PB Book Club
 

Not me. I'm sick of that hobbit shit.

it would help if you defined "rules" for us, or at least how you're using the word.

2.

What would be interesting to see would be a democrat congress/Senate this year and Hillary elected in 08 and then in about 2011, after the Dems and the UN have had time to work their magic, seeing Iran drop a few nukes and take Israel out.

And then see NKorea invade SKorea.

And China make a grab for Taiwan.

Oh the handwringing when their Muslim and communist friends turned on them.

I would love to live in a time when I could see the policy genuises of the left work their diplomatic magic without war to effect realpolitik solutions.

Kum.bay.yah.

He whom laughs last laughs best.

Well played, playah.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...not_israe.html

August 10, 2006
Worry About the West -- Not Israel
By Victor Davis Hanson

The reactions and media coverage coming out of the West regarding this latest war in the Middle East are as bewildering as they are instructive.

Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., for example, recently said, "I don't take sides for or against Hezbollah or for or against Israel."

Meanwhile, the Western news agency Reuters, responding to scrutiny by bloggers, withdrew wire photos taken by a freelance photographer of a smoky and burning Beirut. Reuters had failed to catch the freelancer's doctoring of the photos to emphasize unduly the damage from Israeli bombs.

And the Associated Press notes that initially reported Lebanese claims of 40 "civilians" killed by Israeli air strikes at Houla, Lebanon, in fact, were mistaken -- and that the latest reports have lowered the death toll to one.

In Qana, where the Israeli military had hit an apartment building (and were quickly censured by European statesmen), the number of civilian fatalities reported also kept decreasing as reports were scrutinized. Plus, we have learned that several hours lapsed between the dropping of the bombs and the fatal collapse of the building, raising further questions about the relationship between the bombing and the fatalities that followed. Finally, based on photographs from the scene, the onsite rescue appeared staged for reporters.

These discrepancies suggest we have little idea what actually happened on the ground there -- other than that Qana has been a favored missile-launching site against Israel, as a recent deadly aerial assault from there on Haifa attests.

There is a depressing pattern here. The sources for Western erroneous reports and faked pictures always seem to exaggerate the damage to Lebanon -- but never to Israel.

Likewise, Western news agencies rarely list a precise number of Hezbollah losses, instead lumping them in with civilian fatalities. Does that mean that someone who launches a missile in Levis and sneakers is not a combatant?

In addition, the history and nature of Hezbollah do not matter to many in the West.

Knowingly or not, news outlets continue to spread Hezbollah's propaganda. One wonders if Westerners remember or know that, until Sept. 11, Hezbollah had killed more Americans than had any other terrorist organization.

Most ignore as well that Hezbollah precipitated the present crisis by kidnapping and killing Israeli soldiers, and launching missiles against Israel's cities.

In retaliation, the Israeli Defense Forces use precision bombs to target combatants and try to avoid civilian casualties (though the latter is nearly impossible against an enemy who doesn't wear uniforms and uses non-combatants as "human shields"). In contrast, every random missile launched by Hezbollah is intended to hit a civilian target.

On one side of this conflict is a true democracy that was attacked. On the other are terrorists who hijacked the sovereign government of Lebanon, instituted theocratic rule over a third of the country -- and started a war.

Hezbollah, of course, has been enabled in large part thanks to Iranian petro-dollars and intimidation. But the nature of Hezbollah's patrons doesn't seem to matter to many Westerners, either.

Those now calling for "dialogue" with the "major players" ignore that Iran promises to wipe out Israel. The French foreign minister was quick to praise the regional role of theocratic Iran as "stabilizing."

Then there's Hezbollah's other patron, Syria, a country that brutally occupied Lebanon, harbors terrorists and is suspected of being behind the assassination of Lebanese reformist Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

So, what then does matter to so many Westerners about this war?

Our fear, of course. We want to avoid messy complications like stirring up another 9/11 or Madrid bombing, spiking oil prices to over $80 a barrel, or treading on politically incorrect ground by criticizing the "other" of the former Third World.

The Western press -- usually so careful to condemn hate speech -- is utterly silent about Arab racism. But a European paper recently published a cartoon portraying Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert as a Nazi, secure that no rabbi would issue threats that could cost the editors their heads.

Still, when this is all over, we should not worry about the survival of Israel. For weeks, pundits have been lecturing how canny and adept Hezbollah has proved -- and how a clumsy Israel could only respond by destroying Lebanon's infrastructure. Yet, when the dust settles, the world will learn that Lebanon outside Hezbollah's domain is not destroyed. And, one hopes, those who have suffered in the Hezbollah-controlled south will reexamine their support for a terrorist organization that has brought them -- and itself -- to near ruin.

Instead far more worrisome is the moral crisis in the West itself. If so many of its politicians, intellectuals and media will not or cannot fathom moral differences in this war, they will hardly be able to see them anywhere else.
Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and author, most recently, of "A War Like No Other: How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War." You can reach him by e-mailing author@victorhanson.com.

©2006 Tribune Media Services

DISCLAIMER:

This was rhetorical and not meant to indicate, imply, assert or otherwise express, implicitly or otherwise, that I endorse, support, desire, or otherwise want the destruction of Israel. Further, none of the previous post was meant to indicate, imply, assert or otherwise express, implicitly or otherwise, that I hate America and/or Israel.

Carry on.

Bullshit. I can find studies out the ass to support anything, and tons supporting the non-linkage between second hand smoke and cancer.

A family member onc's position on all this shit is "people with certain genetics can get cancer triggered by certain stimuli, but the studies fail to say YOU HAVE TO HAVE THAT GENETIC QUIRK."

Cross ref the people in these studies for certain mutations and you'll find they probably all had them. Yet these "studies" tell us "everybody who's around second hand smoke" is in danger of getting cancer. That's bullshit.

If second hand smoke were a legitimate cancer risk, as opposed to an infintessimally small one for a select group of people, think of how many people would have it.

These studies are almost always poorly written, but if you put it in the form of a paper, and claim you used the scientific method, somebody - shit, everbody - will believe you.

BTW, I smoke cigars in the presence of my child, and I sleep very fucking well.

BTW2, I had a cancer scare a few years back. I asked about studies. To a doc, each of them said "stop reading epidemiological shit," it's at best a crude guide, and fails to explain so much.

Um, congratulations? How long ago did this happen?

Note: I am doing this only to be obnoxious.

I don't remember any reports of guilty sleeplessness afflicting the parents of the kids who were kept in cages.

Please don't go away again.

As it happens, Dingell was quoted out of context by PowerLine, Rush Limbaugh and others in a way that made him sound more pro-Hezbollah than he is. Amazingly enough, Victor Davis Hanson has managed to quote selectively from a lengthier statement Dingell made to address the earlier smear to again smear Dingell as being more pro-Hezbollah than he is. Bewildering? Hardly. Instructive? Yes, but not in the way he meant. What a hack.

That's why the articles are peer reviewed and that's why they're constantly rehashing the same thing over and over and over again. That's why the EPA, the National Academy of Sciences, and most recently, the Surgeon General issued separate studies on the subject. It's not a hypothesis that one group of physicians came up with and was never tested again.

I'd be more than happy to play "who has more doctors in the family that we can bullshit with at cocktail parties" with you, and I'm pretty sure that I'd win. But I've also gone to a School Public Health and actually done healthcare research, and a vast majority of what I do every day involves healthcare research, and your disdain for epidemeology and evidence based, outcomes oriented medicine show an obvious bias against any rigorous study which has results that you do not agree with.

I could give a shit about what you do with your kids. My doctor father used to get ready every weekend for 100 mile road trips by making a 16 ounce gin and tonic for the road. The single car seat was reserved for the infant, and the other three kids at various weights under fifty pounds were strapped in to whatever lap belts were around. We all lived. Doesn't mean it was safe then or now.

your point being that blog cites aren't particularly valuable as proof of things?

Sebby's kid had a cold. Sebby applied leaches, and now em is better. So don't come around here waving your "modern medicine" stuff and think you can impress him.

Leeches.

Those too.

I actually noticed the error and was about to correct, but you moved too quickly for me. Insert fat joke here.

When you last stepped in dog shit did you resolve never to walk anywhere again?

You can tout studies till you're blue in the face. If what those "studies" say about second hand smoke were accurate (in the sense that they conveyed to the average person his actual chance of getting cancer from a nearby cigar now and again), we'd all have cancer.

According to "govt studies," most of us should be dead. Second hand smoke is not a huge risk, and taht is exactly why, no matter how many studies you might offer me, or how much Sidd will "2" you on the issue, it will always sound absurd for people to say "second hand smoke causes cancer."

It sounds absurd.

Does it happen? Sure, to a degree remarkably infrequent.

Ask an onc how many patients he/she has seen over the years who got lung cancer ascribable to ssecond hand smoke (not industrial second hand smoke).

Oh, bullshit. Lies, damned lies and statistics. If I gave Steven Leavitt the data in those studies, he'd find fifty explanations other than second hand smoke for the cancers. Ever "tune" an expert report? You can bend data till it stands for exactly the opposite of twhat the numbers suggest on first blush.

the Christian Science church next store had a plumbing truck in its drive way. If the minister had to call a plumber to fix a clogged drain, how you going to listen to him when he says you can read your angina away?

Unless the only reason you eat healthily and exercise is pure vanity, you are totally inconsistent. Eating right and exercising does not ensure you will never get sick. It increases your chances of not getting sick, and improves your quality of life. Similarly, inhaling second-hand smoke increases your chances of getting cancer (though it does not ensure you will get cancer) and can make quality of life worse.

I would think you'd be too busy spraying asbestos insulation into the kid's stroller for winter (if breathing asbestos fibers ensured getting asbestiosis, everyone would have it!) and pouring radium into the bottles because it's cool how it makes the milk all glowy to post.

Well...Dingell did in fact say, "Well, we don’t, first of all, I don’t take sides for or against Hezbollah or for or against Israel." When asked to clarify, he still doesn't say he is against Hezbollah and only condemns Hezbollah for its use of violence. Full quote below.

Which apparently means he isn't against Hezbollah's goals and any actions it takes that aren't "violent." Which, basically, means Dingell is retarded for trying to make this distinction. Hezbollah has engaged in horrific violence in the past (before the most recent Lebanon skirmish) so Dingell should flat out say he is against the terrorist organization. That he didn't out and out condemn this violent organization is just splitting hairs. He needs to retire.



DINGELL: First of all, our problem is that we must be a fair and honest broker and a friend to all parties. The resolution didn’t make us that. We have to have the trust of both of the people of Israel and the people of the Arab countries around it, in order to help resolve the problem. If we don’t, the possibilities of regional war, calamitous situation with regard to israel which has 5 million people amidst a billion and a half Arabs are a real potential for calamity. Having said at that, what we have to do is to see to it that finally we begin to address the problems that exist to abate the difficulties that are preventing a– a honest solution to the problem and a negotiated end. It takes– it takes a lot of work to get the trust that it takes to do this. The resolution did not instill that kind of trust and the end result would be quite frankly, the real solution to the problems that exist in the middle east would probably have been and probably will be put off.

ANCHOR: Overall majority of your colleagues didn’t see it that way and some would suggest that if– even though there are obviously a lot of issues with Lebanon and with Palestinian cause wrapped up in this, that this largely boils down to israel against Hezbollah and Hezbollah is a group that the United States has deemed a terrorist organization, that there’s only one side for the Americans to come down on in this fight.

DINGELL: No, I happen to be — I happen to be against violence, I think the United States has to bring resolution to this matter. Now, I condemn Hezbollah as does everybody else, for the violence,

DINGELL: First of all, our problem is that we must be a fair and honest broker and a friend to all parties. The resolution didn’t make us that. We have to have the trust of both of the people of Israel and the people of the Arab countries around it, in order to help resolve the problem. If we don’t, the possibilities of regional war, calamitous situation with regard to israel which has 5 million people amidst a billion and a half Arabs are a real potential for calamity. Having said at that, what we have to do is to see to it that finally we begin to address the problems that exist to abate the difficulties that are preventing a– a honest solution to the problem and a negotiated end. It takes– it takes a lot of work to get the trust that it takes to do this. The resolution did not instill that kind of trust and the end result would be quite frankly, the real solution to the problems that exist in the middle east would probably have been and probably will be put off.

ANCHOR: Overall majority of your colleagues didn’t see it that way and some would suggest that if– even though there are obviously a lot of issues with Lebanon and with Palestinian cause wrapped up in this, that this largely boils down to israel against Hezbollah and Hezbollah is a group that the United States has deemed a terrorist organization, that there’s only one side for the Americans to come down on in this fight.

DINGELL: Well, we don’t, first of all, I don’t take sides for or against Hezbollah or for or against Israel.

ANCHOR: You’re not against Hezbollah?

DINGELL: No, I happen to be — I happen to be against violence, I think the United States has to bring resolution to this matter. Now, I condemn Hezbollah as does everybody else, for the violence, but I think if we’ve got to talk to them and if we don’t — if we don’t get ourselves in a position where we can talk to both sides and bring both sides together, the killing and the blood let is going to continue.

I strap my kids to the luggage rack with bungy chords and mainline 15.5% alcohol zinfandel out of a box on the passenger seat (California zin, hi Ty!), while, in homage to my friends from the British Empire, I drive on the left side of the road.

Let's see your pansy'd ass Doctor Daddy beat that.

eta: and I am a JD!!

Vanity and stress release.

The devil's in the details. My problem with these studies is they all fail to tell people how very little being around second hand smoke, or drinking four cocktails a night, raises their risk. The people who put out these studies want them to be read, so they say "Second Hand Smoking Causes Cancer!"... and in the fine print, you read, "in one out of 3,000,000 people, 79% of whom have a mutation at gene CDK9."

A person who just reads headnotes (most of the press) takes the ball and runs with it. Then some idiot on a city planning board holds it up at a metting and says "We must ban smoke everywhere!"

And so misiniformation spreads further...

Exactly. If you read all that, it's apparent that Hanson was either full of shit or had an intern find a quote for him.

Translation: Dingell hates America and Israel. but not in bad way.

Ty, what does Quiggan say?

Does anyone make zin in Washington? I know they make a zin knockoff called primitivo in Italy. They make a zin in South Dakota, but with grapes from Lodi.

so you've had personal experience with terrorism, and you're involved at the Supreme Court? I'm ready to guess: Are you Jose Pidilla?

He says you should stop paying illiterates to translate Victor Davis Hanson's columns for you.

By "personal experience," you mean seeing lots of security guards at a school, right?

This will only be true when the terrorist start taking out a least twenty planes a year.

There are a couple. I know Sineann out of Oregon makes a zin that is nice, PacNW terroir, although it probably loses something in the translation from the classic attributes. Columbia Winery had a small release of a 2003 Zin last year (the winemaker there, david Lake, likes to play around with varietals that are not necessarily WA staples). Not great. His 03 barbera was good. He also makes a very nice Sangiovese. Had some of the 04 of that last night.

which tribe are your people from? oh. you're not Jewish? I'm afraid you wouldn't understand then.

Or when people stop driving with Penske at the wheel.

You are an idiot, and you assume things you shouldn't.

maybe. but at least I'm not a retard.

And you dont' think this is all just a pretext for (1) trying to make it less convenient to smoke in the hope that fewer people will do it (you do agree that actually smoking increases cancer risk, right?), and/or (2) getting rid of an otherwise annoying and impolite behavior (i.e. smoking indoors and around others)?

So there's hope for you, eh? Good.