ARE JOURNALISTS KILLING JOURNALISM AS A PROFESSION BY IGNORING A PUBLISHED CODE OF ETHICS? The website Carpe Bonum thinks so and tells you why.
AN AL QAEDA REVIEW can be read on former military man Donald Sensing’s site, chock full of highly insightful info on the terrorist group, its motives and plans..
ANALYZING THE NEOCONS: Brent Rasmussen provides an extensive look at the neocons and their influence on the Bush administration. It’s extensive and worth reading in full. He sees a danger that events may cause Osma bin Laden to attack the U.S. homeland again to frame Iran. Here’s a small taste:
For the last couple of years, Osama has been content to let the neocons go at it in Iraq. They have after all left him more or less alone, while driving Muslim opinion and willing recruits to him in a manner he can only think is the divine work of Allah. So he’s had no incentive to take any risks and disrupt that dynamic.
But Osama views Iran as a threat to his ideology. They’re Shia, they’re powerful, and Sunni’s like OBL view the Shia as batshit crazy, heretical lunatics. If OBL sees that our appetite for war in Iraq is waning, and the Shia are going to come out ahead after everything is said and done, he will have an incentive to knock us off balance again.
I don’t have any idea what goes through the mind of OBL, I don’t even know if he has the capacity to attack us, but here’s how I’d play it if I were in his shoes. I wouldn’t do anything to upset the way things are now. But if we begin to leave Iraq, and the Shia rise up, he might reconsider. If I were OBL, I’d bend heaven and earth to put forth every appearance the Iranians were helping me, and then attack the US, framing Iran as complicit in the process …
ON FEMALE PHYSICS FACULTY MEMBERS: Look at this to see how the U.S. stacks up compared to other countries.
THE BEST COMMENTS AND ANALYSIS ON BUSH’S INAUGURAL ADDRESS have been by Oxblog’s David Adesnik. He isn’t getting wrapped up in the partisan cheering or jeering sections. He has done several superb posts. In his latest post compares Bush’s IDEAS to ideas in other Presidential inaugural addresses, arguing "only in the context of his predecessor’s words that the uniqueness of George W. Bush’s inaugural address can be understood." An excerpt:
There are two attributes that distinguish Bush’s second inaugural from those that preceded it. Its talk of democracy spreading across the globe is not one of them. That is a cliche.
But the intensity of Bush’s emphasis on democracy promotion is unprecedented. His emphasis has forced all those who comment on the inaugural address to grapple with that issue.
But more importantly, Bush repeatedly emphasized that the United States must take an active role in spreading freedom and liberty across the globe. In contrast, his predecessors have relied on passive formulations that, as John Quincy Adams might have said, present the United States as a "well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all" but "the champion and vindicator of only her own."
ELVIS IS A BIG HIT IN ENGLAND AGAIN but did you know that there was a time when he caused a scandal (and created a new style) because of his use of the word "ain’t?"
OUR PAL PUTIN STRIKES AGAIN: Russia is coming to the verbal defense of Syria against the backdrop of growing concern (and of course rumors that Russia is selling Syria missiles have nothing to do with Vladimir sticking up for that terrorist enabling nation).
DO BLOGGERS NEED A CODE OF ETHICS? A MUST READ ON BLOGGERS AND BLOGGING can be found at skippy the bush kangaroo (who writes only in lower case). Read the whole post. One of skippy’s key points is the fallacy when journalists start trying to apply journalistic standards to bloggers when journalism and blogging is not necessarily the same thing. Here’s part of what he writes:
there is no "code of ethics" needed for bloggers, because bloggers are just americans discussing their country and the world. does uncle fred have to disclose everyone he worked for when he complains about how the city never fixes potholes outside his house? we don’t think so. and if uncle fred sets up a "i hate the city ‘cuz they never fix potholes.blogspot.com" blog, does he have to create, and then adhere to, a code of ethics, just like paid journalists are supposed to, but hardly ever, do? no.
people are allowed to listen to other’s opinions without worrying about ethics, because people can make up their own minds about the sources’ ethics. "yeah, bob hates the feminists, but he also shacks up with goats, so i think i won’t hold his ideas too highly."
journalists, who rightly are angry that they are still held to an ethics code, when every other industry in america is shedding any modicrum of responsibility, would do better to start holding politicians, the energy industry, the banks, the pharmaceutical industry, and their own bosses to a higher standard, than pick on some guy in his pajamas expressing his opinion.
My FOOTNOTE TO SKIPPY: I do NOT sleep in pajamas. I bare all for truth.
WAS THE BOSTON TERRORISM NUKE SCARE A FALSE ALARM? MartiniPundit notes signs that it was — and offers a theory of what it REALLY was.
BEWARE OF ANYONE TRYING TO LINK UP OSAMA BIN LADEN AND IRAN writes Justin Delebar.
TAKING POLITICAL STOCK OF HIS POSITIONS ON ISSUES libertarian Andrew Quinn gives us a succinct and bold list (no hedging).
THE MAC MINI IS REVIEWED BY Will Collier who thinks its great for some things, but notes that it clearly has some limitations.
THE MODERATE VOICE INTERVIEWED: Our answer to Question #4 of a 20 question interview is now up on Random Fate.