Saturday, March 27, 2004
Ho hum.
The Lightning coasted to a 4-1 win over the undermanned Washington Capitals tonight at the Ice Palace, er St. Pete Times Forum. Vinny Lecavalier scored the first two Lightning goals, and Brad Richards added a goal and an assist. Khabibulin wasn't tested much, but acquitted himself well, nearly saving the lone Cap goal. The only down note was that Martin St. Louis continues to slump, failing again tonight to get on the scoresheet. He looks a step slower out there, and hopefully his apparent fatigue will be temporary.
Meanwhile, the Flyers were surprised at home by the Rangers 3-1, while the Bruins beat Montreal in OT to move into second place overall, four points behind the Lightning with a game in hand. The Lightning's magic number to clinch #1 in the East is four, so any four points they gain or Boston drops will do it. The Lightning has Ottawa, Florida and Atlanta, all at home, left on the schedule, while Boston travels to Carolina and New Jersey, and hosts Washington and the Devils. I'd say there's about a 75% chance the Lightning hang on to the top seed.
|
Meanwhile, the Flyers were surprised at home by the Rangers 3-1, while the Bruins beat Montreal in OT to move into second place overall, four points behind the Lightning with a game in hand. The Lightning's magic number to clinch #1 in the East is four, so any four points they gain or Boston drops will do it. The Lightning has Ottawa, Florida and Atlanta, all at home, left on the schedule, while Boston travels to Carolina and New Jersey, and hosts Washington and the Devils. I'd say there's about a 75% chance the Lightning hang on to the top seed.
This is truly shameful.
OK, read this.
Now, read this.
The money paragraph in the second story:
Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi’s operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.
We could have easily taken out the guy who was likely responsible for 3/11, not to mention over 700 and counting killed by his attacks in Iraq. Is there no end to the damage being done by this administration's obsession with Saddam? How many people will have to die?
|
Now, read this.
The money paragraph in the second story:
Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi’s operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.
We could have easily taken out the guy who was likely responsible for 3/11, not to mention over 700 and counting killed by his attacks in Iraq. Is there no end to the damage being done by this administration's obsession with Saddam? How many people will have to die?
Friday, March 26, 2004
Lost In Translation.
From Salon:
"We should have had orange or red-type of alert in June or July of 2001"
A former FBI translator told the 9/11 commission that the bureau had detailed information well before Sept. 11, 2001, that terrorists were likely to attack the U.S. with airplanes.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Eric Boehlert
March 26, 2004 | A former FBI wiretap translator with top-secret security clearance, who has been called "very credible" by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, has told Salon she recently testified to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States that the FBI had detailed information prior to Sept. 11, 2001, that a terrorist attack involving airplanes was being plotted.
Referring to the Homeland Security Department's color-coded warnings instituted in the wake of 9/11, the former translator, Sibel Edmonds, told Salon, "We should have had orange or red-type of alert in June or July of 2001. There was that much information available." Edmonds is offended by the Bush White House claim that it lacked foreknowledge of the kind of attacks made by al-Qaida on 9/11. "Especially after reading National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice [Washington Post Op-Ed on March 22] where she said, we had no specific information whatsoever of domestic threat or that they might use airplanes. That's an outrageous lie. And documents can prove it's a lie."
Edmonds' charge comes when the Bush White House is trying to fend off former counterterrorism chief Richard A. Clarke's testimony that it did not take serious measures to combat the threat of Islamic terrorism, and al-Qaida specifically, in the months leading up to 9/11.
Edmonds, who is Turkish-American, is a 10-year U.S. citizen who has passed a polygraph examination conducted by FBI investigators. She speaks fluent Farsi, Arabic and Turkish and worked part-time for the FBI, making $32 an hour for six months, beginning Sept. 20, 2001. She was assigned to the FBI's investigation into Sept. 11 attacks and other counterterrorism and counterintelligence cases, where she translated reams of documents seized by agents who, for the previous year, had been rounding up suspected terrorists.
She says those tapes, often connected to terrorism, money laundering or other criminal activity, provide evidence that should have made apparent that an al- Qaida plot was in the works. Edmonds cannot talk in detail about the tapes publicly because she's been under a Justice Department gag order since 2002.
"President Bush said they had no specific information about Sept. 11, and that's accurate," says Edmonds. "But there was specific information about use of airplanes, that an attack was on the way two or three months beforehand and that several people were already in the country by May of 2001. They should've alerted the people to the threat we're facing."
Edmonds testified before 9/11 commission staffers in February for more than three hours, providing detailed information about FBI investigations, documents and dates. This week Edmonds attended the commission hearings and plans to return in April when FBI Director Robert Mueller is scheduled to testify. "I'm hoping the commission asks him real questions -- like, in April 2001, did an FBI field office receive legitimate information indicating the use of airplanes for an attack on major cities? And is it true that through an FBI informant, who'd been used [by the Bureau] for 10 years, did you get information about specific terrorist plans and specific cells in this country? He couldn't say no," she insists.
Next thing we'll hear is that the FBI had the flight numbers.
|
"We should have had orange or red-type of alert in June or July of 2001"
A former FBI translator told the 9/11 commission that the bureau had detailed information well before Sept. 11, 2001, that terrorists were likely to attack the U.S. with airplanes.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Eric Boehlert
March 26, 2004 | A former FBI wiretap translator with top-secret security clearance, who has been called "very credible" by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, has told Salon she recently testified to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States that the FBI had detailed information prior to Sept. 11, 2001, that a terrorist attack involving airplanes was being plotted.
Referring to the Homeland Security Department's color-coded warnings instituted in the wake of 9/11, the former translator, Sibel Edmonds, told Salon, "We should have had orange or red-type of alert in June or July of 2001. There was that much information available." Edmonds is offended by the Bush White House claim that it lacked foreknowledge of the kind of attacks made by al-Qaida on 9/11. "Especially after reading National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice [Washington Post Op-Ed on March 22] where she said, we had no specific information whatsoever of domestic threat or that they might use airplanes. That's an outrageous lie. And documents can prove it's a lie."
Edmonds' charge comes when the Bush White House is trying to fend off former counterterrorism chief Richard A. Clarke's testimony that it did not take serious measures to combat the threat of Islamic terrorism, and al-Qaida specifically, in the months leading up to 9/11.
Edmonds, who is Turkish-American, is a 10-year U.S. citizen who has passed a polygraph examination conducted by FBI investigators. She speaks fluent Farsi, Arabic and Turkish and worked part-time for the FBI, making $32 an hour for six months, beginning Sept. 20, 2001. She was assigned to the FBI's investigation into Sept. 11 attacks and other counterterrorism and counterintelligence cases, where she translated reams of documents seized by agents who, for the previous year, had been rounding up suspected terrorists.
She says those tapes, often connected to terrorism, money laundering or other criminal activity, provide evidence that should have made apparent that an al- Qaida plot was in the works. Edmonds cannot talk in detail about the tapes publicly because she's been under a Justice Department gag order since 2002.
"President Bush said they had no specific information about Sept. 11, and that's accurate," says Edmonds. "But there was specific information about use of airplanes, that an attack was on the way two or three months beforehand and that several people were already in the country by May of 2001. They should've alerted the people to the threat we're facing."
Edmonds testified before 9/11 commission staffers in February for more than three hours, providing detailed information about FBI investigations, documents and dates. This week Edmonds attended the commission hearings and plans to return in April when FBI Director Robert Mueller is scheduled to testify. "I'm hoping the commission asks him real questions -- like, in April 2001, did an FBI field office receive legitimate information indicating the use of airplanes for an attack on major cities? And is it true that through an FBI informant, who'd been used [by the Bureau] for 10 years, did you get information about specific terrorist plans and specific cells in this country? He couldn't say no," she insists.
Next thing we'll hear is that the FBI had the flight numbers.
You tell 'em, Bob!
While it's embarassing to live in a state governed by Jeb Bush, at least for a few more months I can feel pride in my state's Senators, one of whom is Bob Graham. Today, in response to Bill Frist's anti-Clarke meltdown on the Senate floor, which hinted at selective release of classified Clarke testimony in an effort to discredit the man of the hour, Graham had this to say:
"I concur with Senator Frist's call for de-classification of Richard Clarke's testimony to the Joint Inquiry. To the best of my recollection, there is nothing inconsistent or contradictory in that testimony and what Mr. Clarke has said this week.
I would add three other recommendations:
First, if Mr. Clarke's testimony is to be released, it should be released in its entirety -- not, as the Bush administration has done in the past, selectively edited so that only portions favorable to the White House are made public.
Second, the Bush administration should de-classify other documents that surround the Clarke testimony, such as his January 25, 2002, plan for action against al Qaeda, in order to clarify the issues that are in dispute.
And finally, the Bush administration should release all other testimony and documents related to 9-11 for which classification can no longer be justified -- including the 27 pages of the Joint Inquiry's final report that address the involvement of a foreign government in supporting some of the 19 hijackers while they lived among us and finalized their evil plot.
The American people deserve to know what their government has done -- and should be doing -- to protect them from terrorists, and who should be held accountable for shortcomings that have left our country vulnerable."
I'm beginning to think he only thing selling faster than Clarke's book these days are boxes of Depends being bought by the Republican establishment.
|
"I concur with Senator Frist's call for de-classification of Richard Clarke's testimony to the Joint Inquiry. To the best of my recollection, there is nothing inconsistent or contradictory in that testimony and what Mr. Clarke has said this week.
I would add three other recommendations:
First, if Mr. Clarke's testimony is to be released, it should be released in its entirety -- not, as the Bush administration has done in the past, selectively edited so that only portions favorable to the White House are made public.
Second, the Bush administration should de-classify other documents that surround the Clarke testimony, such as his January 25, 2002, plan for action against al Qaeda, in order to clarify the issues that are in dispute.
And finally, the Bush administration should release all other testimony and documents related to 9-11 for which classification can no longer be justified -- including the 27 pages of the Joint Inquiry's final report that address the involvement of a foreign government in supporting some of the 19 hijackers while they lived among us and finalized their evil plot.
The American people deserve to know what their government has done -- and should be doing -- to protect them from terrorists, and who should be held accountable for shortcomings that have left our country vulnerable."
I'm beginning to think he only thing selling faster than Clarke's book these days are boxes of Depends being bought by the Republican establishment.
First sighting of the spring.
Of a Kerry bumper sticker, that is - on a late-model Camry on Missouri Ave. in Clearwater this morning. I haven't seen any Bush/Cheney 04 stickers, but I do run across some leftover 2000 stickers from time to time.
|
Josh Marshall in rare form this morning.
He's linked over to the right, but I have to point out three must-reads from his blog this morning:
1. The absurdity of Robert Novak and Ann Coulter each insinuating that Clarke is racist because he's criticized Condi Rice;
2. A passage from a book released six months ago on Bush foreign policy, in which the former deputy NSA, along with former Joint Chiefs chairman Hugh Shelton (the guy who ripped Wesley Clark, I'll point out), both back up Clarke's thesis that terrorism wasn't a pre-9/11 priority for Bush; and
3. A piece on how absurd it is that Rice isn't willing to testify under oath to rebut charges made by Clarke that were under oath.
Great blogging, man.
|
1. The absurdity of Robert Novak and Ann Coulter each insinuating that Clarke is racist because he's criticized Condi Rice;
2. A passage from a book released six months ago on Bush foreign policy, in which the former deputy NSA, along with former Joint Chiefs chairman Hugh Shelton (the guy who ripped Wesley Clark, I'll point out), both back up Clarke's thesis that terrorism wasn't a pre-9/11 priority for Bush; and
3. A piece on how absurd it is that Rice isn't willing to testify under oath to rebut charges made by Clarke that were under oath.
Great blogging, man.
Condi looks pissed.
As well she should be, I suppose, now that her shortcomings as Bush's NSA have been revealed. Note the picture. I saw it first on CNN, figured it must be "liberal bias" in showing her scowling like that, but lo and behold, the same picture is on the front of the Fox News page. Of course, she's still not going to testify either in public or under oath, so this sounds like a closed-door plea to the 9/11 commission to try not to be so hard on her.
Meanwhile, this Washington Post article shows how contradictory and all over the map her statements against Clarke have been.
|
Meanwhile, this Washington Post article shows how contradictory and all over the map her statements against Clarke have been.
A Corner on idiocy?
Every once in a while, I wander off to The Corner, the official blog of the National Review. Now even though I disagree with them, I will concede that there are many smart people at the Review. Unfortunately, few of them seem to have been posting last night. Here are a couple of bon mots:
From Katherine Jean Lopez:
During the Clinton years, we already had the distinct impression Clinton took the presidency at times with all the seriousness of a spoiled, drunk college kid.
As opposed to the spoiled, drunk college kid who currently holds the office, I suppose. You'd think that's a phrase Bush supporters would try to avoid.
And then we have this from Tim Graham, in response to Kerry's criticism of Bush for making WMD jokes the other night at the Washington Correspondents' Dinner:
But Kerry's outraged response "as a veteran" is twice as lame as any of Bush's jokes. Has Kerry never told a war joke...in his life? A Vietnam joke? How about a few months ago, when he joked that when he came back from Vietnam, John Edwards was still in diapers?
That's the best example he could offer? For crissakes, it's not even a war joke. To paraphrase Admiral Stockdale, I think they're out of ammo over there.
|
From Katherine Jean Lopez:
During the Clinton years, we already had the distinct impression Clinton took the presidency at times with all the seriousness of a spoiled, drunk college kid.
As opposed to the spoiled, drunk college kid who currently holds the office, I suppose. You'd think that's a phrase Bush supporters would try to avoid.
And then we have this from Tim Graham, in response to Kerry's criticism of Bush for making WMD jokes the other night at the Washington Correspondents' Dinner:
But Kerry's outraged response "as a veteran" is twice as lame as any of Bush's jokes. Has Kerry never told a war joke...in his life? A Vietnam joke? How about a few months ago, when he joked that when he came back from Vietnam, John Edwards was still in diapers?
That's the best example he could offer? For crissakes, it's not even a war joke. To paraphrase Admiral Stockdale, I think they're out of ammo over there.
Thursday, March 25, 2004
No sympathy for the Devils.
The Lightning continued their regular season mastery of the team that eliminated them from the playoffs last year, the New Jersey Devils, with a 2-1 win at the Ice Palace tonight. The Lightning swept the season series from Jersey, going 4-0. Combine that with a similar performance against Philly this year, and you have the rare team going 8-0 against the two powers of the Atlantic Division. The winning goal was kind of fluky, coming with about five minutes left when Brad Richards' centering pass from behind the goal line hit Viktor Kozlov and deflected past a stunned Martin Brodeur. Pavel Kubina also scored for the Lightning, his 17th of the year, tops in the NHL for defensemen and a Lightning record for blueliners as well. Most notably, the Lightning topped the century mark in points for the first time in team history, and with the Islanders defeating the Flyers in Philly tonight, and Toronto beating Boston as well, their hold on the #1 seed in the East was significantly strengthened.
I don't have the final shot totals (it was 17-17 late in the game), but it was a typical close-to-the-vest defensive struggle. Khabibulin was quite sharp in goal, and Brad Lukowich deserves to be singled out for a fine performance tonight on defense.
And it was a treat watching the game in high definition tonight.
Non-hockey note: My Final Four is no longer all there, as Pitt is down 10 with a minute to go against Oklahoma State.
|
I don't have the final shot totals (it was 17-17 late in the game), but it was a typical close-to-the-vest defensive struggle. Khabibulin was quite sharp in goal, and Brad Lukowich deserves to be singled out for a fine performance tonight on defense.
And it was a treat watching the game in high definition tonight.
Non-hockey note: My Final Four is no longer all there, as Pitt is down 10 with a minute to go against Oklahoma State.
DeLay to be indicted?
The real-life Dale Gribble , exterminator-turned-House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, apparently is on the verge of indictment for campaign finance abuse. The hits just keep on coming.
|
Wednesday, March 24, 2004
Where have you gone, Jay Bennett?
A Wilco fan turns his lonely ears to you. Or something like that. Finally ready to weigh in on "A Ghost Is Born", or at least 11/12ths of it (one track - "Late Greats" - apparently was not leaked with the rest), having listened to it about 4 1/2 times through.
Rather than try to weave all my feelings into an integrated critique, I'm just going to list them here, in no particular order.
1. Although I haven't paid detailed attention to the lyrics, I find it virtually 100% angst-ridden and humorless. There's nothing terribly joyous or warm on it, like "Heavy Metal Drummer", for example. Only the playful, "Martha My Dear"-esque "Hummingbird" seems to have some lilt to it.
2. The arrangements are rather sparse. If not for a few bits of studio trickery here and there, I'd almost think these were demos rather than the final mastered product. I suppose they could be, but nowhere have I seen that mentioned. The difference between Ghost and YHF/Summerteeth in terms of texture is palpable. This brings me to my titular lament, the missing Jay Bennett.
3. Being a power-popper/wall-of-sound guy at heart, I particularly enjoyed Bennett's contributions to Wilco. Ghost sounds like a Tweedy solo album. I was afraid Bennett would be missed, and my fears appear to have been confirmed. Bennett may have been an asshole, as anyone who watched the excellent documentary I Am Trying To Break Your Heart (recommended to non-Wilco fans as well) can attest, but he was an integral part of the Wilco sound.
4. In my earlier post, I made the comment that my first impression was that Ghost sounded like the work of a jam band. This wasn't too far off the mark - several tracks start off conventionally, only to go off into minutes upon minutes of jamming. I'd say without hesitation that the ratio of Tweedy's vocals to the instrumental parts is the lowest in Wilco history on this release. In and of itself, it's not a problem, but done repeatedly, it gives off the impression that the songs themselves are kind of slight.
5. From AM to Being There to Summerteeth to YHF, there was a definite logical evolution, as both Tweedy's songs and the band's sound become more and more substantive and dense. Ghost seems like a retrenchment.
In the end, the title may be all too appropriate - the band we've known as Wilco is dead, and in its place, this "ghost" of Wilco has been born. Based on my comments above, I'm sure I've given off the impression that I dislike this album. I don't. It's not bad. But after one triumph after another (including the Mermaid albums), "not bad" isn't what I was hoping for from Wilco.
|
Rather than try to weave all my feelings into an integrated critique, I'm just going to list them here, in no particular order.
1. Although I haven't paid detailed attention to the lyrics, I find it virtually 100% angst-ridden and humorless. There's nothing terribly joyous or warm on it, like "Heavy Metal Drummer", for example. Only the playful, "Martha My Dear"-esque "Hummingbird" seems to have some lilt to it.
2. The arrangements are rather sparse. If not for a few bits of studio trickery here and there, I'd almost think these were demos rather than the final mastered product. I suppose they could be, but nowhere have I seen that mentioned. The difference between Ghost and YHF/Summerteeth in terms of texture is palpable. This brings me to my titular lament, the missing Jay Bennett.
3. Being a power-popper/wall-of-sound guy at heart, I particularly enjoyed Bennett's contributions to Wilco. Ghost sounds like a Tweedy solo album. I was afraid Bennett would be missed, and my fears appear to have been confirmed. Bennett may have been an asshole, as anyone who watched the excellent documentary I Am Trying To Break Your Heart (recommended to non-Wilco fans as well) can attest, but he was an integral part of the Wilco sound.
4. In my earlier post, I made the comment that my first impression was that Ghost sounded like the work of a jam band. This wasn't too far off the mark - several tracks start off conventionally, only to go off into minutes upon minutes of jamming. I'd say without hesitation that the ratio of Tweedy's vocals to the instrumental parts is the lowest in Wilco history on this release. In and of itself, it's not a problem, but done repeatedly, it gives off the impression that the songs themselves are kind of slight.
5. From AM to Being There to Summerteeth to YHF, there was a definite logical evolution, as both Tweedy's songs and the band's sound become more and more substantive and dense. Ghost seems like a retrenchment.
In the end, the title may be all too appropriate - the band we've known as Wilco is dead, and in its place, this "ghost" of Wilco has been born. Based on my comments above, I'm sure I've given off the impression that I dislike this album. I don't. It's not bad. But after one triumph after another (including the Mermaid albums), "not bad" isn't what I was hoping for from Wilco.
Kindred spirits?
What he really must have been thinking yesterday at the White House:
"I can identify with you being the appointed #1 over the wishes of the electorate as the result of an unfair, unpopular and questionable selection process."
|
"I can identify with you being the appointed #1 over the wishes of the electorate as the result of an unfair, unpopular and questionable selection process."
A cwassic is weweweased!
CNN reports that one of the funniest movies of all-time, Monty Python's Life of Brian, is going to be re-released as a sort of counterpoint to The Passion of The Christ. Michael Palin will always be the ultimate Pontius Pilate for me.
|
Tuesday, March 23, 2004
Clarke strikes back.
Defending charges Clinton was lax on al-Qaeda:
CLARKE: Well, a great deal was done. The administration stopped the al Qaeda attacks in the United States and around the world at the millennium period, they stopped al Qaeda in Bosnia, they stopped al Qaeda from blowing up embassies around the world, they authorized covert lethal action by the CIA against al Qaeda, they retaliated with cruise missile strikes into Afghanistan, they got sanctions against Afghanistan from the United Nations. There was a great deal the administration did, even though at the time, prior to 9/11, al Qaeda had arguably not done a great deal to the United States.
If you look at the eight years of the Clinton administration, al Qaeda was responsible for the deaths of fewer than 50 Americans over those eight years. Contrast that with Ronald Reagan, where 300 Americans were killed in Lebanon and there was no retaliation. Contrast that with the first Bush administration where 260 Americans were killed on Pan-Am 103 and there was no retaliation.
I would argue that for what had actually happened prior to 9/11, the Clinton administration was doing a great deal. In fact, so much that when the Bush people came into office they thought I was a little crazy, a little obsessed with this "little terrorist" [Osama] bin Laden. Why wasn't I focused on Iraqi-sponsored terrorism.
His testimony tomorrow should be interesting.
|
CLARKE: Well, a great deal was done. The administration stopped the al Qaeda attacks in the United States and around the world at the millennium period, they stopped al Qaeda in Bosnia, they stopped al Qaeda from blowing up embassies around the world, they authorized covert lethal action by the CIA against al Qaeda, they retaliated with cruise missile strikes into Afghanistan, they got sanctions against Afghanistan from the United Nations. There was a great deal the administration did, even though at the time, prior to 9/11, al Qaeda had arguably not done a great deal to the United States.
If you look at the eight years of the Clinton administration, al Qaeda was responsible for the deaths of fewer than 50 Americans over those eight years. Contrast that with Ronald Reagan, where 300 Americans were killed in Lebanon and there was no retaliation. Contrast that with the first Bush administration where 260 Americans were killed on Pan-Am 103 and there was no retaliation.
I would argue that for what had actually happened prior to 9/11, the Clinton administration was doing a great deal. In fact, so much that when the Bush people came into office they thought I was a little crazy, a little obsessed with this "little terrorist" [Osama] bin Laden. Why wasn't I focused on Iraqi-sponsored terrorism.
His testimony tomorrow should be interesting.
Turning over the Leafs.
"It is a far, far better butt-kicking we give, than we have ever butt-kicked before!" This is a paraphrase of a line from a very funny episode of Cheers, in which Frasier Crane tried to "update" Dickens for the beer-swilling regulars. It also could describe tonight's 7-2 Lightning win over the Leafs in Toronto, probably the Bolts' most impressive performance of the year, considering the opponent and the location. The Lightning torched Eddie Belfour for four goals in the first period, and never looked back. Toronto got within 4-2 in the second, but a late period power play goal from Dave Andreychuk (who else?) made it 5-2 and it was all over but the booing.
Two of the seven goals tonight were highlight film material: The first was the Lightning's first, as Freddie Modin won a loose puck on the far boards just inside the blue line, beat a couple of Leafs along the boards, got to the goal line, and came right out in front of Belfour and went five-hole on him. The other was the Lightning's sixth goal, with Vinny Lecavalier coming in on the left on a 2-on-1, and doing a complete 360 spin-o-rama on the Leaf defenseman and backhanding one past Easy Eddie. The only negative tonight was the horrible puck-handling of John Grahame, who nearly gave the Leafs two goals by fancying himself a defenseman. Grahame was solid when it came to shot-stopping, though.
It was a great way to close out the Lightning's road schedule this season, with the final five regular season games at home. The Lightning will be at home now through Game 3 of the first round of the playoffs, which will probably be three weeks from tonight. Philly and Boston both won tonight, keeping the heat on, but the Lightning still hold the top spot. And Martin St. Louis, with three assists, not only widened his league scoring lead, but set the Lightning single-season points record in the process.
|
Two of the seven goals tonight were highlight film material: The first was the Lightning's first, as Freddie Modin won a loose puck on the far boards just inside the blue line, beat a couple of Leafs along the boards, got to the goal line, and came right out in front of Belfour and went five-hole on him. The other was the Lightning's sixth goal, with Vinny Lecavalier coming in on the left on a 2-on-1, and doing a complete 360 spin-o-rama on the Leaf defenseman and backhanding one past Easy Eddie. The only negative tonight was the horrible puck-handling of John Grahame, who nearly gave the Leafs two goals by fancying himself a defenseman. Grahame was solid when it came to shot-stopping, though.
It was a great way to close out the Lightning's road schedule this season, with the final five regular season games at home. The Lightning will be at home now through Game 3 of the first round of the playoffs, which will probably be three weeks from tonight. Philly and Boston both won tonight, keeping the heat on, but the Lightning still hold the top spot. And Martin St. Louis, with three assists, not only widened his league scoring lead, but set the Lightning single-season points record in the process.
Thank God so few of them vote.
MSNBC reports that the 18-29 age group is going big for Nader. Undoubtedly, this is symptomatic of the naivete of youth (I remember being gung ho for John Anderson in 1980 when I was 17) who don't realize that in life sometimes you have to choose something you're not wild about in order (Kerry) to avoid choosing something that is awful (Bush). Thankfully, back in 80, a) I was to young to vote, and b) Anderson's bloc of voters did not swing the election to Reagan, unlike 2000 when Nader's voters helped elect Bush.
|
New Wilco.
I have obtained an advance copy of the new Wilco album, A Ghost Is Born, which is not due out until June. I've only listened to about half of it, and I want to hear the whole thing a few times before passing judgment, but my preliminary take is that they've turned into a jam band.
More to come.
(Please no Emails begging for copies, I don't want to be distributing it.)
|
More to come.
(Please no Emails begging for copies, I don't want to be distributing it.)
Monday, March 22, 2004
Fascinating.
This minute-by-minute timeline of 9/11 is fascinating, thought-provoking and chilling.
It covers such questions as
*Why was Bush still reading children's stories in the Sarasota classroom well after the second plane hit the WTC, when could have been ordering second two hijacked jets shot down?
*Why weren't fighter jets scrambled properly to deal with Flights 77 and 93?
and
*Was Flight 93 in fact shot down?
Nearly all of the items in this timeline are sourced and linked. It's really gripping.
|
It covers such questions as
*Why was Bush still reading children's stories in the Sarasota classroom well after the second plane hit the WTC, when could have been ordering second two hijacked jets shot down?
*Why weren't fighter jets scrambled properly to deal with Flights 77 and 93?
and
*Was Flight 93 in fact shot down?
Nearly all of the items in this timeline are sourced and linked. It's really gripping.
Sunday, March 21, 2004
Richard Clarke on 60 Minutes.
Pretty damning stuff.
I'm sure some will be claiming, as discussed in the interview, that Clarke was "disgruntled" because his cabinet-level counter-terrorism czar position was reduced to a staff-level position. But if anything the fact that *the position was devalued* tells us all we need to know about how much a priority counter-terrorism was in the pre-9/11 days of the administration.
The other interesting item brought up, that we don't hear much about, was that in the early days of December 1999, when Al-Qaeda "chatter" was prevalent, Clinton called for daily urgent staff meetings on the threat, and later that month, the planned Al-Qaeda attack on LAX on 12-31-99 was foiled. When the "chatter" got hot again in the summer of 2001, the same prioritizing of counter-terrorism didn't take place.
So far in response, at least as was presented on the show, all we have are the blandishments that "terrorism was a priority" and that to think it wasn't is "absurd". Hopefully, we'll hear a detailed response or rebuttal to Clarke instead of a plan to discredit the man, but I'm not holding my breath.
I'm sure we'll hear a lot about how he's trying to sell a book (which he is), but again just because he's promoting a book doesn't mean the book is untrue.
|
I'm sure some will be claiming, as discussed in the interview, that Clarke was "disgruntled" because his cabinet-level counter-terrorism czar position was reduced to a staff-level position. But if anything the fact that *the position was devalued* tells us all we need to know about how much a priority counter-terrorism was in the pre-9/11 days of the administration.
The other interesting item brought up, that we don't hear much about, was that in the early days of December 1999, when Al-Qaeda "chatter" was prevalent, Clinton called for daily urgent staff meetings on the threat, and later that month, the planned Al-Qaeda attack on LAX on 12-31-99 was foiled. When the "chatter" got hot again in the summer of 2001, the same prioritizing of counter-terrorism didn't take place.
So far in response, at least as was presented on the show, all we have are the blandishments that "terrorism was a priority" and that to think it wasn't is "absurd". Hopefully, we'll hear a detailed response or rebuttal to Clarke instead of a plan to discredit the man, but I'm not holding my breath.
I'm sure we'll hear a lot about how he's trying to sell a book (which he is), but again just because he's promoting a book doesn't mean the book is untrue.
I find this headline amusing.
|Road to nowhere.
The Lightning drop another on the road today, this time 3-0 to the Islanders. As an Islander fan as well, the good news here is that the Isles are that much closer to nailing down the last playoff spot. And with the Lightning losing for the fourth time in five games, the chance that they end up #1 in the East and play the Isles in the first round of the playoffs looks less likely as well, good for both my psyche and perhaps the Lightning's, considering how much they've struggled with them this season.
Unfortunately, should the Lightning finish #2, they'd now be looking at the Devils, who dropped to #7 after losing to Montreal last night. Given that there isn't a lot of daylight between the top 7 teams in the East, drawing the Devils with their defensive style and playoff experience isn't exactly the ideal scenario. As hot as Montreal has been, I'd still rather see the Lightning play them. One thing in the Lightning's favor for closing out the season, though: after Tuesday's game at Toronto, the Bolts play their final five games of the regular season at home, and since they'll be hosting the first two playoffs games at home as well, they won't be back on the road for over three weeks.
As for today's game, they were just plain listless, not surprising considering having played less than 24 hours before, and for the third time since Thursday night. First time shut out since the January 2 game against Columbus, after which they went on their incredible two-plus-month streak.
|
Unfortunately, should the Lightning finish #2, they'd now be looking at the Devils, who dropped to #7 after losing to Montreal last night. Given that there isn't a lot of daylight between the top 7 teams in the East, drawing the Devils with their defensive style and playoff experience isn't exactly the ideal scenario. As hot as Montreal has been, I'd still rather see the Lightning play them. One thing in the Lightning's favor for closing out the season, though: after Tuesday's game at Toronto, the Bolts play their final five games of the regular season at home, and since they'll be hosting the first two playoffs games at home as well, they won't be back on the road for over three weeks.
As for today's game, they were just plain listless, not surprising considering having played less than 24 hours before, and for the third time since Thursday night. First time shut out since the January 2 game against Columbus, after which they went on their incredible two-plus-month streak.
