Friday, November 24, 2006

friday random ten

Photo by Ryan McManus

friday random ten (24/11/2006)

Under Byen - Det er mig der holder træerne sammen
1. "Byen Driver" - Under Byen [Det er mig der holder træerne sammen]

Kleenex - Beri Beri / Ain't You / Hedi's Head / Nice
2. "Nice" - Kleenex [Kleenex single]

Asobi Seksu - Citrus
3. "Mizu Asobi" - Asobi Seksu [Citrus]

Persephone's Bees - Notes From The Underworld
4. "Home" - Persephone's Bees [Notes From the Underworld]

Bishop Allen - January
5. "Corazon" - Bishop Allen [January EP]

My Bloody Valentine - Untitled
6. "Drive It All Over Me" - My Bloody Valentine [You Made Me Realise EP]

Slowdive - Morningrise
7. "Losing Today" - Slowdive [Morningrise EP]

The Jesus and Mary Chain - Rollercoaster EP
8. "Lowlife" - The Jesus and Mary Chain [Rollercoaster EP]

Arcade Fire - Funeral
9. "Neighborhood #4 (7 Kettles) - Arcade Fire [Funeral]

Swell - ...Well ?
10. "At Long Last" - Swell [...Well?]

Bonus #11: "Song For the Fields" - Fields

friday random ten (24/11/2006)

Thursday, November 23, 2006

Harper drops a political bombshell with plan to recognize Quebeckers 'a nation within Canada'

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper took the historic step Wednesday of recognizing Quebeckers as a nation within Canada, a move that won immediate support from the other federalist parties and thrust the country back into the divisive national unity debate.

Mr. Harper's dramatic intervention was explicitly addressed at a Bloc Québécois motion that was intended to underline rifts within the Liberal Party over Quebec's status in the week before its leadership convention.

The Bloc had planned to force MPs to take a stand Thursday by asking whether they believed Quebeckers to be a nation — without the words that expressed support for national unity.

But the Liberals and New Democrats rose to their feet to join the Conservatives in prolonged applause when Mr. Harper introduced a motion that “this House recognize that the Québécois form a nation within a united Canada.”

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Olbermann: Special Comment

Keith Olbermann corrects bu$h on the lessons of Vietnam

Sunday, November 19, 2006

Seymour Hersh

The Next Act

Other sources close to the Bush family said that the machinations behind Rumsfeld’s resignation and the Gates nomination were complex, and the seeming triumph of the Old Guard may be illusory. The former senior intelligence official, who once worked closely with Gates and with the President’s father, said that Bush and his immediate advisers in the White House understood by mid-October that Rumsfeld would have to resign if the result of the midterm election was a resounding defeat. Rumsfeld was involved in conversations about the timing of his departure with Cheney, Gates, and the President before the election, the former senior intelligence official said. Critics who asked why Rumsfeld wasn’t fired earlier, a move that might have given the Republicans a boost, were missing the point. “A week before the election, the Republicans were saying that a Democratic victory was the seed of American retreat, and now Bush and Cheney are going to change their national-security policies?” the former senior intelligence official said. “Cheney knew this was coming. Dropping Rummy after the election looked like a conciliatory move—‘You’re right, Democrats. We got a new guy and we’re looking at all the options. Nothing is ruled out.’ ” But the conciliatory gesture would not be accompanied by a significant change in policy; instead, the White House saw Gates as someone who would have the credibility to help it stay the course on Iran and Iraq. Gates would also be an asset before Congress. If the Administration needed to make the case that Iran’s weapons program posed an imminent threat, Gates would be a better advocate than someone who had been associated with the flawed intelligence about Iraq. The former official said, “He’s not the guy who told us there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and he’ll be taken seriously by Congress.”


Another critical issue for Gates will be the Pentagon’s expanding effort to conduct clandestine and covert intelligence missions overseas. Such activity has traditionally been the C.I.A.’s responsibility, but, as the result of a systematic push by Rumsfeld, military covert actions have been substantially increased. In the past six months, Israel and the United States have also been working together in support of a Kurdish resistance group known as the Party for Free Life in Kurdistan. The group has been conducting clandestine cross-border forays into Iran, I was told by a government consultant with close ties to the Pentagon civilian leadership, as “part of an effort to explore alternative means of applying pressure on Iran.” (The Pentagon has established covert relationships with Kurdish, Azeri, and Baluchi tribesmen, and has encouraged their efforts to undermine the regime’s authority in northern and southeastern Iran.) The government consultant said that Israel is giving the Kurdish group “equipment and training.” The group has also been given “a list of targets inside Iran of interest to the U.S.” (An Israeli government spokesman denied that Israel was involved.)

Such activities, if they are considered military rather than intelligence operations, do not require congressional briefings. For a similar C.I.A. operation, the President would, by law, have to issue a formal finding that the mission was necessary, and the Administration would have to brief the senior leadership of the House and the Senate. The lack of such consultation annoyed some Democrats in Congress. This fall, I was told, Representative David Obey, of Wisconsin, the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations subcommittee that finances classified military activity, pointedly asked, during a closed meeting of House and Senate members, whether “anyone has been briefing on the Administration’s plan for military activity in Iran.” The answer was no. (A spokesman for Obey confirmed this account.)


In the current issue of Foreign Policy, Joshua Muravchik, a prominent neoconservative, argued that the Administration had little choice. “Make no mistake: President Bush will need to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities before leaving office,” he wrote. The President would be bitterly criticized for a preëmptive attack on Iran, Muravchik said, and so neoconservatives “need to pave the way intellectually now and be prepared to defend the action when it comes.”