Alison Krauss and Union Station - “When You Say Nothing At All (Live)”

Iran has lodged a letter of formal protest with the Iraqi government regarding the attack by British troops on its consulate in the southern Iraqi city of Basra.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry issued a statement on Thursday to convey Tehran’s displeasure at the event, stressing the Iraqi government’s responsibility for providing the consulate staff with security based on international conventions.

Iranian Foreign Ministry officials have said a number of British armored personnel carriers surrounded the consulate in Basra and began shooting without any reason early in the morning.

The sources added that the move by British forces began about 10:30 a.m. local time and went on for 45 minutes.

The incident was the third of its kind in March where the British troops had surrounded the consulate with no specific reason. This time, however, the troops had virtually besieged the building.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry officials said the British soldiers were shooting in the air without any targets. They, however, said the soldiers did not fire at the main building.

Iran’s consulate in Basra is located about 400 meters from former Saddam Hussein’s palace used by the British troops as a military base.

Earlier, Iran’s Chief Consul in Basra said the British were trying to provoke and infuriate Iranians after the detention of their navy personnel who had illegally entered Iranian territory in the Persian Gulf.

A spokesman for the British forces in Iraq confirmed the incident but claimed the attack had been a result of a “geographical coincidence,” without providing further details.

Source

H/T Patriot for this story.

I’m guessing if things keep going the way they are in Iraq, it won’t be the last surprise.

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia - King Abdullah’s harsh - and unexpected - attack on the U.S. military presence in Iraq could be a Saudi attempt to signal to Washington its anger over the situation in Iraq and build credibility among fellow Arabs.

The kingdom has taken an aggressive leadership role to quiet Mideast troubles, and wanted to show other Arabs it was willing to put their interests above its close ties to the United States.

The White House, in a rare public retort Thursday, rejected the king’s characterization of U.S. troops in Iraq as an “illegitimate foreign occupation,” saying the United States was not in Iraq illegally.

“The United States and Saudi Arabia have a close and cooperative relationship on a wide range of issues,” White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said. “And when it comes to the coalition forces being in Iraq, we are there under the U.N. Security Council resolutions and at the invitation of the Iraqi people.”

“We disagree with them,” Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns told senators. “We were a little surprised to see those remarks.”

More at Chron.com

What a mess this is. You know, I’ve been thinking about this alot. First of all, if they were that close to the middle of the line and the boat or ship or whatever it was was shut off for the Brits to board, the boats could have drifted from Iraqi to Iranian water. That’s one thought. So who knows where they started and where they ended. The other thing is, if they weren’t in Iranian waters, why did they say, oh ok….take us. ????? Wouldn’t they have put up some kind of objection….I mean really big time objection. Also, oil went up because of this. We don’t even get any oil from Iran, but our prices will go up. What a rip. Anywho……I hope the Brits are ok (they’re probably safer with Iranians than they would be if they were “prisoners” of the rendition lovin, torture lovin U.S.) and that they return home safely.

The UN Security Council has backed a statement expressing “grave concern” at Iran’s detention of 15 British sailors and marines.

It also supports consular access to the captives.

After hours of negotiations, Britain’s ambassador Emyr Jones Parry said the council called “for an early resolution of this problem, including the release of the 15 personnel”.

Russia had prevented a tougher statement that would have demanded an immediate release of the British servicemen and woman.

Britain had wanted a statement saying the UN “deplored” the Iran’s action.

The Ministry Of Defence says satellite data proves the detainees were seized last week in Iraqi waters, not Iranian waters.

Tehran responded by showing video of the capture and charts it says show the opposite.

The hearing just ended. I listened off and on throughout the day. Here’s what I got from it:

Sampson suggested Patrick Fitzgerald be fired during the Plame investigation. But although he said it, he doesn’t know why.

Although Carol Lam was supposedly fired for not following immigration enforcement policy, no one ever spoke to her about it.

David Iglesias was supposedly fired for not prosecuting bogus voter fraud claims.

Gonzales lied.

Most overused line today: I don’t remember.

Anything else?

When a subject comes along that doesn’t fit with what a republican represents, what do they do? They take away the right of free speech. And, from all places, right there on capitol grounds! Am I shocked? No. Sickened? Yes, but not shocked.

IOL-North America:

Gore’s ‘Live Earth’ concert gets opposition

Washington - Republicans in Congress are trying to bar former vice-president Al Gore’s anti-global warming mega-concert from its planned venue on the steps of the US Capitol building.
[...]

But some Republicans have balked over the cost of providing police for the event, while others insist that the concert is a partisan Democratic event and as such, not allowed on Capitol grounds.

One outspoken opponent of the concert is Senator James Inhofe, a longtime debunker of cataclysmic climate change, which he has derided as a “hoax”.

“Senator Inhofe objects to having any events on the Capitol grounds that are either highly partisan or politically controversial - and the proposed Gore concert is both,” said his spokesperson Marc Morano.

Inhofe and Gore locked horns last week at a standing room only Senate hearing on global warming.

Morano said formal moves to block the concert have been lodged by Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

The Senate passed the Iraq bill 51/47. Two not voting, Johnson (D-SD) an Enzi (R-WY). Where’s Enzi?? Now onto the veto.

Questions need to be asked about this case and this U.S. attorney. Why was this case shoveled under the rug?

“The U.S. attorney’s office in Texas actually prepared indictments in this case,” Angle told WND. “But when the word came from Washington, that’s when Baumann wrote his letter declining prosecution. Sutton’s office dropped the matter on the desk of the local district attorney, but nobody from Sutton’s office said ‘if you can-t go on this case, we’ll help you out.’”

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, both already under siege for other matters, are now being accused of failing to prosecute officers of the Texas Youth Commission after a Texas Ranger investigation documented that guards and administrators were sexually abusing the institution’s teenage boy inmates.

Among the charges in the Texas Ranger report were that administrators would rouse boys from their sleep for the purpose of conducting all-night sex parties.

Ray Brookins, one of the officials named in the report, was a Texas prison guard before being hired at the youth commission school. As a prison guard, Brookins had a history of disciplinary and petty criminal records dating back 21 years. He retained his job despite charges of using pornography on the job, including viewing nude photos of men and women on state computers.

The Texas Youth Comission controversy traces back to a criminal investigation conducted in 2005 by Texas Ranger Brian Burzynski. The investigation revealed key employees at the West Texas State School in Pyote, Texas, were systematically abusing youth inmates in their custody.

Burzynski presented his findings to the attorney general in Texas, to the U.S. Attorney Sutton, and to the Department of Justice civil rights division. From all three, Burzynski received no interest in prosecuting the alleged sexual offenses.

More here

You can also read more about this case here

More about the messed up Texas Youth Commission here

The last female U.S. veteran of WWI, Charlotte Winters, died. I wonder what she thought of politics today, and the mess we created in Iraq. May she rest in peace!

Kyle Sampson testifies at 10.

Storms in the heartland.

Seems things are out of control in Diwaniya, Iraq

What’s new in the financial world Bur$atil? No news is good news, eh?

BAGHDAD - Ambassador Ryan Crocker was sworn in as the new top U.S. envoy to Iraq on Thursday, saying he was taking over the “most critical foreign policy mission” facing the United States.

The oath was administered by junior foreign service officer Tina Tran, who had served with Crocker in Pakistan and has been in the Baghdad embassy since last summer.

Crocker, who is fluent in Arabic, told Iraqi employees of the embassy in Arabic that “you are the heroes of the country, in the true meaning of the word.”

Taking up where his predecessor, Zalmy Khalilzad, left off, the 57-year-old Crocker warned Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki that his government “must take all the necessary steps to unite the country.”

The new ambassador left no doubt of his commitment to the Bush administration’s policy in Iraq, which is under withering attack in the Democrat-controlled Congress.

“President Bush’s policy is the right one. There has been progress; there is also much more to be done,” he said.

After listing challenges faced in the coming months, including shepherding benchmark legislation through the parliament, Crocker said: “All of this will be very hard but if I thought it was impossible I would not be standing here today.”

More at Chron.com

Last sentence……. now the Justice Dept. admits they gave congress inaccurate info, and that Rove did play a role in the firings. Hearing is on today at 10:00 am on C-Span3. Must see tv!

WASHINGTON, March 28 - Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales endured blunt criticism Tuesday from federal prosecutors who questioned the firings of eight United States attorneys, complained that the dismissals had undermined morale and expressed broader grievances about his leadership, according to people briefed on the discussion.

Several of the prosecutors said the dismissals caused them to wonder about their own standing and distracted their employees, according to one person familiar with the discussions. Others asked Mr. Gonzales about the removal of Daniel C. Bogden, the former United States attorney in Nevada, a respected career prosecutor whose ouster has never been fully explained by the Justice Department.

While Mr. Gonzales’s trip was part of a long’scheduled tour, he has been meeting in recent days with prosecutors in an effort to repair the damage caused by the dismissals. President Bush has backed Mr. Gonzales, but his tenure at the Justice Department may still be in peril as lawmakers in both parties have called for his resignation, questioned his credibility and raised doubts that he can lead the department.

His former chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson, is to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday. In his prepared testimony, Mr. Sampson, who resigned two weeks ago, said the prosecutors were fired not for political reasons, but because they failed to follow the president’s priorities. He is likely to be closely questioned about the extent of Mr. Gonzales’s involvement in planning the firings.

On Wednesday, the Justice Department released more than 200 additional pages of e-mail messages and other documents and sent a letter to lawmakers saying that it had given Congress inaccurate information in an earlier letter that asserted that Karl Rove, the senior White House adviser, had played no role in the removals.

More at the NYTimes

(Cross-posted at Vagabond Scholar)

(Click here for a larger image.)

A recent “Holy Crap” installment of Mike’s Blog Round-Up links the Time magazine cover story, “The Case for Teaching The Bible,” by their senior religion writer, David van Biema. (The cover, as you can see above, says “Why We Should Teach the Bible in Public School (But very, very carefully).”)
Read more »

(Cross-posted at Vagabond Scholar)

HTML Mencken at Sadly, No! has a great post from 3/10/07 called “Gaywads Want to Persecute Religious People!” While his post is pithier and funnier than this one will be, its substance directly relates to The Chart Project, most specifically The Social Tolerance Charts and The Religion-in-Society Charts, so I felt compelled to take another look.

Again, I-d read the Sadly, No! post first. But here are the key points of a little discussion over at the Corner at the National Review Online.

In a 3/9/07 post, “Can Religious Freedom Survive Gay Liberation?” David Frum argues that:

There is a widespread view that gay liberation is a movement toward greater freedom. Up to a point, that was true. That point, however, is now receding in the background. The movement for gay equality has rapidly evolved into movement to restrict personal freedoms, including freedoms of religion and conscience. The British example is not a special case. What is being done there today will be demanded here tomorrow.

Andrew Stuttaford, who HTML Mencken describes as “a libertarian and frequently an adult voice in contrast to the Corner’s playground cacaphony,” replies (also on 3/9/07):

Can Religious Freedom Survive Gay Liberation

That’s the question David Frum asks over on his blog. Sure it can.

The more interesting question however is the extent to which religious belief should be privileged above all others. You can, quite legitimately, question the range and definition of anti-discrimination laws, but once a democracy has put those laws in place, I can think of no particular reason why some people should be exempted from that law, simply on the grounds of religion. To do so is to say that religious belief is somehow more deserving of special protection than other (perhaps no less deeply held) ideologies, an idea that, however well-intentioned, is irrational at best, dangerous at worse.

Read more »

(Cross-posted at Vagabond Scholar)

Lights up on the studio of a typical political talk show.

Rightwinger: I think we should kill all the fags.

Polite Democrat: Um, I disagree.

Rightwinger: You’re a fag, aren’t you? Or a fag-lover?

Polite Democrat: No, I - I am not a homosexual, but everyone has a right to live their life in the manner they choose…

Rightwinger: And everyone has a right to believe what they want, right?

Polite Democrat: Yes…

Rightwinger: Well, I believe we should kill all the fags!

Polite Democrat: I really don’t think…

Moderator: Surely there’s some middle ground here.

Polite Democrat: I suppose.

Rightwinger: No.

Moderator: Why don’t we agree to just kill half the fags?

Rightwinger: No, all of them.

Polite Democrat: Everyone has a right…

Moderator: (to Rightwinger) How about three quarters? (to Polite Democrat) Three quarters? Come on, whaddaya say?

Polite Democrat: The Constitution…

Rightwinger: No, every single one of those faggots has to die.

Moderator: Well, how about a different compromise? Instead of killing half, or all of them -

Rightwinger: All.

Moderator: Why don’t you just beat them all half to death?

The Polite Democrat sits befuddled as the Righwinger ponders this, then starts chatting it over with the Moderator as the show goes to commercial.

(This tasteless, unsubtle satire was brought to you by the same folks who brought you Color Commentary. More on false equivalency to come!)

WASHINGTON - The Marine Corps wants billions of dollars in emergency funding so its troops operating outside bases in Iraq can travel in new armored vehicles instead of Humvees, according to Pentagon documents.

Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., supports the Marines- request and has proposed an amendment to add $1.5 billion in emergency funds this year to buy the vehicles for all the services. The commandant of the Marine Corps, Gen. James Conway, said in a letter to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Peter Pace, that they can reduce casualties by 80 percent.

“The American public would embrace this in a heartbeat” if they understood the vehicles- safety record relative to Humvees, Biden said. The vehicles- V’shaped hulls deflect the force of roadside bombs; Humvees- flat bottoms take the brunt of blasts.

The military needs $4 billion this year and $4.4 billion in 2008 to pay for the 7,774 armored vehicles it needs, Biden said. The $1.5 billion he’s seeking now would allow 2,500 of the vehicles to be deployed by the end of the year.

Homemade bombs known as improvised explosive devices cause 70 percent of U.S. casualties in Iraq, Pentagon records show. However, no Marines have died in attacks on the armored vehicles the military calls “mine-resistant ambush-protected” vehicles.

“That makes it a top priority to get them to the field as fast as possible,” said Lt. Col. T.V. Johnson, a spokesman for Conway.

Demand for the vehicles from field commanders has soared since last year. In their first urgent request, the Marines asked for 185 vehicles in May 2006. By November, the Army, Marines and Navy were seeking 4,060. It’s now 7,774.

If authorized, contractors could produce 1,200 of the vehicles per month by December, Conway’s letter says. The Marines want 3,700 of them, while the Army is seeking 2,500; the Navy, Air Force and Special Operations Command have requested the rest.

The Pentagon has been reluctant to acknowledge the need for more of the vehicles because it has downplayed the costs of the war, Biden said. First, the Pentagon responded slowly to shortages of body armor, he said. Then, it was armored vehicles, and recently, it was the poor conditions for soldiers recovering at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, he said.

“Now it’s MRAPs,” Biden said.

More at The Navy Times