Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Benazir Bhutto: Osama Bin Laden is dead

Listen carefully to the video below. At some point (around min. 2:14) Benazir Bhutto says "Omar Sheikh, the man who murdered Osama Bin Laden". What's amazing is the reporter who took the interview did not ask her anything about the remark. Not "What did you just say?" not "When?" not "Sure you meant Daniel Pearl?" (Omar Sheikh is known to be responsible for that). Moreover, no major news agency spoke about this up until now, and no politician or intelligence service representative have confirmed or denied the claim.



Another thing to note is that she lists the people who in her opinion will try to assassinate her, and there is *no* mention of Osama Bin Laden. Instead, she mentions his son, Hamza Bin Laden. In light of this, I think she did not misspoke, and in fact meant what she said.

Saturday, January 12, 2008

Consistency

"What do trees have to talk about, hmm... except the consistency of squirrel droppings?" (Gimli)

I notice that both right and left candidates in the US presidential race are making supreme effort to convince us that their views did not change over time, while accusing each other of changing views. If a candidate is found to contradict himself in another interview the fact is immediately on TV, and the candidate is convincing us that he/she actually meant something else - something he/she is saying now.

But wait a second. Since when never changing your opinion is a good thing? Person that never changes his opinion never learns. He is never inconvenienced by reality, his views are frozen in time and space, forever undisturbed by the entropy of expanding universe. He must be a God, or a cartoon character, or an idiot. And whatever is the case, and whoever wins, he is also the next president of the United States.

Friday, May 11, 2007

Are they back?

Apparently:


This photo was recently taken by a journalist during violent suppression of demonstration against Putin's regime in St. Petersburg organized by "Other Russia" organization. The photo was published by the Esquire magazine. So, what does Russian authorities intend to do about this?

They are concerned. They want to find out how it could happen that SS soldiers are suppressing freedom of speech and demonstration in Russia, more then half a century after being defeated in WWII. No, strike that last one. They want to find out how it could happen that the Esquire magazine publishes "obviously fake photographs", and if it could be punished for publishing Nazi symbol, which is prohibited by law!

Good thing there is that law.

Wednesday, May 09, 2007

Expert from Peres' answers to Winograd commission

Expert from answers of Peres to Winograd commission. Can't vouch for accuracy as this is translation from Russian, but if I have time and access I will bring more translations directly from Hebrew. Peres comes out here as a slime and a demagogue. Let me also remind you that when he heard that the protocols will be published he mentioned he wouldn't give the same answers if he knew. Read and "enjoy".

Peres:
I wouldn't start a war

Gabizon: Did you say anything to Olmert? You are a high ranking minister.

Peres: I said that there are different alternatives

Gabizon: I do not understand why you voted in favor

Peres: And if I were to abstain? There was a majority anyway

Gabizon: If you thought the war was a mistake, why didn't you left the government?

Peres: And loose all the influence?

Gabizon: And how did you influenced?

Peres: I conducted discussions

Einan: With whom? Sharon Stone? And why didn't you turned to press and said...

Peres: What? That I oppose? And damage the moral of our soldiers?

Gabizon: And why didn't you explained your position and left the government after the war?

Peres: Threats of Hizballah require a response. I had no choice.

Einan: You are contradicting yourself, and not answering the question again.

Peres: There is no contradiction. I wouldn't start a war.

Gabizon: But you voted in favor?

Dror: Maybe Mr. thinks he is from UN?

Peres: My friend, I voted because of... circumstances.

Gabizon: Voted in favor of war while being against it?

Peres: I had no other choice

Gabizon: Who didn't had a choice, you personally, or the State?

Peres: I don't deal with personal business. I meant the State.

Gabizon: Did anybody forced you to vote in favor? Could you abstain?

Peres: My dear, nobody promised me anything

Nadel: She didn't ask if anybody promised you anything

Peres: Oh, and I thought...

Gabizon: And despite your position, you voted in favor and supported the government all this time.

Saturday, May 05, 2007

Please, stay


The people that call for Olmert's and Peretz's resignation are completely missing the point. Its not them who should be let go, it is their parties Avoda and Kadima. They are all responsible for the outcome of Second Lebanon War. That also includes Gil and Shas. Right now all the ex-friends of Olmert's and Peretz's are trying to shift all the blame just on those two. If people don't recognize this, new tricksters will arise from the same parties, and we will be back to square one. Olmert needs to stay as long as is needed for the coalition to rip itself apart from inside for the fear of association with him. Please, stay!