Writing, Media & Blogs: July 2005 Archives
Drudge points to an article about Nevada water policy by the BBC (pretty local and esoteric for a news agency half a world away). Aside from the issue at hand, I'm struck by the rather balanced tone of the article, which is contrary to my expectations given the BBC's reputation as a leftist organ. Sure, the article is about an environmental concern that won't take shape for 20 years, but the advocates for changing current policy are identified as "environmental activists" and their motivations are actually attributed to their own person gain rather than being the last best hope of humanity. No one was interviewed who had a contrary opinion, but I really did learn a lot about how water is used in Las Vegas, and the casinos weren't vilified.
But this is one of "Sin City's" greatest myths. Local hotels account for just 7% of the area's total water usage, according to the Southern Nevada Water Authority."The hotel casinos use only 30% of their water allocation on outdoor use, while 70% is used indoors in rooms and kitchens and that water is reclaimed and used again," says Cruz.
"Even though the Bellagio has the largest water feature on the Strip, it benefits from ground water. We are consuming less water than when it was functioning as a golf course when it was the old Dunes (hotel)."
In an interesting turn of events, American diplomats protected reporters from Sudanese security forces even though reporters rarely lift a finger to assist American diplomats.
Security forces in the Sudanese capital manhandled U.S. officials and reporters traveling with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, marring her round of meetings with leaders of the new unified government. Rice demanded an apology, and got it. ...Reporters, whom guards reluctantly allowed into the meeting for a planned photo session, were harassed and elbowed, and guards repeatedly tried to rip a microphone away from a U.S. reporter.
Ambassador Khidir Haroun Ahmed, head of the Sudanese mission in Washington, attempted to smooth over the situation on the spot. "Please accept our apologies," he told reporters. "This is not our policy."
But there was another scuffle moments later.
The reporters were told not to ask questions, over State Department objections. When NBC diplomatic reporter Andrea Mitchell tried to ask el-Bashir about his involvement with alleged atrocities, guards grabbed her and muscled her toward the rear of the room. State Department officials shouted at the guards. "Get your hands off her!" Wilkinson demanded. But all the reporters and a camera crew were physically forced out as Rice and el-Bashir watched.
All that despite Mike Wallace and Peter Jennings' famous insistance that reporters should never sacrifice a story to help their country. Those who can, do; those who can't, report.
Here's a great example of a blogger being quoted as an expert, and pseudonymously at that. Wretchard, now self-revealed as Richard Fernandez, has been quoted in a Times Online article about missing US SEALS in Afghanistan.
“Its insertion represented an extraordinary risk,” said the author of an influential military blog known as Wretchard. “They would be operating in an area known to be a stronghold of the Taliban, where any contact with the enemy automatically meant they would be grossly overmatched.”Another source noted that Murphy’s unit bore all the hallmarks of a long-range sniper team sent to hunt down a particular target. US Navy Seals are trained to spend long periods operating clandestinely.
“The fact that the US did not send in several hundred troops for a sweep instead of the four-man recon team strongly suggests the team’s mission was to fix a very high target before it could flee from an airmobile assault,” Wretchard said.
The post being quoted is here, and there are a few later follow-ups. As I've written in the past, the strength of the blogging medium is that the experts themselves are doing the writing without being filtered through ignorant reporters and editors. (Ignorant in the sense that they don't know anything about the topic they're reporting on.)
Wretchard also has a post about the London bombings being both a blessing and a curse.
The Al Qaeda have characterized the attack on London as 'punishment' for Britain's temerity to resist the inevitability of Islam. It is the kind of punishment these self-ordained masters of the universe are accustomed to meting out against harem women and insolent slaves. A few administered licks, and no doubt the cowardly kuffar will crawl back to his place. The tragedy is that Al Qaeda's perception is perfectly correct when applied to the Left, for whom no position is too supine, no degradation too shameful to endure; but incorrect for the vast majority of humans, in whom the instinct for self-preservation has not yet been extinguished. It will result in history's greatest case of mistaken identity; the mismatch that should never have happened. The enemy is even now dying at our feet, where we should kick him and kick him again.
I think his characterization of the left is pretty accurate, and in their constant striving for false peace they bring us ever closer to the brink of total war.
Update:
You'll also want to refresh your memory by reading Wretchard's Three Conjectures that explain why Muslims had better hope the West wins this war as quickly as possible.
