Back in a moment.
Thank you Santa.
Tuesday, May 24
And I didn't speak out, because - Hey! Wait a minute!
Via Debbye of Being American in T.O. and Kate of Small Dead Animals comes the news that Andrew Coyne is being sued for libel by the Chief of Staff of the Canadian Prime Minister, apparently over this or related items. Robot Guy has more.
A commenter at Small Dead Animals points out that the very first sentence in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is this:
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.That's real reassuring, that is.
Mind you, Australia doesn't even have such a charter. Fortunately, our Liberal government is actually liberal, in the classical sense.
Glenn Reynolds seems to have stickied a post regarding the FEC's proposal to regulate bloggers under the Campaign Finance "Reform" Laws. Don't think it can't happen here. Um, there. Wherever.
Wednesday, May 18
Glenn Reynolds says that Andrew Sullivan thinks that he (Glenn) should be writing more about Abu Ghraib, and less about Newsweek's recent fuckup.*
I think that Andrew Sullivan has gone insane:
FOUR OTHER CITATIONS: Kos blogger Susan Hu has discovered four other media citations of the allegation that Gitmo interrogators desecrated the Koran: one from the Philadelphia Inquirer, and three from Human Rights Watch. Now we cannot know for sure - yet - if these allegations are real, or propaganda. But we do know for certain that other "techniques" designed to use religion as an interrogative tool have been deployed, including the smearing of fake menstrual blood on detainees' faces. This religious warfare was also deployed at Abu Ghraib. I wrote in my review of the official records of the tortureDo I need to unpack that?
Okay, just for Andrew:
You say "We cannot know for sure - yet - if these allegations are real". In fact, we have no evidence whatsoever that these allegations are real.
You say that "we do know for certain that other "techniques" designed to use religion as an interrogative tool have been deployed". In fact, we have no evidence whatsoever that these allegations are real.
You refer to "religious warfare", on the basis of these allegations, when you have no evidence whatsoever that these allegations are real.
You say "I wrote in my review of the official records of the torture" in reference to Abu Ghraib. There was no torture at Abu Ghraib; that is, not after Iraq was liberated. Under Saddam Hussein Abu Ghraib was infamous for torture and murder; it was the prison from which people never returned.
The incident of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib has been investigated by the authorities, and the responsible parties brought to trial (and in some cases already punished). Despite being a relatively minor incident, it has been the subject of an ongoing leftist frenzy since it first came to light - at a time when it was already under investigation by military authorities.
It happened eighteen months ago. Oh, and no-one died, or was even injured.
The Newsweek story was published last week. It led to at least fifteen deaths - not that this is the fault of Newsweek. What Newseek can and should be faulted for is their impenetrable left-wing bias that blinds them to questions of fact, proportion and propriety.
Much, Mr Sullivan, like your own.
* Apparently this is now the accepted terminology in the mainstream media.
52 queries taking 0.092 seconds, 163 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.