Andy wrote:
] Bob Barr states:
] ] Some of you may think that I have always been in
] ] politics, but I haven't. There was a time in the
] ] distant past, in a land far, far ago, where I actually
] ] worked as a professional. Came to a job every day. Was
] ] held to certain standards, where I had actual job
] ] evaluations and had to get raises and so forth, and I
] ] actually enjoyed it. It was at the CIA. I spent close to
] ] eight years at the Agency back in the 1970's. Having
] ] the opportunity this weekend to visit with Jim Woolsey
] ] and have the honor of introducing him here today really
] ] is wonderful.

Phew! That was one of the extreme right-wingers' gatherings. Looks like there were about 50 attendees, including Rush Limbaugh and an NRA bigshot.

Here's some more info on "Restoration Weekend" where Woolsey issued that particular speech. He had a few good points, but overall I think he came off sounding pretty damn racist and anti-Islam:

 http://rogerailes.blogspot.com/2002_11_17_rogerailes_archive.html (scroll down to 11/17/2002)

RE: World War IV

] Al-Sahhaf's aura of confidence, along with the surprising
] resilience of Iraqi fighters in the first weeks of the war,
] have become an unlikely source of pride for an Arab world that
] has watched the invasion in impotent anger.
]
] "He's the comic relief of the war," said Salwa, a 59-year-old
] Egyptian teacher. "At the same time, he's the voice of victory
] that we want to believe."
 . . .
] By Monday, U.S. troops were occupying the Baghdad parade
] grounds and one of the main presidential palaces and calmly
] chatting live on TV with a Fox News reporter. Meanwhile,
] a few hundred yards away on the eastern bank of the Tigris
] River, al-Sahhaf stood on the roof of the Palestine Hotel
] telling reporters that U.S. troops had been taught "a lesson
] that will not be forgotten in history" and were "committing
] suicide against the walls of Baghdad."
 . . .
] Indeed, it seems like the only appropriate ending for
] this televised point-counterpoint (with al-Sahhaf on one
] side and reality on the other) would be for a U.S. tank
] to roll by in the background of one of al-Sahhaf's news
] conferences with a soldier holding up a "Hi, Mom" sign.

Iraqi information chief unshakable as Baghdad falls around him

] Rival satellite station Abu Dhabi TV announced its
] Baghdad bureau had also been hit and broadcast a live
] report showing its camera position under attack.
]
] As they filmed the arrival of two US tanks on a major
] bridge in central Baghdad close to their offices
] overlooking the river, what appeared to be Iraqi
] machinegun fire clattered out from just beneath the
] camera position.

I was watching this one live on TV. The Abu Dhabi camera crew was filming two M-1 tanks attempting to cross a bridge over the Tigris river, and then there were puffs of dust which looked like machine gun fire around the camera, which was then knocked off its stand until it came to rest pointing at a stairwell. It was righted (or maybe they switched to another camera) a few moments later, and the translator of the Arabic broadcast said the Abu Dhabi crew were shouting, "Why are they attacking us? We're just trying to show the truth?!"

I meme this because it was very clear to me that the firing was coming from the Iraqis, and not from the Americans. Even this Middle East Online article agrees. It was the Iraqis firing at the camera crew. If the Americans would have wanted to take the TV crew out, the tank had a direct line on them (heck, we were practically staring right down the gun barrel of the tank).

I'm still not sure what to think about the tank that was firing at the Palestine Hotel, but in this particular case, it was very clear who was doing the firing, and what they were aiming at.

Iraqis Shooting at Abu Dhabi TV Crew

] The correspondent, Shaker Hamed, issued the call for help
] on Abu Dhabi TV saying that "25 journalists and
] technicians belonging to Abu Dhabi television and Qatari
] satellite television channel Al-Jazeera are surrounded in
] the offices of Abu Dhabi TV in Baghdad".

Baghdad reporter issues SOS (April 09, 2003)

] But Fox News Channel reported that coalition forces were
] guided to the site after breaking into Saddam's coded
] communication system, known as a Jaguar security
] encryption system.

(unconfirmed) Saddam's Bunker Located via Cracked Jaguar Encryption

] Shakir Hamid, paterfamilias to the Abu Dhabi television team
] in the Iraqi capital Baghdad, who has brought the war on Iraq
] into millions of viewers' living rooms, found that the war had
] hit closer to home than he could have ever imagined.
]
] The fierce, relentless bombing by U.S. forces of the
] southern city of Nassiriya on which he was reporting had
] claimed three precious victims - Shakir's older brother
] Jawad and two of his brother's children, Hamid, 13, and
] 12-year-old Khulood.
. . .
] Jawad and his family, part of a huge convoy of cars
] carrying other civilians from Nassiriya were mowed down
] by the U.S. soldiers as they approached Souk Al Shuyoukh.
]
] "My brother and my nephew and niece died on the spot,"
] said a tearful Imad, Shakir's younger brother and also a
] television journalist who arrived in Dubai from Baghdad a
] day before the war began.

Gulf News Online: Abu Dhabi TV's Hamid bereaved after bombing

] The Post's account is significant because it suggests
] that, in fact, military procedures may not have been
] properly followed at the checkpoint. Several U.S. papers,
] including the New York Daily News, Boston Globe, Chicago
] Tribune, L.A. Times and San Francisco Chronicle, managed
] to include the discrepancy between the official Pentagon
] account and the Post's eyewitness description in their
] reports on the Najaf killings in their April 1 editions.
] The New York Times, however, did not, instead running a
] story that only presented the official version, under a
] headline that stated as a definite fact that adequate
] warning had been given before soldiers opened fire:
] "Failing to Heed Warning, 7 Iraqi Women and Children
] Die."

FAIR MEDIA ADVISORY: Official Story Vs. Eyewitness Account

] Chalabi, an exiled former banker wanted for fraud
] allegations in Jordan, is popular amongst the powerful US
] oil lobby -- whom he predicted would have great
] opportunities in the Iraqi oil industry after the
] invasion. His fortunes did not promise much after the
] abortive coup launched in 1996 from the Kurdish region in
] the north. It soured relations with Kurds who felt it
] exposed them to Saddam's revenge.
. . .
] US deputy secretary of defense Paul Wolfowitz has said
] that the US "goal has got to be to transfer
] authority and the operation of the government as quickly
] as possible not to some other external authority, but to
] the Iraqi people themselves."
]
] Chalabi, who left Iraq in 1956 at the age of 11 and has
] lived all his adult life in the US and UK, would appear
] to be a poor candidate.

Al Jazeera doesn't like Chalabi. The CIA doesn't like Chalabi. The State Department doesn't like Chalabi (http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N07129260.htm). "60 Minutes" did a segment on him yesterday, and they didn't seem thrilled with him (http://www.reason.com/links/links040703.shtml). And after having learned more about him, and seen his interview on TV, I can't say as I like him either. My gut says that he and this "Free Iraq Force" smell wrong, and I hope that a better choice becomes available!

Al Jazeera: Anti-Saddam Opposition Troops Fly into Iraq

] And, the United States is preparing to launch an
] Arabic-language television station in the Middle East to
] boost its image.
]
] Not one to be left behind, Al Jazeera hopes to launch an
] English-language channel to compete with the "big
] guys" and give "another perspective".

What I also want is at least one worldwide television network, with different languages being played simultaneously depending on the viewer's preference, no matter where they're located (interactive TV).

Having different "localized" channels would still be fine, but for real communication, I'd like at least one channel that I knew the entire world could watch, and know that they were seeing the same thing, where they could switch in and out of different languages (if they understood those languages), to know that it really was the same reporting going out to everyone. More like a United Nations speech, where no matter what the language is of the current speaker, all the different representatives are hearing translations in their own language, all at the same time. A "World News Network" in a variety of languages, with rotating reporters from dozens (or maybe hundreds) of countries, subject to the review and accuracy checks of all sides at once.

Note: I'm not saying it would be *easy*....

IRAQ: Media Wage Their Own War

] U.S. forces near Baghdad found a weapons cache of around
] 20 medium-range missiles equipped with potent chemical
] weapons, the U.S. news station National Public Radio
] reported on Monday.
]
] NPR, which attributed the report to a top official with
] the 1st Marine Division, said the rockets, BM-21
] missiles, were equipped with sarin and mustard gas and
] were "ready to fire." It quoted the source as saying new
] U.S. intelligence data showed the chemicals were "not
] just trace elements."

The 4-minute NPR audio from today's "Morning Edition" can be listened to here:

 http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wfId=1223246

Note: This is not an eyewitness report. It's an interview with an NPR reporter who was told by an official from the Marines who said he'd heard it from the intelligence network. Enough degrees of separation to treat the report with skepticism, but enough detail to definitely be of interest!

(unconfirmed) U.S. Finds Missiles with Chemical Weapons