home

Saturday College Football OpenThread

My picks: Notre Dame +4 Competitor: Michigan, Georgia -3½ Competitor: South Carolina, Oregon -23 Competitor: Virginia, Utah State -10 Competitor: Air Force, Oklahoma State -27 Competitor: Texas San Antonio, Michigan State -23 (5 units) Competitor: South Florida, Syracuse +16½ Competitor: Northwestern, Western Kentucky +13 Competitor: Tennessee, Cincinnati -8 (3 units) Competitor: Illinois. -- Late CG Specia -OVER 43 1/2 in MSU-USF gamer

Season Record: 10-12 ATS, -3 units.

You can listen to the Amato and Armando Show (sans Amato this week, my bad) today at noon EST on Netroots Radio. Lots of college football (and soccer, NFL) Here is the player:

Listen LIVE here:The Daily Kos Radio Player




Can't see the Flash player? Click here to download the stream directly.
Go Gators!

Open Thread.

< Friday Afternoon Open Thread | On Syria: A return to the UN and a proposed AUMF >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Here's to Yusmeiro Petit (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Dadler on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 09:15:12 AM EST
    The journeyman Giants pitcher came within one strike of a perfect game, before the D-Backs Eric Chavez broke it all up with a hit that SF right fielder Hunter Pence came within about six inches from catching on the fly. Oy, the guy will be thinking about that one for decades, until he is on his deathbed.

    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, Volume  120: Romance the old fashioned way, with ball busting. (link)

    Volume 119
    Volume 118

    Peace out, my TL peeps.

    I watch it over and over (none / 0) (#5)
    by CoralGables on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 10:02:24 AM EST
    and it just keeps hitting the ground

    In the immortal words of Maxwell Smart...

    Missed it by that much



    Parent

    you're cruel (none / 0) (#6)
    by Dadler on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 10:05:00 AM EST
    in a good way, of course.

    Parent
    It would be helpful for those of (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by oculus on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 11:15:56 AM EST
    us in remedial gambling to know what the line (is this the correct term?) is as to each of these bets.

    In remedial gamblers anonymous (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 03:27:06 PM EST
    If I put one toe in.  I feel it.

    Parent
    Stigliz recommendation of Yellen: (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by oculus on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 01:06:54 PM EST
    NYT

    Probably the kiss of death... (none / 0) (#21)
    by Anne on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 04:49:48 PM EST
    I think it's going to be Summers.

    Sigh.

    Parent

    Michigan beatsbNotre Dame @'Ann Arbor. (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 12:39:06 AM EST
    Next year's game is on my birthday in South Bend. Hope to be there to see the touchdown Jesus.  

    Secret NSA transcript; Warning: Over the top. (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 05:50:15 AM EST
    The NYTImes published today a Transcript of private meeting between Obama and Kerry.
    It was bugged by the NSA from a secret mic planted in a salad bowl at a private dinner party.

    O. John. I'm well into my second term and I haven't a war to call my own.
    K. But - you've dropped lots of bombs and drones. You've incinerated your share in Pakistan and Atghanistan.
    O. Yes, yes. But they don't give me any credit. They always say that I'm mopping up after W's wars - like I'm a fking janitor or something. I want one I can call my own.
    K. Well... you could have Iran...
    O. I dunno...
    K. How about North Korea. That could spark WW3 and you'd get a lot of credit...
    O. Yeah... but they got nukes... Not sure that many people would be left to credit me...
    K. I got it. How about Syria?
    O. Syria? Are you serious? (laughs) Where's that?
    K. In the mid-East someplace. I'll check...
    O. Would this be mine all mine?
    K. Sure would. We could call it Obamabomb - like Obamacare.
    O. D'ya think folks would go for it?
    K. Sure they would. We could ask Congress to push it through...
    O. It might be a tough sell...
    K. Doesn't matter. We can do it anyway. You know. Tough a la Bush. "National Security!!!" Works like a charm. I'll do a Powell and seal the deal. I've just had a face job and I'm ready for prime time.
    O. Gee John. That sounds great. My own war. My very own war. And then Hillary can mop up after me. (laughs).
    K. Hillary?  I want 2016 for myself. Quid pro quo.
    O. I see. Sounds good. I get my own ravished country and you get to mop up. It's a go.
    K. Great. I'll tell the boys.
    O. Hey... what's this piece o' chit in the salad? Holy Christ! Get this thing outa... (Communication broken)

    Finally (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by Edger on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 07:25:45 AM EST
    The evidence is clear and unequivocal and we have a unclassified summary of just who's bulshi++ing who.

    Go team.

    Reuters has a (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Nemi on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 08:14:53 AM EST
    pretty believable - as in I don't trust anyone or anything anymore - look at the 'evidence'/ 'supposed evidence'/ alleged evidence' ...

    Direct link between Assad and gas attack elusive for U.S.


    Parent

    And from LATimes (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by Nemi on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 08:30:48 AM EST
    Pentagon adjusts plans for more intense attacks on Syria

    To cite but a few snippets:

    Obama plans to blanket the nation's airwaves in coming days to make his case to a skeptical public. Aides say he will tape interviews Monday with the anchors of CBS, NBC and ABC, the three major broadcast networks, as well as with PBS, CNN and Fox News. He also will address the nation from the Oval Office on Tuesday, the night before the full Senate is expected to vote.

    [Dempsey] also noted reports that prisoners and other noncombatants had been moved to potential military targets where the U.S. might strike.

    ... but go read the whole thing.

    Isn't this when you should 'Be afraid, be very afraid' ? I know I am.

    Parent

    He needs a reason (none / 0) (#68)
    by Edger on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 09:12:48 AM EST
    he can use to justify his determination to attack that sounds plausible enough that people will buy the con. To him this is a "messaging" problem. "Truth" is irrelevant to him. Find the magic words, no matter if they're sheer unadulterated bullshi+, and people will fall all over themselves to flatly ignore everything else.

    Parent
    MOSCOW, September 8 (RIA Novosti) - (none / 0) (#70)
    by Edger on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 09:16:44 AM EST
    Russia's Emergency Situations Ministry has sent a plane to Syria for citizens willing to leave the war-torn country, a spokeswoman said Sunday.

    "An Il-76 plane took off for Latakia on Sunday morning. The plane will carry both Russians and citizens of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) from Syria," emergencies ministry spokeswoman Irina Rossius said.

    -- Russia Sends Plane to Evacuate Citizens from Syria

    Parent

    "The fact is that..." (none / 0) (#59)
    by Edger on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 07:45:44 AM EST
    "...were the White House telling the truth about the need for an attack on Syria, it would be a first in history. Every other case for war has always been dishonest."
    [...snip...]
    The idea that Syria used chemical weapons is more plausible than the idea that Iraq had vast stockpiles of chemical, biological, and (in some versions) nuclear weapons and was working with al Qaeda. But the evidence offered in the case of Syria is no stronger than that for Iraq. It's harder to disprove merely because there's nothing to it: no documentation, no sources, no science. Congress members who have seen the classified version say it's no better than the declassified. Experts within the government and reporters in Syria who have seen more than that say they don't believe the White House's claims. The assertions masquerading as a case come packaged in dishonest claims about how quickly Syria gave access to inspectors, and are written in a manner to suggest far greater knowledge and certainty than they actually assert on careful examination. The latest claims follow a series of failed claims over a period of months and stand to benefit a Syrian opposition that has been found repeatedly to be manufacturing false propaganda aimed at bringing the United States into the war. It seems, at this point, unlikely that the Assad government used chemical weapons two weeks ago, and already certain that even if it did, President Obama and Secretary Kerry don't know it -- they've only guessed it at best


    Parent
    BTD College Football Financial Update (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by CoralGables on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 08:48:27 AM EST
    In a 3 way train wreck, hopefully no one paid the slightest bit of attention to any college football predictions on this thread yesterday (or went against everything we predicted)

    Yesterday
    BTD 3-7... -10 units
    visteo 0-1... -10 units
    CG 0-1... -1 unit

    For the Season
    BTD 13-19... -13 units
    visteo 4-11... -17 units
    CG 2-2... even

    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, vol. 121 (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Dadler on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 09:23:47 AM EST
    We have the same favorite game today (none / 0) (#1)
    by CoralGables on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 08:24:48 AM EST
    but I'm hitting from a different angle

    Sparty vs South Florida Over 43½

    That's interesting (none / 0) (#2)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 08:30:28 AM EST
    You talked me onto it.

    I'm going to play that one too.

    Parent

    Since the final score was 21-6, ... (none / 0) (#55)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 03:19:22 AM EST
    ... how'd that work out for you guys?

    ;-D

    Parent

    Last week while playing at home (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by CoralGables on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 08:31:54 AM EST
    South Florida gives up 53 pts to lowly McNeese State. This week, Michigan State playing at home against that same weak sister South Florida team has the proverbial cupcake game where everyone should be able to cash as the Spartans make themselves look like the Oregon Ducks on offense.

    And that is how I get sucked into violating one of the great maxims of wagering on college football...
    Never ever bank on a Big 10 team to score points for you.

    Parent

    LOL! (none / 0) (#110)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 03:37:52 PM EST
    A few Big 10 teams are finally catching on, but you must be patient, because overcoming the nearly century-long philosophy of "3 yards and a cloud of dust" is going to take some time.

    When I was in high school, teams like McNeese State, Louisiana Tech and Southern Mississippi were mid-major regional powers whom the big boys of the SEC were loathe to schedule because of the real possibility that they could lose.

    Now, they're considered "cupcakes." (Sigh!)

    Parent

    Debra Milke to be retried (none / 0) (#4)
    by SuzieTampa on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 09:38:56 AM EST
    I bet Jeralyn will be interested that Debra Milke's conviction has been overturned. She has been on death row since 1990, convicted of hiring two men to murder her 4-year-old son for insurance money. A detective had testified that she confessed to him, but the confession wasn't taped and no one else heard it. Judges have thrown out four other "confessions" because the detective lied under oath.

    I need to get this in before the game starts... (none / 0) (#7)
    by Visteo1 on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 10:54:37 AM EST
    Cincinnati -8 (10 units) Competitor: Illinois.

    I see where rocker... (none / 0) (#9)
    by desertswine on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 12:04:34 PM EST
    Bon Jovi's son, Jesse Bongiovi, made the Notre Dame squad.  As a walk-on.

    (Sigh!) Old habits die hard. (none / 0) (#17)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 03:46:41 PM EST
    I glanced at the kid's name, and the first thing I saw was "Bong" ...

    Anyway, congratulations to Jessie. Making the football team as a walk-on is no small feat, regardless of school, never mind doing it at Notre Dame of all places. That's huge, and Dad and family should rightly be very proud of him.

    Parent

    Tennessee covered... and then some (none / 0) (#11)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 02:54:31 PM EST
    See ya in 2 weeks, BTD.

    It probably helped that ... (none / 0) (#29)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 06:24:52 PM EST
    ... the Western Kentucky offense turned the ball over five times in six plays during the first quarter, handing the Volunteers a 31-3 lead.

    Parent
    Maybe, just maybe, (none / 0) (#35)
    by NYShooter on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 09:25:21 PM EST
    the Tennessee defense had something to do with it.

    I dunno, just a guess........ :)

    Parent

    You can se the replay on ESPN. (none / 0) (#37)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 10:41:13 PM EST
    I watched that first quarter, and quite honestly, I'd chalk it up to bad playmaking by the Hilltoppers, i.e., questionable throws and careless ballhandling -- but to their credit, the Vols defense was right there to capitalize on it each time.

    We'll see how Tennessee copes on the road next week in Eugene against No. 2 Oregon.

    Parent

    Hey, I'm a transplanted (none / 0) (#119)
    by NYShooter on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 10:32:49 PM EST
    New Yorker plopped down here as a "Volunteer" (more like a hostage, really,)
    and, with the Titans as my Pro team, cheering the college team is about all I
    get.
    But, give the Titans credit (after one game) they did beat the Steelers the
    other day.
    Back to the Vols, I've been doing some reading up on their history, and, I
    gotta say....extremely impressive! They've won something like 15/16 SEC
    championships, and have one of the top, all time won/loss records for all NCAA teams.
    But, each year we start anew, so, see ya in Oregon!  And, being a Syracuse grad, I just luv those orange jerseys.

    Parent
    Shooter, I believe you (none / 0) (#121)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Sep 12, 2013 at 10:14:33 PM EST
    have started singing an old southern hymn that goes...

    "I've seen the light! I've seen the light! Praise the lord I've seen the light!"

    Parent

    Oregon leads Virginia 21-0, and it is still (none / 0) (#12)
    by caseyOR on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 03:13:15 PM EST
    the first quarter. Of course, it is just the first quarter, so anything can happen. The Ducks look pretty good so far, though.

    And I like the Ducks' style. On their first TD they also went for, and got, the 2 point conversion.

    Here's hoping they don't get cocky and blow this thing.

    Still, GO, DUCKS!!!

    When teams do blow 21-point leads, ... (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 03:35:43 PM EST
    ... it's more often than not because the big lead came early in the game, and the team that was ahead started playing not to lose, rather than sticking to the game plan and playing to win.

    But Oregon's not the type of team that takes its foot off the accelerator and switches to cruise control. Unless the Ducks inexplicably start turning the ball over like Florida did earlier today, I think this game's over by halftime.

    Parent

    Halftime: Oregon 28, Virginia 10. (none / 0) (#19)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 04:14:09 PM EST
    The Cavaliers hung tough in the 2nd. They're still in a deep hole, just not as deep as it could've been.

    Parent
    Ducks 45, Cavs 10 at the end of the third (none / 0) (#23)
    by caseyOR on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 05:05:20 PM EST
    quarter.

    Looking good for BTD's bottom line.

    Parent

    Ducks win 59-10. (none / 0) (#25)
    by caseyOR on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 05:51:48 PM EST
    The second string went in for the 4th quarter, and they scored, too.

    I liked seeing Thomas Tyner in for the Ducks. He's a freshman who was an amazing player at a Portland metro high school. He had some good runs today.

    GO, DUCKS!

    Parent

    So I was off a quarter. (none / 0) (#30)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 06:27:41 PM EST
    Still a very solid win for the Ducks on the road.

    Parent
    Oregon doesn't get cocky (none / 0) (#18)
    by CoralGables on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 04:00:32 PM EST
    Only South Carolina gets cocky.

    Parent
    FINAL: Miami (Fla.) 21, Florida 16. (none / 0) (#13)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 03:26:37 PM EST
    One of the few times you'll ever see me pulling for Florida is when the Gators are playing the Miami Hurricanes. And I had them taking this one rather handily today.

    But while there are obviously the occasional exceptions, the general rule is that you can't turn the ball over five times and expect a positive outcome -- especially when three of them are inside your opponent's 20-yard line.

    Self-destruction is always the most painful of defeats. Ouch.

    Go 'Canes!! (none / 0) (#118)
    by indy in sc on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 12:48:55 PM EST
    I'm so happy my 'Canes beat those Gators (sorry BTD).  I'm still celebrating.  I too didn't think it would happen (and I'm forgiving you for pulling for the Gators against the Canes) :).

    The Gators were definitely in a giving mood!  I'm glad they were!!

    Parent

    Did not understand your U-T vs. W.K, prediction (none / 0) (#15)
    by the capstan on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 03:33:18 PM EST
    My Vols (I have almost forgiven them for dumping Majors) won by 32 points.

    Tokyo chosen as site of 2020 Olympics. (none / 0) (#20)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 04:23:43 PM EST
    In selecting the Japanese capital, the IOC dismissed concerns over possible contamination from the crippled Fukushima nuclear reactor up north and passed over Istanbul on the final ballot, after eliminating Madrid from contention earlier. Tokyo previously hosted the 1964 Summer Games.

    Once again the IOC makes a bad (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by caseyOR on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 05:10:07 PM EST
    decision. Fukushima is like a sieve. And Japan is lying through its teeth about the danger that poses.

    So, what happens if the truth about the extent of the radioactive leaking comes out before 2020? Is there any precedent for a late change of locations? Or does the IOC simply encourage athletes to hold their breath during competition?

    Parent

    Denver, which was selected in 1970 ... (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 05:53:18 PM EST
    ... to host the 1976 Winter Olympics, decided to decline the role in 1972, following Colorado voters' decisive rejection of a bond measure to finance the construction of the infrastructure.

    The Games were then awarded to Whistler, B.C., which also pulled out the following year after a change of government led to a similar rejection of public financing for the Games' infrastructure.

    This compelled the IOC at a late hour to turn to Innsbruck, Austria, which had previously hosted the Winter Games in 1964, and still had the infrastructure in place to repeat the role.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Thanks. n/t (none / 0) (#27)
    by caseyOR on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 06:00:43 PM EST
    Should we similarly reject ... (none / 0) (#28)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 06:17:27 PM EST
    ... Portland, OR or Seattle as potential sites for future sporting events, conventions, etc., due to their proximity to the aging and leaking nuclear waste dump facilities at Hanford, WA?

    Fukushima is 150 miles north of Tokyo by air, which is relatively the same distance between Portland or Seattle and Richland, WA. And frankly, the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission has also been BSing the public for years about the very real threat posed to the region by Hanford. So, what's the difference? Hanford just hasn't failed completely -- yet.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Maybe we should. DOE's lies about (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by caseyOR on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 06:33:08 PM EST
    the dangers to the groundwater and the Columbia River basin from Hanford leaks are legion. It makes me very nervous. As a result of Hanford I have stopped eating my beloved salmon, the only Columbia River seafood I ate. And I have stopped playing in the Columbia River.

    I am not going to defend the DOE's actions and inactions on Hanford, nor am I going to minimize the danger. Your comment seems to suggest, in a rather combative tone, that I don't consider that to be a danger. And you would be wrong about that.

    Perhaps there isn't any place left on earth that is both developed enough to be able to support the infrastructure needed for the Olympics and free of dangerous contaminants. If so, then I think the IOC should err on the side of caution and not choose the obviously more dangerous places. Japan, IMO, is an obviously more dangerous place because of Fukushima.

    Parent

    Given that you never mentioned Hanford ... (none / 0) (#38)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 11:11:36 PM EST
    ... in your original comment, it's sort of a stretch for you to suggest that I implied that you don't take the problems at Hanford seriously.

    I was just trying to elicit from you some clarification, i.e., whether you might have a double standard. Quite obviously, you don't.

    That said, had the Games been awarded to the city of Sendai, I think you'd have a point. But given the prevailing easterly direction of both the jetstream and the north Pacific currents, the danger posed by radioactive fallout from the crippled Fukushima Daichi Power Station -- and in particular, the radioactive ocean plumes -- should probably be of far greater immediate concern to those of us who live in the Pacific Northwest and Hawaii, than to those presently residing in Tokyo, because it's actually moving away from the Japanese home islands and toward us.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Donald, please reread my comment. I (none / 0) (#42)
    by caseyOR on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 11:35:03 PM EST
    made no reference to Hanford in my original comment, only in my response to your comment.

    Parent
    But isn't that what I said? (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 11:56:08 PM EST
    I apologize if I wasn't as clear as I should've been.

    Parent
    Sorry, clearly I am the one with the (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by caseyOR on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 12:12:16 AM EST
    reading problem.

    Parent
    Hitler's bodyguard... (none / 0) (#22)
    by desertswine on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 04:52:34 PM EST
    96yr old Rochus Misch, Has died.. "He was a wonderful boss."
    I guess he didn't do such a good job.

    Sometimes you see a new artist's act... (none / 0) (#32)
    by Dadler on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 06:35:25 PM EST
    ...and it's like being blown away by a hurricane named after a fruit you've never heard of. Such was the case late last night as I took in The Late Show with David Letterman.

    A buzzcut British talent of exquisite loveliness named Laura Mvula sang a song called "Green Garden," and it was, in a word, heavenly. You must check it out. Life is too short.
    (link)


    She is like... (none / 0) (#33)
    by Dadler on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 06:37:30 PM EST
    ...the sweeter living ghost of Nina Simone, if that makes sense. I'm an idiot, so maybe it doesn't.

    Parent
    Armando, what about Nuremberg? (none / 0) (#34)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 07:36:23 PM EST
    Since your international law diary is a bit dated, I wanted to raise the point about the Nuremberg Principles providing the basis for enforcing international norms that are not part of any treaty.

    Crimes Against Humanity and Waging An Aggressive War were wholly new and were not based on any treaty.  The intellectual driving force behind the Nuremberg Trial is that there are certain humanitarian norms that form part of International Law that are not part of any treaty that may be enforced retro-actively.  An International Common Law, if you will.

    I have read Jack Balkin's article.  He does not mention Nuremberg.  That is a glaring omission in my opinion.  Nuremberg represented an ad hoc, after-the-fact remedy--because there were no treaties or conventions or statues that addressed some of the more horrific things the Nazis did.  The Allies prosecuted the Nazis in part for gassing their own people.  Here, we are talking about something very similar by Assad.

    Justice Jackson took a leave of absence from the Supreme Court to head up the Nuremberg Prosecution.  Actually, my favorite Justice, having authored--in 1943--the Barnette pledge of allegiance case.

    The view you espouse just looks at the statutes, and not the "common law" of Nuremberg.  It is a mechanistic approach that ignores the history of how some of our most important legal standards have been created on a case-by-case basis. The tort standards for negligence were not created by statute but in large measure by your fellow New Yorker Cardozo.

    The best argument you may have against this is that that the UN Charter supercedes Nuremberg.  But the League of Nations provisions existed too when Hitler was gassing his own people.  I would assert Nuremberg as a common law exception to the provisions Prof. Balkin is citing.

    A good discussion (5.00 / 2) (#36)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 10:23:45 PM EST
    at Big Orange developed discussions about Samantha Powers's Right to Protect Doctrine, and Customary International Law, and "instant" Customary International Law, and Chapter 51 of the UN Charter providing for collective regional self defense.  The Israelis would back us if no one else will....regional self defense would work for them

    There is a lot more the story than the UN Security Council--especially when it is paralyzed by Russia which is backing Syria.

    Parent

    I agree that there is more to the (none / 0) (#41)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 11:31:42 PM EST
    Story than the UN Security Council, but I am not convinced that the existing plan is worth executing.

    Parent
    Neither am I. (none / 0) (#45)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 11:51:19 PM EST
    I believe something should be done, just not necessarily this particular proposal as presently outlined.

    Parent
    Classical Athens (none / 0) (#48)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 12:05:22 AM EST
    elected their generals by popular vote.  One can go too far in putting up strategy to a vote.

    Parent
    Article 51 of the UN Charter (none / 0) (#39)
    by MKS on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 11:26:07 PM EST
    provides in part as follows:

    Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.

    So, if the U.S. if attempting self defense of Israel or Jordan from Assad, then the Security Council ahead of time is not needed.  The Security Council after the fact would not act, as the U.S. has veto rights.

    And here is Article 52(1):

    1.Nothing in the present Charter precludes the existence of regional arrangements or agencies for dealing with such matters relating to the maintenance of international peace and security as are appropriate for regional action provided that such arrangements or agencies and their activities are consistent with the Purposes and Principles of the United Nations.

    The U.S. has a regional arrangement with Israel and Jordan and Saudi Arabia.  This not confined to self defense but includes "maintenance" of international security.

    If Israel just issues a simple press release in support of the strike, it would satisfy Article 52.

    Parent

    This is absolutely (5.00 / 3) (#93)
    by bmaz on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 11:12:39 AM EST
    ridiculously strung out disingenuous argument. Has Syria attacked Israel or Jordan? Of course not, and they have not attacked anyone else yet. This is warmongering at its finest.

    Parent
    Uh, it is not disengenuous (none / 0) (#99)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 11:45:21 AM EST
    I was not asserting that they had to have been attacked.....

    Why not just discuss the merits...

    Good grief.....what a task this is to get a real discussion...

    Parent

    Baloney (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by bmaz on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 12:32:10 PM EST
    It is remarkable how often you say something and then claim that wasn't what you said. Well, it IS what you argued:

    So, if the U.S. if attempting self defense of Israel or Jordan from Assad, then the Security Council ahead of time is not needed.

    And, yes, that is false argument.

    Parent

    Self defense is authorized under Article 51 (none / 0) (#104)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 12:34:22 PM EST
    But that is a different argument.

    Where did I say that?

    Parent

    Okay that was the discussion of (none / 0) (#106)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 12:40:39 PM EST
    Article 51 a few comments ago.

    My most recent focus has been on Article 52.

    And I would assert an inherent authority under the Nuremberg Principles.

    Parent

    I still want to know (none / 0) (#108)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 12:50:31 PM EST
    how my analysis--that I wrote yesterday--on self defense under Article 51 is wrong.....

    Parent
    Hezbollah attacks Israel with rockets (none / 0) (#101)
    by Politalkix on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 12:02:34 PM EST
    and they are fighting Syria and Iran's wars in the middle east. A large part of Hezbollah leadership lives in Syria.

    Parent
    It seems to me that you've (4.25 / 4) (#69)
    by Anne on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 09:16:31 AM EST
    had an erection over launching an attack on Syria for way more than 4 hours; I think it may be time to call your doctor.

    Seriously, if you haven't already, you should take advantage of the excellent posts at Lawfare, which can be found here.

    But here's the real problem/issue, and it was expressed quite well by Alan Grayson in an op ed in the NYT:

    THE documentary record regarding an attack on Syria consists of just two papers: a four-page unclassified summary and a 12-page classified summary. The first enumerates only the evidence in favor of an attack. I'm not allowed to tell you what's in the classified summary, but you can draw your own conclusion.

    On Thursday I asked the House Intelligence Committee staff whether there was any other documentation available, classified or unclassified. Their answer was "no."

    The Syria chemical weapons summaries are based on several hundred underlying elements of intelligence information. The unclassified summary cites intercepted telephone calls, "social media" postings and the like, but not one of these is actually quoted or attached -- not even clips from YouTube. (As to whether the classified summary is the same, I couldn't possibly comment, but again, draw your own conclusion.)

    Over the last week the administration has run a full-court press on Capitol Hill, lobbying members from both parties in both houses to vote in support of its plan to attack Syria. And yet we members are supposed to accept, without question, that the proponents of a strike on Syria have accurately depicted the underlying evidence, even though the proponents refuse to show any of it to us or to the American public.

    [snip]

     But by refusing to disclose the underlying data even to members of Congress, the administration is making it impossible for anyone to judge, independently, whether that statement is correct. Perhaps the edict of an earlier administration applies: "Trust, but verify."

    [snip]

    My position is simple: if the administration wants me to vote for war, on this occasion or on any other, then I need to know all the facts. And I'm not the only one who feels that way.

    I'm not an expert on international law, treaties, conventions, etc., and neither are you.  I don't have the background or education or experience to cherry-pick language from any of these documents to prove we have the right to attack, and neither do you.

    But whether we do or we don't have the right to do it, shouldn't we be sure that attacking is the right thing to do in the first place?  I listen to John Kerry, and I'm getting that sick feeling in the pit of my stomach that we're being bamboozled again - and can there be any good reason why members of Congress are not being afforded all of the information they need to make such a serious decision?

    I'm not saying that it's okay for people to be killed with chemical weapons - but I don't much like that they're being killed with conventional ones, either - and there's been no alarm, no argument, no full-court press to punish Syria for the 100K+ deaths that have occurred in the civil war.

    Syria is not an island, sitting alone where an attack doesn't affect any other country, or the dynamic between and among allies and enemies - so if we're going to start raining down missiles that will, inevitably, kill and injure more people and destroy more infrastructure, I think it's imperative - as a world leader - to make sure we're doing the right thing for the right reasons.

    And world leader or not, this administration has a responsibility to its own people, and needs to be accountable to them, and feeding them propaganda to get the green light to act isn't how I would define "accountable."

    It shouldn't be too much to ask, and yet - members of Congress are literally begging for information that is being refused to them.

    That cannot stand.

    Parent

    Anne, (3.25 / 4) (#81)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 10:48:16 AM EST
    Get lost your with respect to your talk of an erection.  That is the nice version.  Think of the more gritty version.  Like placing something where there is no sunlight.

     What an absolutely childish response.....Should I insult you with a comment about your gen*talia?  Would a comment about female gen*tlia by me be just brushed aside as funny?  Do you know what ad homimen is? Ha, ha.

    If you do not want to respond to the merits of my argument about the UN Charter or Nuremberg, then don't.  What is this new standard of expertise?  Is Armando an expert in International Law?  Did you upbrade him for posting on the subject?

    And just what are you going to do if and when the UN tests come back with what is already verified--the use of chemical weapons. We have truthers and birthers and climate change deniers all wanting more evidence?  

    The cite you cite to has more nuance than you let on.

    Parent

    I got tired ot your relentless (1.00 / 0) (#113)
    by Anne on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 05:39:41 PM EST
    foraging for support for an attack from as many treaties and conventions and charters as you can find.

    There isn't a person here who doesn't agree that the use of chemical weapons is bad, but that isn't and can't be the only metric by which we measure whether we will or won't launch missiles.  While you've been busy scouting out legal justifications, the mission itself is expanding.  And the administration seems to be less and less forthcoming with the intelligence that supports their position.

    I didn't intend to be rude, just to maybe bring to your attention that you seem a little breathless to launch what will be regarded as an act of war.

    So far, all I've seen you do is whine about why no one is greeting your comments with applause - and you've been troll rating comments like there was going to be a prize at the end.  Note, if you can, that as routinely as you are awarding 1's, I have not returned the favor, because while I don't agree with you, your comments don't sink to the level of trollishness.

    If you keep it up, though, I may have to revise my position.

    Parent

    Is that an apology? (1.00 / 3) (#115)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 05:54:10 PM EST
    Good grief.....

    Try again.

    Parent

    Edger, care to discuss openly? (none / 0) (#82)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:49 AM EST
    Unreal.  I can actually have a civil discussion about this at Big Orange, but not here, even though Big Orange opposes the strikes.

    Parent
    You could if you tried (1.00 / 0) (#83)
    by Edger on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 10:54:02 AM EST
    Unfortunately it's apparent you're incapable of it.

    Parent
    Again, (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 10:56:01 AM EST
    Edger, why not try discussing the merits of this?

    I had a very good discussion with international lawyers over at Big Orange without this childish name calling.

    Care to address the merits?  

    Parent

    No (none / 0) (#85)
    by Edger on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 10:58:37 AM EST
    Not with you. Waste of time.

    Parent
    Then why comment at all? (3.00 / 2) (#89)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 11:03:58 AM EST
    Just to insult?

    No one here wants to discuss the merits of Charter 52?  Okay just phone in the insults...  Pretty sad, actually.

    I went an entire diary disagreeing with people at Big Orange without any of this vitriol.

    I am able to discuss this issue without rationally.  Of course if you have nothing to offer.  

    Parent

    Is that the extent of your (1.00 / 1) (#91)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 11:09:18 AM EST
    ability to comment--a mute button push for a "1" rating?  Wow, you are really good at that.

    Parent
    "without rancor and rationally" (none / 0) (#95)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 11:13:59 AM EST
    Forgot to add the "rancor and" portion of the sentence.

    Parent
    On second thought, (1.00 / 1) (#96)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 11:20:28 AM EST
    maybe I should be flattered you though of me in that way.

    I never really considered anyone's anatomy when I posted my comments about Article 52 and Nuremberg.

    Parent

    lol! Fortunately I wasn't drinking my coffee (none / 0) (#80)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 10:36:29 AM EST
    when I ran across the leading edge of your comment.


    Parent
    Do you want to discuss the merits? (1.00 / 2) (#86)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 10:59:46 AM EST
    Or are we just about junior high school taunts?

    Parent
    It was funny. (none / 0) (#90)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 11:05:36 AM EST
    If you say something funny I'll rate you a five too.

    Parent
    Do you really think (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 11:12:21 AM EST
    I could insult a female commentator about their anatomy and get away with it?  Be applauded for it?

    No matter. No one here wants to discuss the merits....

    I did like the conversation I had at Big Orange as it further informed my opinion.  If I am so wrong about Nuremberg and Article 52, tell me how.  I will listen.

    Parent

    It was a metaphor, MKS, (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 11:22:45 AM EST
    for your relentless O'Advocacy.

    BTW, your foray into International Internet Law was interesting.

    What makes it interesting is that your attempts at International Internet Law will probably be just as valid as the grabbag of legalisms which are finally chosen by the Dronemaster in Chief.

    Parent

    International Intenet Law? (1.00 / 1) (#100)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 11:48:25 AM EST
    You have really got me on that one.

    I am not sure if that is some type of slam, or just a typo?

    If you guys would just place your cards face up, this would be a lot easier.

    Parent

    Interesting that even at the time (none / 0) (#120)
    by jondee on Tue Sep 10, 2013 at 09:52:43 AM EST
    of Nuremberg amoral profiteers could dodge any accountability by being part of a large corporation and basically hiding behind the "just following orders" (of the market) defense in a way that the Goerings of the world couldn't..

    Witness all the German companies that exploited concentration camp slave labor..

    Nuremberg sometimes looks like a high profile example of the old "law like a spider web.."

    Parent

    The President is to sell us Syria (none / 0) (#40)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 11:29:23 PM EST
    On Tuesday.  Congress shown gruesome videos from the chemical attack, I guess we can all go see them too if we want.  They put them on youtube.  In previous reports though I was told I could not see photos and videos because they were too horrific, now that the nation is stalling a war we can all see them.  

    Well, maybe we should see them. (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 11:48:15 PM EST
    Perhaps then, the magnitude of the atrocity committed in Ghouta wouldn't remain such an abstract concept with so many of us.

    Parent
    I was a little peeved that I was told (none / 0) (#50)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 12:12:18 AM EST
    I must be protected initially.  I can understand the concern of young children seeing something like that and reserving it for late night news, but initially nobody wanted to be responsible for showing it to the adult world.

    I agree though that perhaps adults should view such things in order to understand why we do all we can to ban.

    Parent

    Alan Grayson's opinion (5.00 / 4) (#52)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 12:48:21 AM EST
    piece on the restrictions a member of Congress faces re information re Syria:  NYT

    Parent
    Stunning (none / 0) (#63)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 08:32:48 AM EST
    Will there be an answer to this writing? If they don't address him, and we go to war, this will never go away. Sometimes I feel like Grayson is a little over the top, but he sounds solemn, grounded and factual about this.  And if Congress can't know certain facts before the President and his national security advisors take us to war, nothing is functional and is doomed to never be again.

    Parent
    Especially when President Transparency... (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by Dadler on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 09:01:51 AM EST
    ...is behind it. He morphs into the charlatan so easily, it seems, disturbingly. That he was elected as an African-American was a great first in this nation, but its proven a very empty first. Dubya did his damndest to dig this nation's grave with his mental midgetry, but Obama is proving just as "adept" as a slightly larger intellectual dwarf.

    Parent
    And of course.... (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by Dadler on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 09:06:42 AM EST
    ....there's also this angle, even more depressing and disgusting to ponder:

    Making The World Safe for Banksters: Syria in the Crosshairs (link)

    Parent

    I would like to think (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by CoralGables on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 09:04:51 AM EST
    that when Congress returns from vacation they have access to more. At the same time, according to Grayson,
    gaining access to just the classified summary involves a series of unreasonably high hurdles

    In Grayson's own words, those high hurdles consist of going down four floors. He doesn't specify whether the "high hurdle" is an elevator ride. That is a good example of why you are correct and Grayson oftentimes comes off as over the top.

    Parent

    So, the part that followed the (1.00 / 0) (#71)
    by Anne on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 09:23:34 AM EST
    four-floor descent escaped you?

    Per the instructions of the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, note-taking is not allowed.

    Once we leave, we are not permitted to discuss the classified summary with the public, the media, our constituents or even other members. Nor are we allowed to do anything to verify the validity of the information that has been provided.

    They don't let you take the 4-floor trip unless you agree to the terms of access.

    But I'm pretty sure you already knew that, and just saw an opportunity to take a gratuitous shot at Grayson.  That's a little disappointing, but maybe you're still feeling kinda pumped up from your season-to-date football-picking record...

    Parent

    You obviously didn't read what he said (5.00 / 0) (#73)
    by CoralGables on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 09:29:51 AM EST
    He said getting the summary was a high hurdle. It's actually a non-hurdle. Not discussing classified info or not taking notes is not a hurdle.

    Parent
    lol; no 'hurdles found. Move along. (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 11:13:23 AM EST
    Once we leave, we are not permitted to discuss the classified summary with the public, the media, our constituents or even other members. Nor are we allowed to do anything to verify the validity of the information that has been provided.

    No notes, no discussion, no verification or even means of verification, which would of course require notes and discussion.

    Nope, no hurdles at all.

    Parent

    Uh, no - what he said was: (1.00 / 0) (#75)
    by Anne on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 09:37:51 AM EST
    In fact, even gaining access to just the classified summary involves a series of unreasonably high hurdles.

    I can't speak for you, but when I read "series," I know there's more than one thing to follow, and this seems to be further supported by the use of "hurdles," which, where I come from, is a plural meant to describe more than one.

    Which Grayson then went on to specifically list.

    So, please don't insult my intelligence or question whether I have read something before you make sure you understood what was said in the first place; clearly, you did not in this instance.

    Parent

    I didn't insult your intelligence (5.00 / 0) (#76)
    by CoralGables on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 09:41:05 AM EST
    Grayson insulted your intelligence.

    Parent
    I don't think he did at all (none / 0) (#77)
    by Dadler on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 10:03:40 AM EST
    And I've never been a huge Grayson fan. IMO, it strains sanity to simply take at face value what this government is saying about wanting to use military force. Again. The military and intelligence leadership have shown themselves to be almost wildly incompetent. Anti-imaginative institutions are always like that. They lack entirely the most important thing freedom should engender.

    And in this case, the boy who cried wolf doesn't get any more chances in my book. And that is what is so heinous to me about these folks lying us into mass murder so often. It destroys the genuine ability to save people or help people who might otherwise have been, because corruption has rightfully caused the public to lose all trust in those institutions.

    Plus, the only people who will get a guaranteed benefit from whatever military action is taken, as usual, are munitions manufacturers.


    Parent

    I find it disturbing that (none / 0) (#105)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 12:39:10 PM EST
    They are not allowed to talk to their colleagues about what is being presented to them.

    It reminds me of frying eggs making sure they don't touch each other.

    Discussion allows people to process information.  I usually enjoy Talkleft because of the discussion.  I can have my knee jerk reactions and depending on how emotional that is, discussion usually brings on rational thought, and fleshing out the whole situation more fully.

    It's creepy exposing a bunch of people to most likely hair raising photos and facts, and then herding them out into the light of day a bunch of mute orphans.  Course if I wanted a go to war vote that's how I would handle those I must get the approval from.

    Parent

    I do think though (none / 0) (#74)
    by CoralGables on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 09:37:14 AM EST
    that John McCain far supercedes Grayson for silly statement of the day.

    He implies that going to war with Syria is an impeachable offense if you do it when congress says no because a strong president should go to war with Syria without asking Congress.

    His logic escapes me.

    Parent

    Hasn't his state reverted to having to (none / 0) (#107)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 12:41:49 PM EST
    Wear a sidearm to be able to drink at the bar? :)

    Parent
    Dennis Kucinich now has a list of sorts (none / 0) (#79)
    by EL seattle on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 10:33:21 AM EST
    ...in a piece at HuffPo (of all places). It's a sort of follow-up to something he did back before the start of the Iraq war. He says it's a "call for independent thinking and congressional oversight, which rises above partisan considerations."

    Kucinich lists 10 administration claims, and he brings up questions about each one. Here's an example:

    - - -

    Claim #6: The administration claims poison gas was released in a rocket attack

    Who was tracking the rocket and the artillery attack which preceded the poison gas release?

    Did these events occur simultaneously or consecutively?

    Could these events, the rocket launches and the release of poison gas, have been conflated?

    Based upon the evidence, is it possible that a rocket attack by the Syrian government was aimed at rebels stationed among civilians and a chemical weapons attack was launched by rebels against the civilian population an hour and a half later?

    Is it possible that chemical weapons were released by the rebels -- unintentionally?

    Explain the 90-minute time interval between the rocket launch and chemical weapon attacks.

    Has forensic evidence been gathered at the scene of the attack which would confirm the use of rockets to deliver the gas?

    If there was a rocket launch would you supply evidence of wounds from the rockets impact and explosion?

    What is the source of the government's analysis?

    If the rockets were being tracked via "geospatial intelligence," what were the geospatial coordinates of the launching sites and termination locations?

    Further reading: FAIR.org report- - -

    The LINK is here for the entire piece. Maybe all of these questions are wrong, or maybe they've all been carefully addressed (with restrictions) in closed door meetings. But from what Grayson is saying I'd sorta doubt that.


    Parent

    Final: BYU 40, Texas 21. (none / 0) (#43)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 07, 2013 at 11:44:37 PM EST
    The No. 16 Longhorns apparently earned their present Top 25 ranking through name recognition alone, because the Cougars opened up a real can of whoopa$$ on them tonight, with 679 yards in total offense -- 550 of them coming on the ground.

    All in all, it was a nightmarish night for Longhorn Nation, highlighted by a thoroughly wretched performance by a porous Texas defense. The BYU offense blew through them so fast, I'd be surprised if the Horns didn't catch cold in the draft. The game was not nearly as close as the final score.

    Aloha.

    Could not watch the game (none / 0) (#47)
    by MKS on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 12:03:38 AM EST
    The weather delay wore me out and I gave up.....

    Parent
    Interesting bit of trivia: (none / 0) (#53)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 02:52:27 AM EST
    The last time Texas played BYU in Provo was exactly 25 years ago tonight. The Longhorns fared no better back then than they did this evening and got crushed by the Cougars, 47-6.

    Suffice to say that LaVell Edwards Stadium is a very tough place to play for visiting teams.

    Parent

    And you missed a spectacular performance ... (none / 0) (#56)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 03:29:18 AM EST
    ... by BYU QB Tayson Hill, who ran roughshod over Texas for 259 yards and three TDs.

    Parent
    Final: Washington State 10, USC 7. (none / 0) (#54)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 03:12:00 AM EST
    Washington State kicker Andrew Furney booted a 41-yard field goal with 3:03 to play, and free safety Damante Horton then grabbed his second interception of the game to seal the Cougars' win, which marked their first victory at the L.A. Coliseum in 13 years.

    Trojan fans roundly booed USC head coach Lane Kiffin and his soon-to-be-unranked team as they exited the Coliseum after the final gun, having lost their first home opener since 1997.

    How Syria amassed chemical weapons (none / 0) (#78)
    by Politalkix on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 10:31:20 AM EST
    And the rebels have chemicals too (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Dadler on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 10:59:58 AM EST
    In a battle of scumbags, all bets are off.

    We have no idea what we are doing.

    If you think we do, I can only say I completely and utterly and vehemently disagree.

    Parent

    And the real innocents (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by Dadler on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 11:01:35 AM EST
    We couldn't give a sh*t about. Superpowers care about power, not the little people who get eviscerated. If they pretend to, it's all for show, we both know that. We live in the worst of the worst so far about what Eisenhower warned us about several decades ago. But if there's one thing the powers that be in this country don't do, it's listen or learn.

    Parent
    The rebels have chemical weapons? (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 03:43:55 PM EST
    Says who -- Vladimir Putin and the Russian oligarchy, who are trying to prop up a client state?

    Parent
    Freedom Fighters? (none / 0) (#114)
    by squeaky on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 05:42:26 PM EST
    Yes, rebels, aka freedom fighters fighting commies client states never do bad things.

    sweet in a way..

    Parent

    The "Rebels" have... (none / 0) (#117)
    by bmaz on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 09:25:26 PM EST
    ...supporters deep within many, if not all, parts of the Syrian government and military. If you think their inside folks are not capable of such a misdirection play, you are nuts. That may or may not be the case, but to dismiss the possibility is silly.

    Parent
    Best random quote I've seen in (none / 0) (#98)
    by Edger on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 11:25:33 AM EST
    maybe forever?

    On Facebook today...

    If it took watching this bumbling, forked tonged, double dealing, excuse for a leader. Finally to unite the American people against the industrial war machine. I guess now I can say. Good job Mr. President!


    Last night (none / 0) (#102)
    by Nemi on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 12:25:33 PM EST
    was not only the Last Night of the Proms but also the first 'Last Night' with a female conductor.

    And the conductor Marin Alsop did good. Really good. She also made a good speech, among other things expressing her gratitude for being chosen as the first female conductor for this occasion, but adding that she couldn't believe we had reached 2013 for this to happen. Which caused more than one 'stiff upper lip' in the audience. And not the by now more regular(!) filler or botox kind, more like the "we are not amused" kind, lol.

    As one of the commenters at the linked article puts it:

    " she rose to the occasion politically" did she?
    No, she used a musical event to push her identity politics.
    Musically, she is only as good as the musicians under her baton.

    Sigh!

    The Proms (none / 0) (#109)
    by christinep on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 01:00:09 PM EST
    My husband has been a fan of The Proms for some time; we listened last night, here in Denver, and--in addition to the rousing reality of the last night--we had looked forward to hearing our former Colorado Symphony conductor, Marin Alsop.  You are right, she was quite good ... 'always has been a bit ahead of the crowd.

    Ms. Alsop is an accessible, outspoken maestro.  And, yea, she is "political."  We just happen to like her politics, for the most part.  We were fortunate a number of years ago (@1998) to be at a Denver house gathering for then First Lady Hillary Clinton where Alsop was standing with the rest of us very openly talking about her progressive support at the time. (Recall that the timeframe was particularly trying for H. Clinton.)  Marin Alsop really appears unassuming, very much without the assumed aura of self-importance.  I'm a fan.

    Parent

    Breaking Bad Toy Meth Lab sells out (none / 0) (#112)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 05:34:01 PM EST
    online.  A 500 piece toy model of Gus and Walter's high production methamphetamine cookery has sold out on the Citizen Brick website, according to the following article, which appeared in the Daily Mail, one of the U.K.'s sleazier newspapers.

    Serena wins another Grand Slam. (none / 0) (#116)
    by caseyOR on Sun Sep 08, 2013 at 06:59:50 PM EST
    Serena Williams defeated Victoria Azarenko in the U.S. Open today. It took three sets, including a tie-breaker, but Williams prevailed. It was a great match to watch. Very exciting. And to top it off, today was a $3.6 million payday for Serena.

    I love watching Serena play tennis. With her sister Venus, Serena has done so much to elevate the women's game. It is a much more athletic and powerful game now. Serena takes her rightful place in the pantheon of women who have changed the game. She is up there with such greats as Billie Jean King and Martina Navratilova and Steffi Graff.

    Way to go, Serena.