yo yo yo search it!

Thursday, August 17, 2006

hmmmmmm i couldn't even finish the article

the picture was so f**king offputting

by the way did you know the following women were fat?
scarlett johansson
evangeline lilly
liv tyler
mandy moore
katherine heigl
gretchen mol
sophia loren
carla gugino

from details:

(a shout out to feministing for pointing the details story out)

James K. Galbraith asks some very good questions

worthy of some thought. oh, i know there are terrorists out there. people who mean to bring the united states (and other countries) harm. i also know there are some liars and some immoral and some insane people running this country as well as other countries.

jon stewart had correspondent john oliver on the other day. they were talking about how electing ned lamont would of course open the door for terrorists, osama and the rest of al qaeda to come marching right into this country. it was WICKED hilarous (i checked you tube to see if they had the video, they didn't. at least not yet).

did announcing the arrests of the alleged terrorists in britain right after the primary elections in the united states amount to one big fat coincidence?

Groundhog Day

[posted online on August 16, 2006]
James K. Galbraith flew from Manchester to Boston on August 10, enduring eleven hours without a book.
Let's see... It's August. Bush is in Crawford on a "working vacation." His polls are in the tank. Congress is in revolt. The economy is going soft. The next elections don't look good. Cheney is off in Wyoming, or wherever he goes. It's 2001. No, it's 2006.
In The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, Marx
reports that "Hegel writes somewhere" that the great events of history tend to occur twice, first as tragedy and then as farce.
On September 11, nineteen hijackers commandeered four airplanes and succeeded in killing some 3,000 people. On August 10, we are told, British authorities upended a suicide-murder plot aimed at destroying twelve airplanes, killing everyone on board including the bombers, possibly with more fatalities than on 9/11. As a senior British police official put it, "This was intended to be mass murder on an unimaginable scale."
From all official statements so far, we are led to believe that August 10 was a highly developed, far-advanced conspiracy, under surveillance for some time, which could have been put into action within just a few days. And perhaps 8/10 really was the biggest thing since 9/11. But then again, perhaps it wasn't. We don't know yet. And it's not too early to ask the questions on which final judgment must depend.
Well, then. Here is a checklist of some things we should shortly be hearing about. Bombs. Chemicals. Detonators. Labs. A testing ground. Airline tickets. Passports. Witnesses. Suspicious neighbors. Suspicious parents. Suspicious friends. Threats. Confessions. Let me spell this out: By definition, you cannot bomb an aircraft unless you have a bomb. In this case, we are told that there were no bombs; rather, the conspirators planned to bring on board the makings of a bomb: chemicals and a detonator. These would be mixed on board. ..........

one of THE worst jobs in the entire universe

can you imagine having to say this shite day after day with a straight face? say this shite like you actually believe it yourself? day - um

Tony Snow: No Civil War in Iraq -- and He Disputes 'NYT' Report on Bush's 'Frustration'

By E&P Staff Published: August 16, 2006 5:35 PM ET
NEW YORK Generals, pundits, and members of Congress may see shades of grey in the situation, but Tony Snow, the White House Press Secretary, has no such doubts. "There is not a civil war going on" in Iraq, he declared today in his daily meeting with reporters.As for the upsurge in brutal killings and bombings that left more than 3,400 civilians dead last month, Snow characterized this as "a number of sectarian violence operations going on." The New York Times reports Thursday that the number of roadside bombs planted in Iraq rose in July to the highest monthly total of the war.Snow also took issue with New York Times and Los Angeles Times stories today depicting President Bush as growing "frustrated" with lack of appreciation for U.S. efforts on the part of Iraqis.The transcript of the relevant exchange follows. For an uncut video of the press conference, click here............

Wednesday, August 16, 2006

as far as i'm concerned

THESE people are the REAL threats to the world. whether they be in suits and little black cocktail dresses or inked skinheads (i know many who are inked and shaven of skull who are NOT racist by the way. i'm using the term skinheads because it is descriptive ). these people scare me. the ones in the 'proper dress' that is. the ones who seem to fit into society. the ones whose beliefs remain hidden unless they are with like kind. the ones with hate behind their eyes. the ones who fear something they will never know.

A Split In the Racist Right

By Heidi Beirich and Mark Potok, Intelligence ReportPosted on August 16, 2006, Printed on August 16, 2006http://www.alternet.org/story/40343/
For a gathering of people devoted to denouncing the inferiority of blacks and sounding the alarm about civilization-threatening Muslims, the biannual conferences thrown by the New Century Foundation, publisher of the racist newsletter American Renaissance, are decidedly genteel affairs. Men dress in suits and ties, women in formal business attire, and there are no uniformed skinheads or Klansmen to be seen. Large plasma television screens, Starbucks coffee spreads and fancy linens adorn the hotel meeting hall. Epithets have no place here.
Or at least they didn't. At the latest edition of the conferences that began in 1994, held this February at the Hyatt Dulles hotel, a nasty spat broke out that upset the gathering's decorum -- and may even shape the future of the radical right.
It began when David Duke, the former Klan leader and author of Jewish Supremacism, strode to a microphone after French author Guillaume Faye wrapped up a talk vilifying Muslims entitled "The Threat to the West." Duke thanked Faye for remarks that "touched my genes." But then he went one further.
"There is a power in the world that dominates our media, influences our government and that has led to the internal destruction of our will and spirit," Duke said, according to an undisputed account in The Forward newspaper.
"Tell us, tell us," someone in the back yelled..............

i loved bruno kirby

damn, he was in a ton of movies. he always made me smile when i saw him or heard his voice. a wonderful character actor.

'City Slickers' Actor Bruno Kirby Dies


Associated Press Writer

LOS ANGELES — Bruno Kirby, a veteran character actor known for playing the best friend in two of Billy Crystal's biggest comedies "When Harry Met Sally" and "City Slickers," has died. He was 57.

Kirby died Monday in Los Angeles from complications related to leukemia, his wife Lynn Sellers said in a statement Tuesday. He had been recently diagnosed with the disease.

"We are incredibly grateful for the outpouring of support we have received from Bruno's fans and colleagues who have admired and respected his work over the past 30 years," his wife said. "Bruno's spirit will continue to live on not only in his rich body of film and television work but also through the lives of individuals he has touched throughout his life."

Born Bruno Giovanni Quidaciolu in 1949 in New York City, he was the son of actor Bruce Kirby. His early work included the 1971 film "Young Graduates," as well as appearances on the television show "Room 222" and the made-for-TV movie "The Summer Without Boys."

In 1974, he scored a role in "The Godfather: Part II," which won several Academy Awards, including best picture. In the film, Kirby played young "Pete Clemenza," following Richard S. Castellano's role in the first installment...........

bruno kirby

Tuesday, August 15, 2006

since i just had a bat in my house

i thought this story was rather appropriate.

Photo in the News: Baby Bats Babble Like Human Infants

August 14, 2006—Just like human children, bat pups may amuse themselves by saying the equivalent of "goo goo ga ga."
Young greater sac-winged bats, like the one pictured here, make long strings of adultlike noises, according to research by Mirjam Knörnschild and her colleagues at the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg in Germany.
The screeches, barks, and hisses have no social context, meaning the sounds are most likely babbling and not a form of communication, the scientists report in an upcoming issue of the journal Naturwissenschaften
(listen to a babbling baby bat). ...........

Photography courtesy Mirjam Knörnschild

bring them home, bring them home NOW

i am sure there are all sorts of horror stories like this one.

US sending 300 newly returned troops back to Iraq

By Will Dunham
WASHINGTON, Aug 14 (Reuters) - About 300 U.S. soldiers who just weeks ago returned home to Alaska after a year in Iraq are being ordered back to try to help bolster security in Baghdad, the U.S. Army said on Monday.
The soldiers are part of the 3,900-strong 172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team from Fort Wainwright in Alaska. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on July 27 ordered the unit to remain in Iraq for up to four months past its scheduled departure.
The order provoked anger and disappointment among some of the soldiers' families in Alaska. It also made clear that any significant reduction in the 135,000-strong U.S. force in Iraq was unlikely in the immediate future.
The brigade was so far along in the process of flowing out of Iraq after its yearlong tour that 380 soldiers had returned home to Alaska and 300 had arrived in Kuwait en route home, the Army said..........

Monday, August 14, 2006

update on the story below

(well the part that deals with me that is)

the person at work whom i had a discussion with last thursday, said HELLO to me this morning very loudly. i didn't answer him. i was still quite upset (and to tell you the truth a bit hurt). he came over to my desk and asked me what was up. i told him, i was very upset and it was hard for me to deal with some of the things he said to me. i said i wasn't so much upset about what he said about things in general, i was upset he didn't want to deal with me anymore because of MY beliefs (which i normally keep to myself at work. remember HE brought it up. although he did overhear me talking with someone else about my political beliefs). a few other things were said and then he apologized to me and i of course apologized to him (although i didn't do anything that i felt needed an apology. i just wanted to say it to clear the air). i then said i am going to consider the prior discussion forgotten (and i will). end of (this) story

free speech in america

it seems less and less likely (on thursday of last week something very disturbing happened to me at work. i went to ask someone a WORK RELATED question and he said to me (in a semi-kidding way), ‘i don’t think i want to talk to you anymore’. i asked him why and he said he had overheard me speaking with someone else about my choice for senator in the connecticut primary. he then started a rather political discussion (HE started it not me). it became quite clear to me he wasn’t kidding about not wanting to answer my WORK RELATED question. he was seriously angry with me i asked him if he thought the king and his court were doing a good job. i brought up many examples and he agreed, the king was doing a lousy job (how could he NOT agree. the king IS doing a lousy job). however, he was incensed i voted for ned lamont and not da liebs. i said i voted for ned first and foremost because i was against the war in iraq. i stated i was against BOTH sides in the israel lebannon war. i said innocents were being killed everywhere. he just couldn’t fathom what i was saying. it was making him mad. it was making him mad i didn’t want people to be killed. he thinks the king and his court are supporting the people of israel. little does he know the king and his court don’t give a flying yoo hoo about the people of israel. they believe in the rapture and when the rapture comes, the people of israel will be wiped out along with all of the OTHER non believers. if not that, the king and his court want the oil in the middle east. they don’t give two sh**s about ANY of the peoples in the middle east (why aren’t we doing something about the wars and atrocities in some of the african countries????????), they care about wealth and power (and the rapture). the person at work even went so far as to say he wished everyone in france would get wiped off of the face of the earth. why? why even say something like THAT?

i walked away because i had enough. i wanted to question him more about his world beliefs. did he feel like he felt ONLY because he was a jew? is that fair? aren’t there all sorts of OTHER considerations to take into account? i was afraid to ask. work wasn’t the proper forum for our discussion anyway. would i have asked him OUTSIDE of work? i don’t know and that is bothering me too.

we can’t have peace if our minds are closed to others. it has to start somewhere. it has to start with me AND YOU. it has to start now)
The land of the free - but free speech is a rare commodity

You can say what you like in the US, just as long as you don't ask awkward questions about America's role in the Middle East Henry Porter Sunday August 13, 2006 The Observer
It used to be said that academic rows were vicious because the stakes were so small. That's no longer true in America, where a battle is underway on campuses over what can be said about the Middle East and US foreign policy.
Douglas Giles is a recent casualty. He used to teach a class on world religions at Roosevelt University, Chicago, founded in memory of FDR and his liberal-inclined wife, Eleanor. Last year, Giles was ordered by his head of department, art historian Susan Weininger, not to allow students to ask questions about Palestine and Israel; in fact, nothing was to be mentioned in class, textbooks and examinations that could possibly open Judaism to criticism.
Students, being what they are, did not go along with the ban. A young woman, originally from Pakistan, asked a question about Palestinian rights. Someone complained and Professor Giles was promptly fired.
Leaving aside his boss's doubtful qualifications to set limits on a class of comparative religion - her speciality is early 20th-century Midwestern artists such as Tunis Ponsen (nor have I) - the point to grasp is that Professor Giles did not make inflammatory statements himself: he merely refused to limit debate among the young minds in front of him...........