If you view one thing on the internet this week, I recommend this, a Bloggerheads discussion between Robert Wright and Eli Lake. Bloggerheads, in case you are wondering, is a site where two way video conversations are broadcast. Robert Wright's a liberal, Eli's a conservative journalist. Eli's embedded in Iraq, following the "surge" of US troops there; Robert's back in the USA. It's nighttime in Iraq when this is recorded, daytime in the USA. Eli's account is full of excitement and tension- the real thing in other words. (via Instapundit)

Also fascinating, to get into the mood of Lake's reporting, this from Michael Yon- Rattlesnake- embedded with the British army and active on night missions. Again, electrifying.

I should also add that I will be away for the next few days, visiting relatives. I may be absent from these pages for five days or so. Then again, maybe I won't be.

Ah, happy days. Some joke, perhaps? The BBC had it as their front page photo all day.

As Mark Steyn said about the BBC in a recent column, "On the European Union, on the Iraq war, on Northern Ireland, on Islam, on America, the BBC trends not merely well to the left of the Conservative Party but well to the left of Tony Blair’s New Labour."

Is the IPCC doing harm to science?

Look out for a big BBC climate change splash this weekend, unless that is they think the weather's too cold in London or they think people are looking the other way. The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), you see, is due to release another climate change paper on Friday.

Der Spiegel have written an interesting analysis of the current state of play, explaining the international wrangling that goes on about the use of language, and how the EU (with the UK) has tended to have its way in hardening forecasts.

What struck me most was this concerning CC "denier" Richard Lindzen:

"Lindzen's arguments sound convincing, but they are still nothing but claims, popular theories as opposed to a transparent global process, a global plebiscite among climate researchers."

I grew up in a family headed by a scientist, and this was not the way I understood it should work. Politics and science just don't mix, which appears not to be good enough for some.

Oh, another highlight from the Spiegel article (unserious one), concerning Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the IPCC:


"When colleagues describe him they mention his beard, the way he combs his hair straight across his head and his diplomatic skills."

Ah, I think this is the polite German way of saying that he has a wicked comb-over.

Nations Run Deep : France's positive moment.

I've heard recently from several sources of an old quote from the perennially influential Adam Smith:

"There is a great deal of ruin in a nation"

True enough, but the corollary must be that there is a great deal of repair required from time to time.

I am glad to hear of Nicholas Sarkozy's victory in the French Presidential elections, but Commentary's Michael Gurfinkiel sounds a cautionary note, and with good reason.

It's difficult reading his analysis of the situation, with France dominated by elite bureaucrats in Government, and by numerous, youthful and active Eurabian inmigrants on the the ground, to see how Sarkozy will be more than temporary respite for France. Maybe he will show people what needs doing- ie. a massive and alien revamping of France's political culture and social ideas. It's doubtful that he can actually do this himself, but perhaps he can be a trailblazer who buys France some time.

It would be nice for Europe if he can be more than that.

My comparison of the French situation with that of Britain, meanwhile, would be that while the French need to swallow their pride and accept alien solutions to their problems (and I mean more traditional Anglo-Saxon ones), Britain needs to awake to its own interests and show even greater robustness in its elected War on Terror. What we have seen in France is creeping Islamisation; in Britain we are vulnerable to the sudden terrorist shock. The French need to take their self-imposed blinkers off; the British to wake up. Neither is in a good position, but the French have taken a step forward today, undoubtedly.

By the way, I rather enjoyed the sour grapes BBC comment that "the BBC's Caroline Wyatt in Paris says he will have to work hard to unite the French, and try to win round those who voted against him". Clearly since this vote was a choice of two philosophies, it would be a betrayal of Sarkozy's voting base to pander to the Royalists. But that's, I expect, the Beeb's only consoling consideration at the moment. I wonder whether the Beeb will ever tire of their boilerplate.

Beeb-based observations

Ordinarily I ignore local elections. There seems to be a pretty good case for ignoring the most recent ones. That, one can imagine, is what the attuned folks at the Beeb concluded when they analysed the Conservative performance primarily through the prism of a notional national voting percentage barely increased on the previous year's less comprehensive local elections results (40ish percent versus 40ish percent). Yet there I was on Thursday night poring over the results at 3 in the morning. True, it was really just the consequence of insomnia- but somehow I had begun to care.

I wonder if others are beginning to feel that way? The Beeb are probably shuddering at the thought. A litmus test though of whether Cameron is really a statist or is actually a pretty good conservative liar would be whether (assuming- big assumption- his election in three years' time) the BBC was permitted to continue as the state sponsored global broadcasting monster which it has evolved into, or whether Cameron would engage in some conservative-minded natural selection of BBC functions, with the aim of stimulating the free media market.

Also in my mind during the coverage was the Beeb's very own Lothian question- where they gave primacy to the decision making processes of less than an eighth of the British population by headlining the elections to the assemblies in Scotland and Wales.

I wonder if that would have happened had Labour enjoyed a relatively relaxed Thursday night south of the border? It must be a comfort to lefty Beebites that they can always retreat to covering a truly leftist country when they need to get their breath back. Something similar has usually been true of conservatives in England- there was always the South East. Though we never had a giant broadcaster to cater for such escapism, news tends to follow the money, so...

I very much like Scotland, actually. The main reason, aside from motive, that I can't imagine ever locating there is the suffocating essentialness of the state to people's existences there. The same for me would apply to Sweden, probably Norway too. Where I currently reside, in the Czech Republic, the state has a bit of an image problem, having had a forty year term of office statifying (stultifying?) everything. The roll back from that is therefore instinctive and there's an instinct to leave alone; as well as the imperative of not actually being a very rich state to begin with.

I fear for Scotland though, or rather for its people. A retreat from the Union would be a fundamentally unserious step, a step towards EUification and away paradoxically from national identity. The fact that the deciding factor would be the opposition of the Lib Dems to such a move says it all really.

The Beeb thinking what I'm thinking, part deux.

The Beeb, it would appear, consider that the murder of Bob Woolmer may be linked to Islamic radicalism. According to this article via ATW

"PAKISTAN'S cricket coach Bob Woolmer may have been murdered after angering radical Muslims, according to a BBC investigation.

The Panorama TV show suggests some players followed the extremist Muslim movement, Tablighi Jamaat."

There is also the fact that "preliminary toxicology tests confirm Woolmer was rendered helpless with a powerful poison before being strangled."

Maybe in the light of these things I would venture to suggest that not only Islamic radicals linked to the team, but the team too, may be responsible for the murder.

Why? Because cricket is a very personal game- there's no other game where you are around the same people for such a long time, often engaged in idle chat and casual observation. The things Woolmer apparently criticised his players for were part of their lives and only the players would have heard them and felt their effects. Only the players, meanwhile, were going home to Pakistan to face the ridicule of their formerly adoring public. How to respond to the Englishman's "oppression" and save face at home?....

"Everybody's watching, everybody's gloating..."

-Sandmonkey on the world reaction to the political retreat of the US Congress and Representives from Iraq. In a fascinating interview with the ubiquitous Atlas the Egyptian blogger talks of a political thaw in Egypt following Bush''s reelection in 04, and a crackdown following the election of the Democrats last year. Some things needed to be above politics- unfortunately the pols lack the imagination for things like that.

Cat. Bag. Open. Heh.

Dangerously Good

If you're not following the Conrad Black trial as blogged by Mark Steyn for Macleans, I strongly suggest that you do. Writing with such unpolitical perspicuity Steyn does what the great satirical writers have always done: open their opponents to ridicule while remaining scrupulously observant. I suppose none of the jury will get to read any of it, but if they did...

Blogsweep

In which Max Boot makes it seem as though my pessimism on Iraq is premature (again), Dumb Jon makes most excellent and chewy toast of a former BBC journalist, while Norm Geras and Oliver Kamm demonstrate which of them is the Professor of Philosophy as they debate that high art, The Blog.

Ironic how the roles of philosopher king and man of letters are reversed- the academic offering tolerant and social solutions, the journalist offering draconian bloviation.

Then again, the US media could get worse (see below post).

Iraq revisited- what does go down the toilet.

Melanie Phillips has a fascinating post up on Iraqi WMDs.

Mmm. Kind of retro now, isn't it.

Yet I think it is instructive, and I have more respect for Melanie Phillips than for any other journalist.

It's almost a welcome relief to think about Iraqi WMDs than to think about mounting death tolls of US and British troops.

In truth I never expected anything else. I did hope for a miracle though, given that the goal was certainly a noble one. The really interesting thing is to reflect on the weakness of a military giant that can allow an insurgency to defeat it despite, and this is key, the overwhelmingly receptive nature of most Iraqis to an occupying force in place of a terrorist regime.

When you consider it, victory in Iraq is critical- yet it is not apparently happening. The opponents are very active- the Iranians, the Syrians, even the Saudis one suspects, at a distance. But America and its allies should have been able to enforce their will. So it's imperative to examine in detail why they haven't, and I'd start here:

"The docile US media, dependent as it is on government sources and handouts, is all too easily intimidated or bought off by pressure from a myriad different sources which all have their own conflicting reasons to suppress such politically damaging revelations. Too many important reputations in the media now rest on the ruthless suppression of the faintest possibility that they might have been wrong."

The US media, I would add, is docile when it comes to things which feed its preening narrative, and totally reactionary when it is contradicted. The poverty of the US media in understanding and reporting the stakes and the realties of the big wide world mirrors the starvation of intelligence which characterises the involvement in Iraq. Idealism remains, but is not enough. To know friend from foe and rightly estimate their designs is the key, and the media love throwing such realities down their toilets after the fashion of top mag Newsweek.

The Bias Masterclass

As an epicure of media bias, I have to link to a couple of recent posts from the well-known US blog Powerline. These lawyerly types are particularly good at highlighting the liberal bias of many media outlets there; the BBC's relentless pap represents a far tougher challenge here though.

Lesson One

Lesson Two

I may add more as they arise.

Allah's Moneyed Enslavers

I've not come across anything that exposes the utter evil of the people the US-led coalition are confronting in Iraq more than the story of a handicapped 13 year old, bought- yes, BOUGHT-, by Al-Qaeda to do its bidding.

It's Oliver Twist, Iraq-style, and instead of picking pockets, we find that the lad is assisting in attacks on US forces.

The difference in this story is that although motherless, like Oliver, unlike Oliver "Barack Muhammed" was sold by his father for 10,000 dollars.

Quite a lot of money, when you think about it.

Oh, "source" I hear you asking?

The UN, actually.

Thanks to the excellent Pamela from Atlas Shrugs for the link.

It's a little cruel, and perhaps slightly unwise, but I have to confess I found Allah very funny is his riff from the Iran debacle/kerfuffle/distraction.















I also have to confess that, though I should have known better, I thought young Batchelor was a girl. Those doe eyes!

ps. Devil's Kitchen, I notice, is a tad more up front along similar lines.

Compare and contrast

Zimbabweans write. Here and here.


"Every day, every night, hitmen in smart, unmarked vehicles arrive and drag people out their houses, or beat them senseless, because they don’t support the ruling Zanu PF."


"Mugabe has always left his people licking their wounds. He stops at nothing to take out his frustration, his anger and what he sees as his God-given right to lead on the people...The man jumps at shadows and orders his police and army, together with the CIO, the youth militia and the war veterans to beat his own people - the very ones that voted him into power."
[ I don't think Mugabe ever got in in a truly straight election process, even at the beginning there were thousands of reports of intimidation on big M's behalf- ed]

Comfy non-Zimbabwean western marxists write. Here and here


"Morgan Tsvangirai is a Western sponsored "terrorist", he plotted in London to assassinate Mugabe and overthrow the elected government. There is nothing democratic about the MDC, unlike the Mahdi army and Badr Brigades in Iraq, Hamas in Palestine or Hezbollah in Lebanon."


"Ever since veterans of the guerrilla war against apartheid Rhodesia violently seized white-owned farms in Zimbabwe, the country’s president, Robert Mugabe, has been demonized by politicians, human rights organizations and the media in the West."

Given the general apathy towards meaningful actions against Mugabe, given the laissez faire approach that has given the main role to quiet diplomat Thabo Mbeki, given the catastrophic (no understatement) decline of every aspect of Zimbabwean life taking Mugabe's reign in its totality, isn't it clear that far too much credit has been given already to the marxist take on that country, without the BBC giving it some more? (see where they link luscious lawyerly lefty Steph's blog- 1st marxist link above).

Kamm is rong

On, the contrary. to Kamm, most blogs are well ritten and a fare amount of time is given to rite spelling two.

But of course it isn't just that ;-). The blogosphere gives room for counterbalancing opinions to the dominant media. Really. Speaking as someone who was always antagonised by the BBC's simplistic socialistic version of Britain and the world, the blogosphere gave the first opportunity to fight back directly and honestly.

The Telegraph could be said to be the nearest thing to an opposition to the BBC, as long as one isn't hung up on the notion that the Times is Murdoch's personal Beeb-bashing vehicle. Yet the Telegraph has enjoyed journalistic contacts with the Beeb, swapping correspondents from time to time (Andrew Marr, for instance, has written for the Telegraph). It is also true that the Telegraph would probably be happy with a conservative-oriented state broadcaster, if such a thing be possible .

I would never be happy while a state organised news network retained centre stage in the British media. I was also deeply unhappy with the complicity of Dyke's BBC with New Labour, which is marginally less noticeable in today's corporation following the Hutton watershed. That's not to mention its closeness to the British Foreign Office with all its designs.

So, the blogosphere has given me the chance to say directly what I so deeply feel- that the BBC, through accident of history and malchance, has become a deeply rooted disseminator of half-baked reality.

Gazillionth confusing headline from the BBC

London attacks suspects in court

Yes, it's probably pretty unusual to wonder at this who Mr London is and why he has attacked people in court...

Happy Easter!

About that photo..

Claudia Rosett weighs in.

Aww, What a sweet little grandma...