October 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  
Previous Months






The Astonished Head Tee!
Buttons, Small and Bigger!
Chomskybat Magnet!
Proloxil T-shirts and Mugs!


Ba-Bow
Limerence (Falls In Waves)


Astonished Head: The Ad
Miserable Ovoid Creature


Current
Crygender
The Hacker Crackdown
The Ethics of Ambiguity
The New Goddess
In the Queue
Love and Limerence
A General Theory of Love
Labyrinth of Desire
The Second Sex
Decoding Gender in Science Fiction
Male Bodies, Women's Souls


The Aristocrats
The Blenster's Blog
Classical Values
The Colossus
Exit Zero
Fried Green al-Qaedas
Kate Evans' Blog
Protein Wisdom
Seablogger
Spiced Sass
Ten Fingers 6 Strings
through the moonroof
verb-ops
Virtual Occoquan
Waiting for Cassowary

BMEzine
ErosBlog
Fleshbot
Girl with a one-track mind
ModBlog
Susie Bright


Adventure Cycling
'BentRider Online
crazyguyonabike
Greenspeed USA
HP Velotechnik
Ken Kifer's Bike Pages
Nomadic Research Labs
Northeast Recumbents


boingboing
Dan's Data
Engadget
Gizmodo
Mozilla
Oh Gizmo!
OpenOffice
Slashdot
ThinkGeek
Treehugger
Ubuntu
Ubuntu Forums
Wired



Get Firefox
Opera


January 30, 2003

For those looking for stunning new evidence about Iraq's weapons programs from Colin Powell's February 5 speech at the UN: don't bet on it.

At yesterday's Gaggle, Fleischer made the following comments:

Let me make a couple points about what Secretary Powell will do at the United Nations next week, as well as where we stand in the bigger picture about what is coming next vis-a-vis Iraq. The Secretary's presentation will take a look at what is known about Saddam Hussein and the threat he presents, and he will connect the dots. He will go before the Security Council to share with them information about why this is such a matter of grave concern and why the peace is threatened by Saddam Hussein's defiance of the United Nations, and Saddam Hussein's refusal to disarm.

When asked a second time if Powell would be presenting new evidence, he said:

Again, I think that he will, in effect, connect the dots about what is known. And I'm not going to make any more predictions beyond that about what the Secretary will say.

There's an extreme level of ambiguity throughout, except for one thing: this is a serious process. Fleischer used that particular phrase twice, and the word "process" five times, referring not to the buildup of forces, or to the war itself, but to the consultation with Europe and the UN. The public face the administration is putting on is that of diplomatic consultation, but it is indicating that the present "diplomatic window" will be of relatively short duration...weeks, not months.

It's also been made clear that President Bush believes that the information necessary to prompt the UN to take action is already available:

But I also submit to you, in the President's judgment, there's already a Mt. Everest of information, high enough to know that Saddam Hussein has weapons and is willing to use them. From the President's point of view, making Mt. Everest higher is not necessary to disarm Saddam Hussein.

So, in effect, the President is saying to the UN: you're going to have to decide to support us or not based upon information that is already available. Which means that he is drawing a line in the sands of diplomatic procedure: this is it. This is all you'll get. If that's not enough...well, let's hope that the President meant it when he said that America's purpose is to achieve a result, not follow a process.