Daily Archive

The BBC reports:

An Austrian court has ruled that UK historian David Irving - jailed for denying the Holocaust - should be released on probation…

…He said he would urge an academic boycott of historians from Germany and Austria until the nations stopped jailing historians…

Speaking of “academia”, the BBC gives readers a very unfortunate impression in granting Mr Irving a title to which he is not entitled. Holding not so much as an undergraduate history degree, he is not an “historian”. However, if media does feel compelled to give him some title, call him a “writer”.  (He does write, after all.)

The Press Association:

Prime Minister Tony Blair was in favour of announcing a timetable to pull troops out of Iraq but changed his mind after speaking to US President George Bush, Iraq’s Vice President has said.

Speaking to the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, Tareq al-Hashemi reportedly said Mr Blair was “brainwashed” by Mr Bush into changing his mind on the subject…

Hey, whaddya know: An Oxford law graduate and barrister was “brainwashed” by a moron.

Three points:

1) Reuters now considers Osama bin Laden to fall under the “Entertainment News” section.

2) They tell us that aggressive, ready at the trigger French forces had him “in their sights” more than once, but it was THE AMERICANS who didn’t give the order to fire? Sorry, but that explanation just doesn’t quite ring true. After all, as we well know it is Americans who are aggressive and trigger-happy, and not being vassals French forces would never agree to serve even for an instant under bumbling American command.

3) In their related article, Reuters then tells us:

…The French military, however, said that the incidents never happened and the report was “erroneous information”…

Even though that clearly inconsequential “however” aside might have been considered rather important when it comes to allowing us as Reuters consumers to make a decision “based on the facts“, Reuters obviously correctly felt it would be inappropriate to put that sort of tiny detail in an “Entertainment” photo caption.  Wouldn’t want too many facts out there muddying the waters, of course.  Then, from bin Laden, we are moved effortlessly on to other “Entertainment”:

Who says Reuters can’t improve? For while just above they did use quotes around penguin (which is subtle and is indeed appropriate), they didn’t feel the need to treat readers as complete idiots in telling us it is someone dressed as a penguin, or that Ms Murphy is on the right.

[Other award-quality photojournalism here.]

MNF-Iraq, December 19:

…The Iraqi Army and Coalition force responded to reports of an explosion in a building east of Ramadi. According to local citizens, the building was a former school that was being used as a medical facility.The building was clearly marked with a Red Crescent flag which is a symbol for medical facilities.

According to residents, armed insurgents wearing black masks had deposited an explosive charge and left the area. An explosion occurred shortly after their departure. A portion of the building was destroyed.

Upon further investigation, a propane tank and several projectiles were found strategically placed throughout the building in order to destroy it. The explosives were removed from the building and detonated in place. There were no reports of civilian casualties and no Iraqi Army or Coalition casualties…

Thus does the heroic resistance nobly struggle on.  Inspiring, aren’t they?

A very interesting article in yesterday’s Times:

…“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are born equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that amongst these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” These statements are not self-evident. They are not even true. They are gobbledygook. Yet they inspired the Constitution of the United States, one of mankind’s great achievements…

I say “interesting” given my post of the other day on a famous “human rights” organization. And actually, those lines above are in the Declaration of Independence, but the argument is still reasonable. So is the conclusion . . .

…Tens of millions of Chinese have worked their way out of poverty in recent years. It was not achieved by extending human rights law in China. Nor is it an “economic miracle”. It is a predictable consequence of establishing property rights.

. . . which is something of an accidental corroboration of Madison’s “property in rights“.