[Population: One] <A HREF="http://popone.innocence.com/ar
Feb. 4th, 2005 09:43 amFor some reason, Glenn Reynolds is very interested in the Volcker Report, which implicates the UN in corruption involving Iraq's food for oil program, but hasn't said a word about CNN's report that the US condoned Saddam's oil smuggling.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-04 04:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-04 04:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-04 04:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-04 04:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-04 04:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-04 05:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-04 09:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-05 08:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-06 04:11 am (UTC)Just checked back -- he posted another update today... about the UN. Still no mention that the US might have winked at Saddam's oil sales. Intellectually dishonest.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-06 04:14 am (UTC)And fuck, of course it's worth talking about. Reynolds is scoring points on Ward Churchill. When someone's an idiot, you say "Hey, look at that stupid idiot." It's good for the public discourse.
no subject
Date: 2005-02-06 04:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-06 05:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-06 07:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-06 06:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-02-06 07:07 pm (UTC)What he has actually stated, by the by, is this: "I decided early on to take ads from pretty much anybody unless I thought they were offensive to me or to too many readers. I'm not easily offended by political views short of Nazis, Communists, etc." The "unless I thought they were offensive" bit? That's an ideological filter.
I'm not talking out of my ass here. Back when I worked at Netcom, we had a subscriber who was into neo-Nazi hate speech. Actually, you've been around Usenet a while -- you might remember him. Dan Gannon. Total wad. So he had an account with us, and from time to time someone would say "should we be letting this guy post hate speech through us?"
And I always said "Yes." Because I think free speech is good. We had an agreement with Dan about what was reasonable to post where; he had to work under the same AUP as everyone else. No posting Holocaust revisionism to inappropriate groups. Eventually he decided that he wasn't gonna abide by the agreement anymore, so we did wind up cancelling his account, but as long as he played by the same rules as anyone else we were willing to transmit his content.
So this is not just some hypothetical exercise for me.
Alllll that said, I still think it's pretty goofy to say "Well, better the money is with me than with Soros," because if he didn't take the ads the money would go someplace else. It's got that "wink wink I'm putting something over on the opposition" quality that I dislike no matter which side it's coming from. "Ha ha, I used Kerry/Bush's sign generator to make funny signs!" Yeah, great.
Now, if you ask nicely, I'll tell you why I hate America.