency argument is shot, and you need to adopt the more sane pose of "Democrats suck, but Republicans suck a lot more" or vice versa if you like the cut of the Republican Party's jib.


If you want to maybe read a fucking book once in awhile I suggest A Different Kind of War: The UN Sanctions in Iraq by Hans von Sponeck.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^NetRunner:
@Yogi, so you're jumping on the same moronic bandwagon, and spreading lies to boot?
Awesome.

Nothing I said was a lie, it's history. Obama has been ordering targeted assassinations with drones. Clinton was responsible for the sanctions against Iraq which saw 500,000 Iraqi children die. This figure and the reasons for it were accepted by his secretary of state Madeleine Albright.
You wanna dispute either of those facts I'll refer you to Professor Chomsky and you can tell him how wrong he is.


What you're saying doesn't establish a similarity, it establishes your willingness to ignore evidence that contradicts your preconceptions.

For example, economic sanctions = war to you now? They're "Clinton's" economic sanctions, and not something the UN imposed before Clinton was President? That's before we even delve into your claim that the economic sanctions killed more children than 10 years of war killed.

That aside, what you need to prove for equivalence is that there's no difference. Not that you can argue that maybe on some subject that they have similar views (and it's hard to even do that, without relying on hasty generalizations), but that on every subject they agree, with no counterexamples.

So here are three counterexamples:

Democrats want universal healthcare, Republicans don't.
Republicans want to privatize Social Security, Democrats don't.
Democrats want to regulate banks, Republicans don't.

If you can't deal with those, and every single one anyone can come up with then the equivalency argument is shot, and you need to adopt the more sane pose of "Democrats suck, but Republicans suck a lot more" or vice versa if you like the cut of the Republican Party's jib.

>> ^NetRunner:

@Yogi, so you're jumping on the same moronic bandwagon, and spreading lies to boot?
Awesome.


Nothing I said was a lie, it's history. Obama has been ordering targeted assassinations with drones. Clinton was responsible for the sanctions against Iraq which saw 500,000 Iraqi children die. This figure and the reasons for it were accepted by his secretary of state Madeleine Albright.

You wanna dispute either of those facts I'll refer you to Professor Chomsky and you can tell him how wrong he is.

>> ^Rotty:

"The Iraq War was going to happen whether or not they came up with this so why risk such a dangerous act?"
The war in Iraq never stopped. We were flying over Iraq constantly and upholding an embargo there. The incidents on 9/11 were exactly what was needed in order to full scale the military operations and quickly (while everyone's emotions were high) pass domestic laws clamping down on US citizen rights.
Without a perceived threat (War on Terror, Communism, etc) there is no rationale for perpetuating the Military Industrial Complex. And, as far as this being a Republican party thing, just remember the Vietnam and Korean wars were brought to you by the darling Democrats with total body counts of ~ 112K American soldiers.


You're right about the Iraq war not stopping, we enforced (The US and UK through the UN) an embargo that devastated the population killing almost half a million children alone. It also strengthened Saddam which wasn't a secret, it was well known.

I disagree with you that "without a perceived threat there is no rationale for perpetuating the Military Industrial Complex" because when there is none available it's just made up. Just look at the budget for the Pentagon 1991-1992, no change after the end of the Cold War is just stayed the same. Because simply the economy we have requires it to continue in this way, without it we wouldn't have this shiny computers to debate with.

I'm not sure what you mean with the Democrat comments, I'm very vocal on War Crimes perpetrated by Clinton and Carter not insignificant in the least. The point is that this has to change, from the ground up fundamental change, it won't do anything to prove 9/11 was an inside job, because frankly it will only explain the deaths of 3,000 people. I don't want to sound cold, but that pales in comparison to half a million children starving to death which was justified as "worth it" by Madeleine Albright. So no love for the Democrats here.

Intellectually it also wastes a lot of time. You could be spending time working towards real reforms, that help people incidentally. Instead thousands of people spend huge amounts of time and go to Conventions on which member of the Mob was involved in the Kennedy assassination. It's just not friggin worth it.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Madeleine-Peyroux-Between-The-Bars-beautiful
http://www.videosift.com/video/Between-the-Bars
http://www.videosift.com/video/Chris-Garneau-Between-the-Bars
http://www.videosift.com/video/Good-Will-Hunting-Between-The-Bars

Tags for this video have been changed from 'barack, michelle, obama, madeleine, albright, women, mccain, sarah, palin' to 'barack obama, madeleine albright, women, john mccain, sarah palin' - edited by xxovercastxx

The other video that was posted http://www.videosift.com/video/Sweet-recipe-for-choco-madeleine is a self-link.

and the fact that the youtube video only has 57 views most of which are from here, I'm gonna go with *ban

Nice! I can't hear any danish accent either. Here's another beautiful rendition of "Between the Bars":
http://www.videosift.com/video/Madeleine-Peyroux-Between-The-Bars-beautiful

"Jeff Buckley's Hallelujah"

That is Leonard Cohen's tune! Although Jeff has the best recording ever of it. Corpus Christi Carol is by Benjamin Britten, but Jeff has really made that one his own as well.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

1. Cloud Atlas - David Mitchell
2. Oryx & Crake - Margaret Atwood
3. The Sparrow - Mary Doria Russell
4. Snow Crash - Neal Stephenson
5. A Wrinkle in Time - Madeleine L'Engle
6. Beach Music - Pat Conroy
7. Bridge to Terabithia - Katherine Paterson
8. Dhalgren - Samuel Delany
9. Titan - John Varley
10. A Fire Upon the Deep - Vernor Vinge

*Please note, there is at least one non-SF book in there!

She also says that there's a place in hell for women who do not support other women. I guess that means that Palin's calling dibs!

>> ^bcglorf:
> The interviewer was leading him with a tricky question? You've got to be kidding me. When Galloway has repeatedly boasted of how he has been condemning Saddam since the 80's, I think it's fair to point out that in the 90's Galloway went to Saddam to share 'heartfelt fraternal greetings and support'.

yes, and i'd agree that was fair to point out.
which is why you'll notice my objection was to "the interviewer's actual question".

it's phrased as a slippery slope that associates galloway's having once praised saddam, with thinking that iraq was better off under saddam than not.

another great example of this kind of thing is Madeleine Albright. 3rd paragraph in, there, "In 1996 she was also criticized for..." footage here, with lesley stahl.

she still takes an enormous amount of flak for her poor answer, to this day. look no further than the description at that last youtube clip. "Albright makes statement that ultimately led to 9/11." oy. by what quantum leap of deduction?!? see? again, slippery.

so, yeah.
first off, the interviewer shouldn't have relied on easily-dismissed 3rd-party allegations that galloway once praised saddam. why not instead, simply run the footage you should already have, supporting that fact?
then, just turn & ask galloway a fair, open-ended question: "what's your reaction?"
does he regret saying it? had there been a recent event that sparked your praise for his courage? what had saddam done to warrant this flattery?

instead, they present him with an opportunity to lie and backpedal, which he promptly does.

watch that powell clip again, where he catches a slippery question and responds intelligently, and let me know if my original point makes sense now.

half *dupe of Tofumar, but he don't need it no more.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Chris-Garneau-Between-the-Bars

Please also see...
http://www.videosift.com/video/Madeleine-Peyroux-Between-The-Bars-beautiful

Four times 'oughta do it, eh? Can never have too much good content.

>> ^critttter:
OK, I love their music, but they were arrogant and rude to whoever was in that elevator.


Dude, have you ever tried to perform live music? I'm the biggest ass on the PLANET when the show needs to start. Maybe some musicians are chill and humble, but I don't listen to them.

Plus, don't forget they were in Paris where this time of behaviour is to be expected.

Original source - http://www.blogotheque.net/Arcade-Fire

Some background on this glorious *rocknroll *bravo session:

"Win Butler had to slouch a little to fit into the freight elevator. He went directly to the back, leaned against the iron door, turned around, and taking a look at the grudging space, asked us: «Think we can all go back now?» Then he smiled a smile that a kid would give, so pure and honest like he had just found his hiding place. in Butler smiled, and five weeks of work seemed to crumble before us.

During those weeks I had been in continual contact with Vincent Morisset, who runs the Neon Bible site. Win and Régine had been responsible for coordinated our Take Away Show. We had discussed dates and places, imagining the Madeleine at night, the knoll at the Île de la Cité, an old café, a roundabout behind the Olympia...We checked the weather every day, put to despair by the cold front that’s passing through Paris. We had surveyed the entire inhumane neighborhood from top to bottom, trying to anticipate the crowd, the will power of the group, the cold, and the fatigue. Then suddenly we had a plan. Win asked if there was a freight elevator. We found it, he smiled, and the Take Away Show was no longer in our hands."


Some more after the cut:


We knew that the Take Away Show with Arcade Fire wouldn’t be like the others. The project was born for them because they’re of a different kind, a different essence. We had spent the afternoon with them and suddenly we realized, in a flashing instant, that «yes, this group is different.».

We had been playing the role of outsider the entire day, like a foreign body that latches onto the daily grind of these magnificent musicians. We had to adapt, through astonishment and wonder, as the band took up their tools and started to play. But Arcade Fire didn’t take us as outsiders. It seemed to unfold naturally: we entered into their logic, as they awaited us and eventually swallowed us up. It was now Win Butler’s Take Away Show, and we followed.

It was too cold to play outside after the show, so we initially thought about playing in the entrance hall during Electralane’s performance, but the Olympia didn’t allow it. All we had left was the freight elevator, and we had to do a little convincing to make it happen. On the other side of the elevator there was a door that would lead us into the concert hall. They could go back to the pit in the Olympia by exiting through there, and then re-exit through the door near the stage. Win wasn’t so hot on the plan...the venue was a little too big and it the whole thing sounded complicated. It took us about 20 minutes to convince him, not knowing at all what was waiting for us at the other end of this crazy idea. Win went back to tell Richard and Will to follow him to the elevator, with everyone asking when to play, or whether this was going to happen before or after the show. It’s going to be before. Régine was the only one who thought differently and there were a couple seconds of exchanging furious looks, which immediately settled and eased into resolution. The big guy won, and everyone went back to reconfigure the set-list.

Arcade Fire is a unique group. Everyone’s split up during the day, managing and wandering through his/her own affaires in the dressing rooms and corridors. No one seems to move about as much as Win, who manages everything, knows everything, watches everything, and hears everything. Afterwards, as show time approaches, everyone slowly comes together again, each still folded into him/herself. A couple notes sound from a bugle, Régina taps on a box, Jérémy amuses himself with a drum, and Tim does a little Monty Python dance. A mobile cacophony, a music that takes form, several people coming together, and some random and various snippets of songs to come. Everyone is concentrating alone, but at the same time following a trace towards the group’s uncanny unity. As the orchestra tuned and grew powerfully aligned, we started towards the elevator.

The rest waits on film. We all bunched into the elevator, and I took my position at Richard’s feet. They started off with an enchanting version of «Neon Bible» and then door opened, allowing us to approach and penetrate the massive torrent of fans. I didn’t think about anything more. I was taken by the fervor, watching Vincent Moon with his camera, screaming in silence, and thinking over and over again:

«We did it. Shit, we really did it!»


Amazing. I dare you not to feel *happy watching this bit of *shortfilms.

First introduced to her via PM's post here

http://www.videosift.com/video/Madeleine-Peyroux-Between-The-Bars

The Guardian also published another review of the book by Madeleine Bunting which is worth reading. She makes the following interesting point:

"Husain's book will be used in many debates - the future of multiculturalism, whether infringements of civil liberties are necessary to combat terrorism, what parts of Islamist histories from Asia and the Middle East a British Muslim community needs to jettison. One suspects the naivety which took him into Hizb-ut Tahrir has blinded him as to how his story will be used to buttress positions hostile to many things he holds dear - his own faith and racial tolerance, for example. A glance at the blog response to a Husain piece in the Telegraph reveals how rightwing racism and anti-Islamic sentiment are feasting on his testimony."

Ziauddin Sardar's review of the book for the Independent is more critical and is also worth reading.