Don Imus will be suspended for two weeks, and the Rutgers team has agreed to meet with him.
The Captain has some thoughts; Michelle Malkin has lots of links.
I'm a bit surprised by the "Hold the front page - shock jock says something shocking!" reaction, but clearly Imus' comments were outrageous, deplorable and unacceptable coming from a white guy. In his apology appearance with Al Sharpton (who is now an arbiter of racial etiquette after building his career as a race-baiter?), Imus did point out that rappers use similar language and win Academy Awards; Sharpton responded that he deplored that as well (search on "Sharpton" for a monumental a**-kicking of hip-hoppers here), but who knew? If Sharpton wants to organize a boycott Imus, let him organize a boycott of a few record labels, too - as if.
OlbyWatch has a classic of an Olbermann double standard on criticizing one's own network (briefly, Olby explains that Bill O'Reilly ought to whack Fox to show he's a man even though Olbermann won't go after a fellow MSNBCer); the NY Times points out that Imus has a lot of support from the media and book promoters who love his platform.
And a last thought for the Libby-obsessed - Imus was mentioned during the Libby trial because he tortured Andrea Mitchell over her changing story about whether she knew about Valerie Plame's CIA affiliation prior to the Bob Novak column.
However! When he comes back, Imus will be on a short leash. So, does this mean he will never vex another NBC Newser with questions about their role in the Plame debacle? That is great news for Tim Russert and David Gregory.
It is pretty clear at this point that neither NBC News nor anyone else will report on the David Gregory mystery - did he or did he not receive a Plame leak from Ari Fleischer while in Africa? If he did not, that contradicts prosecution witness Ari Fleischer; if he did, that contradicts prosecution witness Tim Russert.
So, will a newly chastened and compliant Don Imus let this topic go? Or in a mad bid for relevance and in an attempt to re-establish some street cred, will he pop the question when Gregory makes a guest appearance?
I'm betting on El Foldo.
God--a masterstroke McGuire: you combined Imus, sharpton, political correctness, Olbermann and the libby unindicted co-conspirators in ONE THREAD--Way to go!
Posted by: RogerA | April 10, 2007 at 02:37 PM
That's a good bet,TM. How many days has Gregory remained duct taped since the trial?
Posted by: clarice | April 10, 2007 at 02:37 PM
I'm a little surprised at Imus' contrition. He's not generally a contrite guy. One funny note - if you go to the Imus blog it says it has been "suspended" (apparently for non-payment, not for rap speak).
WE may as well codify it: Political correctness applies primarily to white republican males. White republican females get a bit of a pass, but my gawd, a black liberal lesbian can say any damn thing she wants - Rosie O"Donell must have some indian blood somewhere.
It's a big bore.
And no I'm not condoning "nappy-headed ho", but I was desparate to see someone at that press conference implore the rest of them to not take themselves so seriously. Taking offense at everything is not the way to get ahead in this world.
Posted by: Jane | April 10, 2007 at 02:44 PM
Well, just loosen Gregory up a little bit...hic...
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | April 10, 2007 at 02:45 PM
Stop the presses: Shock Jock Shocks
He's been doing this since 1971..and the problem is now?
Posted by: RogerA | April 10, 2007 at 02:50 PM
I think Greg P. over at NRO Media blog has a few lines from Imus indicating that he isn't going to grovel in contriteness forever. I was, like Jane, surprised at his contrition, but like I said last night, that could all turn quickly.
Posted by: centralcal | April 10, 2007 at 02:52 PM
See a tongue-in-cheek visual of Imus and his newfound buddy, Michael Richards, hanging out and counting sheep...here:
www.thoughttheater.com
Posted by: Daniel DiRito | April 10, 2007 at 02:59 PM
David Gregory is not a mystery. He's a jackass. And the idea of Al Sharpton being any kind of mediator is laughable. He's a Jesse Jackson wannabe. And since Jesse Jackson is a jackass also what does that make Sharpton?
Posted by: BarbaraS | April 10, 2007 at 03:09 PM
"what does that make Sharpton?" a jackabee? a jackawanna?
Posted by: RogerA | April 10, 2007 at 03:11 PM
I just really wish one of the Rutgers women had stood up, taken the microphone, thanked Imus for the apology and suggested they all get back to real life, stuff that actually matters, like kicking ass on the basketball court, or getting great grades, or excelling at job interviews. I'd be a lot more hopeful about this country if that had happened.
Posted by: Jane | April 10, 2007 at 03:15 PM
I blame Bush.
Imus would never have made those comments if Bush had imposed a fascist theocracy.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | April 10, 2007 at 03:25 PM
John McWhorter:
---------quote--------
...the quest for an America where no one ever makes passing observations that are less than respectful of minority groups is futile. And why are so many of us so obsessed with chasing that rainbow anyway? The truth is that black people who go to pieces whenever anyone says a little something are revealing that they are not too sure about themselves.
Imus hosts a radio show and a lot of people listen to it. During a few seconds last week he said something tacky. The show went on, as did life. Black people continued to constitute most new AIDS cases, black men continued to come out of prison unsupervised. And we're supposed to be most interested in Imus saying "nappy-headed ho's"?
What creates that hypersensitivity is a poor racial self-image. Where, after all, did Imus pick up the very terminology he used? Rap music and the language young black people use themselves on the street to refer to one another.
What Imus said is lowdown indeed, but so is the way blacks refer to each other. And life goes on.
Street theater is not strength. It saps energy better put to other uses.
--------endquote---------
Posted by: PatrickR | April 10, 2007 at 03:36 PM
Speaking of mourning, I understand that Kurt Vonnegut is in a coma, and the plug is being pulled on his life support machines.
Posted by: Neo | April 10, 2007 at 03:42 PM
So, just where was it that people picked up the notion that there is something wrong with referring to a woman using the word for a common garden tool used to kill weeds? Sure, this idiot said it, but is it his fault that no one needed to translate for him?
Posted by: cathyf | April 10, 2007 at 03:44 PM
"Street theater is not strength. It saps energy better put to other uses. "
Street theater is Sharpton's political modus operandi. And, if this particular play ends up actually getting Imus fired, then Hillary (who Imus can't stand) will end up owing Al for getting rid of this thorn in her side.
Al's not doing this for nothing.
Posted by: MaidMarion | April 10, 2007 at 03:46 PM
PeterUK,
Claims made in a British national newspaper that women do not belong in the Armed Forces have angered some high-ranking British Army officials.
The Daily Mail newspaper said that women were not suited to the rough-and-tumble of conflict, and should "pack up their troubles in their old kit bags" and go home.
The outcry comes after the Iranian Government allowed the release of 15 Royal Navy personnel captured whilst swimming in Iranian waters. Amongst their number was Faye Turney who smokes 100 cigarettes a day, and sleeps with her rifle.
She was a particular favorite of Iranian President Mahmoud Armadinnerlady, who said:
"Britain is right to use women in its Armed Forces. They should use more. That way, they will be easier to beat in a scrap."
Regards,
Demo
Posted by: DEMO | April 10, 2007 at 03:50 PM
Poor Imus.
Posted by: SunnyDay | April 10, 2007 at 03:58 PM
IMUS In The Mourning? Great Line TM.
Question,
Was Imus the guy everybody was mad at a few years ago for outrageous comments at some Press Club roast when Clinton was President? I seem to recall that.
What struck me listening to him groveling to Reverend Al, was how many times Imus used the "Sir" word; "Yes Sir", "No Sir", "Yes Sir", "No Sir", etc. I haven't heard so many "Sir's" since I was in bootcamp, and if I'm not much mistaken, I don't think I've ever heard Imus use the "Sir" word on his TV show with almost anybody, though I must admit I ain't a regular listener. I kept waiting for Sharpton to bark out, "Push-up's forever, begin!" And what the crap was Imus doing referring to himself in the 3rd person on Sharpton's show as 'a Cracker', as if that's gonna' help the situation and make all us Cracker's and Gringo's and Oreo's and Canuck's and Limey's and Kraut's and Wop's and Spic's and Russkee's and Camel Jockey's and Butterheads and Mick's and Yid's and Flip's and Kiwi's and Cheese Eating Surrender Monkey's feel better about him. Push-ups forever begin.
Posted by: Daddy | April 10, 2007 at 04:03 PM
Demo,
At the risk of encouraging you, what are you talking about?
I reviewed all the comments on THIS thread, and PeterUK has not even commented here yet. But, you still address him as if you are in the middle of a conversation and post something completely off-topic about woman in the military in the U.K.
It is these types of complete non-sequiturs that make no sense that make people believe you are simply attempting to disrupt a conversation.
What more, you simply quote the piece without any analysis of your own, so what is the point of that? Do you agree that women should not be in combat? or disagree?
Posted by: Great Banana | April 10, 2007 at 04:06 PM
OFF TOPIC and just for you Daddy - DNA shows that Birkhead is the father of Anna Nicole's baby....sorry for the disruption. LOL
Posted by: Specter | April 10, 2007 at 04:21 PM
Well, I don't have a lot of time for Imus, but he's occasionally entertaining. The initial gaffe and apology was pretty lame (the wimpy apology particularly: "I did a bad thing . . . but I'm a good person"). But the "you people" remark that got him suspended is ridiculous. And the pure inanity of Sharpton being the one to call him on it is, well, priceless.
It's also worth pointing out he didn't originate the "ho" comment (more offensive than "nappy headed," I'd think). And since nobody else wants to bring up the Velvet Jones School of Techonology, I think I should. (Sorry, couldn't find any live clips.)
Posted by: Cecil Turner | April 10, 2007 at 04:27 PM
And since Jesse Jackson is a jackass also what does that make Sharpton?
The ass's ass?
Posted by: Sue | April 10, 2007 at 04:27 PM
Repeating pretty much what I said yesterday.
The whole thing is stupid, if you ask me. I had to Google nappy-headed to even understand the problem. When I did, I found websites with that name, or a version of it, devoted to the sisterhood of the natural black woman. Google “nappy” and you’ll see. It is all so hypocritical, especially when the two loud-mouthed complainants are Sharpton and Jackson. They are not exactly pure themselves. And to be perfectly frank, as a woman, I’m more offended at a man calling a female athlete a “Ho” than I am about him using a questionable adjective to describe a hair type. Would sweaty-headed HOs be any less offensive? How ‘bout straight-haired HOs or stringy-haired HOs or empty-headed HOs? I know, how ‘bout Afro-headed HO? Back in the day, everyone, black or white wanted to sport an Afro. As I recall, men were even submitting to having their hair permed in order to get a good Afro.
I heard speculation that the Clinton personal destruction machine is behind the push to muzzle Imus. I’ve never listened to Imus on the radio, but I do see him on the MSNBC broadcast from time to time, but if I’m up that late, I usually watch Fox and Friends instead, so it is no great loss to me. I just don’t like to see someone get suspended or lose his job over hypocrisy.
Posted by: Sara | April 10, 2007 at 04:36 PM
Al Sharpton: The Democrat's David Duke
What bothers me the most about the Imus story is Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. And some Dr. on H&C last night who acted like he had a needle poked up his ass.
Posted by: Sue | April 10, 2007 at 04:37 PM
I, for one, am happy for Larry Birkhead. It is admirable, albeit unusual, for a man to fight so hard to prove paternity and he hung in there from Day One. Now maybe we won't have to hear about ANS every news cycle. Although I did read someplace the way you know things are going well in Iraq is the wall-to-wall coverage of ANS and the court battles rather than hourly doses of blood and violence.
Posted by: Sara | April 10, 2007 at 04:41 PM
Jane,
"Taking offense at everything is not the way to get ahead in this world."
Sadly that hasn't been true for the last thirty years,being offended is a great career move,did wonders for the feminist movement.
Who's Imus?
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 04:52 PM
Great Banana
"Amongst their number was Faye Turney who smokes 100 cigarettes a day, and sleeps with her rifle."
That is a foul calumny,she only smokes fifty and as she says "Happiness is a warm gun".
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 04:57 PM
Just found out she slammed ImADamNutJob with a putdown
GUTSY Faye Turney turned the tables on Iranian tyrant Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as he freed her in front of TV cameras — making him SQUIRM.
She was the first of the 15 hostages ushered forward during the cynical stunt in the madman’s own Tehran palace garden.
As Faye stood in front of bearded Ahmadinejad he asked her through a translator: “How is your daughter?”
Faye fumed in response: “I don’t know, Mr President, I haven’t seen her for 13 days — remember?”
The Islamic fanatic stuttered: “Oh yes. But haven’t you been allowed a phone call to her?”
Faye replied: “No I most certainly have not”.
Taken aback by her forthright response, Ahmadinejad was momentarily lost for words. Red-faced, he then muttered: “Er, well, good luck in your life and your future”.
And with that he nervously signalled to flunkies to move Faye on so he could meet the next hostage.
An aide then gave her a children’s doll as the president’s personal present for her only child Molly, three.
Posted by: SlimGuy | April 10, 2007 at 05:59 PM
Tears as Faye says 'I'm sorry'
Sun TV Exclusive: April 10, 2007 : BRAVE Royal Navy sailor Faye Turney has defended her decision to sell her topless Iran photos for a reputed six figure sum after the Ministry of Defence caved in and accepted the standard 15% agency fee.
At the Admiralty Pub in Whitehall Vice Admiral Charles Style said Ms Turney's fellow captives would also be given an opportunity to sell their nude pics and that the Ministry of Defense was negotiating on their behalf with Sun TV.
Posted by: DEMO | April 10, 2007 at 06:05 PM
"Who's Imus?"
A fellow whom the Beast of Chappaqua wishes destroyed. He said some very unkind things about Bubba during his tribulations and the Beast never, ever forgets. Plus, as noted by Tom, he had the temerity to actually expose a bit of the Russert, Mitchell, Gregory perjury practice. He doesn't carry Lyin' Tim's weight with the network and has made himself disposable.
It's a hoot seeing the racebaiters Sharpton and Jackson drageed onstage one more time to do their number. 'Ol Hymietown and Tawana's Best Friend are just the people to offer reproof for ethnic slurs.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 10, 2007 at 06:07 PM
LOL Rick - you were punning when you said Imus doesn't carry Tim's "weight", right. Tim's gotta outweigh him by at least 75 pounds...
Posted by: Specter | April 10, 2007 at 06:15 PM
Axey ::grin::
"The ass's ass?"
Or in deference to all our newly civil colleagues, the ass hat.
Posted by: JM Hanes | April 10, 2007 at 06:19 PM
Thank you Mr Ballard,
What do you think of the former great civilisation of Persia being reduced to piracy and banditry to gain a place on the world stage? Anyone would think Iran was rat infested third world country,amazing how a theocracy can drag a country down.
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 06:21 PM
"It's a hoot seeing the racebaiters Sharpton and Jackson drageed onstage one more time to do their number."
With Obama doing so well in the polls and campaign $$, Al and Jesse must be fearing for their political futures.
This stunt is Al's attempt to remain politically relevant.
Posted by: MaidMarion | April 10, 2007 at 06:23 PM
This might have something to do with all the Peace legislation-department of peace, Hillary's public service school, etc. The original idea was to creat an alternative to the military and draft. We eneded up with free education for a period of service not in the military, but forgot that millions of vets are coming home and have to pay for education. White House hopeful and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) has this figured, but is that Mass or Conn that will be giving free education to vets?
Posted by: Roger | April 10, 2007 at 06:29 PM
I was very disappointed to see the Rutgers team talk about themselves as victims and all of the things that were taken from them as a result of Imus' stupid remarks. Crude gossip reflects only on the person speaking- not on the person or persons being trashed.
Typad has me as "sad" but we all know I'm BAD.
Posted by: bad | April 10, 2007 at 06:31 PM
Hi, Bad! We haven't seen you for a hile. Hope all is well.
Posted by: clarice | April 10, 2007 at 06:35 PM
Al Sharpton for President!!!
Posted by: Nick Kasoff - The Thug Report | April 10, 2007 at 06:35 PM
"What do you think of the former great civilisation of Persia being reduced to piracy and banditry to gain a place on the world stage?"
Mr Uk,
A rather typical problem for monarchies at times, isn't it? One might think that the blood of Cyrus and Darius would have produced better than Xerxes but "shirtsleeve to shirtsleeve in three generations" seems to have held as true for Persian satraps as it does for Kennedys...
It is rather odd that nothing seems to have changed in Persia in 2500 years. Those folks seem awfully slow learners. Perhaps shining a much brighter light upon them would help them to find the correct path?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 10, 2007 at 06:38 PM
Sadly that hasn't been true for the last thirty years,being offended is a great career move,did wonders for the feminist movement.
PUK,
Oh I remember it well. I was in the "women's" generation. We were all the rage. We got the job, we got the admissions to law school (you still had to be black to get the money.)We got all sorts of bandwidth just because we were female and someone decided it was time to atone.
And I noticed when I got out of law school that a whole bunch of women groused when everything didn't go their way, and they groused at men.
Now I grew up in an all female household, and I really like men. So I decided I could learn a lot more from the people (men) who had been there and done that, than from the ones doing the whining. Best decision I ever made. It's been a whole lot more fun (and a hell of a lot more prosperous) hobnobbing with the big guys than the whiners.
I'd say that sort of thing is one of the biggest mistakes any minority makes. My business partner is not so afflicted despite the fact that she is also leading the way, which probably explains her success as well.
And assholes (can we still say the "A" word?) like Al Sharpton do more to hinder people on the way up than anyone.
Hey Sad/Bad - good to see you!
Posted by: Jane | April 10, 2007 at 06:43 PM
Hey - it's registered user like ...test
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 10, 2007 at 06:44 PM
It is rather odd that nothing seems to have changed in Persia in 2500 years.
Actually everything changed in Persia in 1978. It was a sophisticated, prosperous, capitalist society - the Paris of the mideast (back when being Paris was good) before Khomeni deposed the Shah. My persian friends blame Carter.
Posted by: Jane | April 10, 2007 at 06:45 PM
Mr Ballard,
Rumour has it that President Ahmamoodydude,is simply trying to get the US to invade so he can get better dentistry,as you know his present avuncular smile is like the gleam on a coffin handle.
It would be better,if he wants to get into the big league for him to change his name,where would Adolph Schickelgruber and Joseph Vissarionovich Djugashvili be today without rebranding?
Yes he can get the front pages but who knows his name?
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 06:49 PM
Clarice
Forgot to give you an attagal from your article about the Clintoons being read by Rush on his show.
Wonder if he lurks here sometimes?
Posted by: SlimGuy | April 10, 2007 at 06:59 PM
I don't like Imus at all, and I would caution anyone who thinks he's either a conservative or a Bush supporter. He's a vile fellow, and I'm enjoying seeing him grovel. Why he felt that the appropriate forum for him to advance his quest to look foolish was Al Sharpton's radio program is a mystery to me, but if it demeans the man further it's fine with me.
And while I generally agree with everything Jane has to say, and would infinitely prefer the Shah to the current theocracy, I don't think we should delude ourselves about life in Iran under his regime. He ran quite an authoritarian show, and had a particularly vicious secret police and torture squad at his disposal.
Other Tom
Posted by: Other Tom | April 10, 2007 at 07:02 PM
Good God--I didn't even notice until just no, but for some reason the TypeKey God now recognizes me for who I really am. I am not close to figuring this stuff out, and in fact I seem to get further from it every day. Could be the booze...
Posted by: Other Tom | April 10, 2007 at 07:04 PM
"just NOW..."
Posted by: Other Tom | April 10, 2007 at 07:05 PM
Now I grew up in an all female household, and I really like men. So I decided I could learn a lot more from the people (men) who had been there and done that, than from the ones doing the whining. Best decision I ever made. It's been a whole lot more fun (and a hell of a lot more prosperous) hobnobbing with the big guys than the whiners.
Jane: My Mom left college in 1929, just months before the Big Crash and the onset of the depression, with Masters in Economics and Finance. Neither field was open to women to any great extent. She had worked with her suffragette Mother in earlier years. She said she made up her mind to be tough as those suffragettes and as savvy as the male executives she admired in the business world. She didn't whine. When she met roadblocks, she reconsidered her options and found work-a-rounds until ultimately she rose to the top of her profession. She preferred working with men, yet never forgot her gender and often reached back and gave other young women a chance to get their foot in the door. At her memorial, men I didn't even know spoke and said she was the most capable and brilliant woman they'd ever worked for and they trusted her judgment implicitly (a compliment I know made her smile wherever she is) and women I didn't know stood in line to give her credit for their own success. She would have liked you, Jane, and I know she would have liked your attitude. In fact, I think she would have liked all the tough, smart women who hang out here at JOM and most of the men too.
Posted by: Sara | April 10, 2007 at 07:12 PM
It is rather odd that nothing seems to have changed in Persia in 2500 years.
What I don't understand about the Persian/Arab world is how they can live in the 7th century and still be responsible for some of the most beautiful buildings and architectural design in the world. It is like they had it and then lost it.
Posted by: Sara | April 10, 2007 at 07:16 PM
> Criminey off
Posted by: Sara | April 10, 2007 at 07:17 PM
Romney targets Pelosi in foreign-policy speech
Posted by: Sara | April 10, 2007 at 07:27 PM
I'm losing it today. Sorry
Posted by: Sara | April 10, 2007 at 07:28 PM
Sara,
The civilisations were there thousands of years before the Arab light cavalry came riding out of the Arabian peninsula.Before the conquests, the peoples of the Middle East were not regarded as Arabs,what we see is the remnants of the Arab Empire and the later Ottoman Empire.
Our main misconceptions about the history comes from the fact that many of the diplomatic corps were Arabists.
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 07:30 PM
I have been reborn as MayBeex.
Perhaps that will bring some excitement to my posts.
Posted by: Maybeex | April 10, 2007 at 07:39 PM
Lawerence should understand that they were nomads, they owned the whole continent. It's like Indians owned North America.
Romney is doing the Pelosi thing because no one else will and he'll probably get elected.
Kennedy sold out of the stock market just before the crash and had alot of cash on hand to buy real estate. Anybody know him?
Posted by: Roger | April 10, 2007 at 07:42 PM
Maybeex
Get your mind out of the gutter gal, I need all the room I can spare there to get a good view of the lay of the land. LOL
Posted by: SlimGuy | April 10, 2007 at 07:56 PM
I'm proud of Romney. It is time someone held her to account in this whole business of her attempting to usurp president Bush's power as commander-in-chief. Then Harry reid turns down the President's invitation. his constituents in nevada should vote out illegal land deal harry in the next election. he can't serve their interests if he is not communicating with the President. he is a sorry excuse for a majority leader. As for Pelosi- Dick Gephardt is starting to look good in comparison to her partisan hack ways.
Posted by: maryrose | April 10, 2007 at 07:58 PM
"Our main misconceptions about the history comes from the fact that many of the diplomatic corps were Arabists."
Mr Uk,
In part, to be sure. The other tiny problem is the almost complete ignorance concerning the tenets of islam. I still see calls for a 'moslem reformation' which indicates a certain lack of understanding concerning the fact that al Queada is the military arm of a true 'reformation'. It's like the dream of the existance of 'moderate muslims' - not a glimmer that a 'moderate muslim' is definitionally an apostate and subject to a death sentence.
Shah Pahlavi lost his throne for the 'sin' of rapid secularization. Anyone proposing 'moderation' or 'secularization' of a moslem country needs to understand that the potential penalty for attempting to do so doesn't involve just a fine or a bit of time in jail. Apostates in Iran spend their time hanging around cranes.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 10, 2007 at 07:58 PM
sad/bad
Welcome back! I hope all is coming along ok. You're still on my prayer list.
Posted by: maryrose | April 10, 2007 at 08:02 PM
Re: Pelosi: She will negotiate with Syria, but won't meet with the president about funding our troops.
He ran quite an authoritarian show, and had a particularly vicious secret police and torture squad at his disposal.
That is certainly true. Some people in Iran had fabulous lives under the Shah - but not everyone. Now everyone is miserable, something liberals seem to feel is very important.
Posted by: Jane | April 10, 2007 at 08:04 PM
I am well. Chemo is kicking my butt right now. The spirit is willing but the body thinks it is owned by Tim Conway's old man character on The Carol Burnett Show.
BAD
Posted by: bad | April 10, 2007 at 08:04 PM
BBC: Iran film 'to tell sailors' tale'
The Iranian military says it will soon release a CD and a book on the arrest, interrogation and statements by UK sailors aboard the HMS Spyship held in Iran for two weeks. The culture and propaganda office of the joint chief of staff of Iran's armed forces is negotiating the UK book publishing rights with a British Tabloid. Proceeds from the sales of the book will go into a fund for seamanship training for the twelve brave compass-illiterate British sailors who wandered into Iranian terrestrial waters.
Posted by: DEMO | April 10, 2007 at 08:09 PM
Mr Ballard,
Amazing how the ancient Silk Road gave way to the Polyester Road. I blame the Americans for inventing oil,you would store it under the Clampett's camp site.
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 08:15 PM
"Iranian terrestrial waters."
Obviously not of this world.
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 08:16 PM
Who will train the Iranians who initially placed the event in Iraqi "terrestrial" waters? I suspect those poor fellows' training has already begun in earnest...
Posted by: Other Tom | April 10, 2007 at 08:19 PM
Michelle Malkin points out that there are far more important news reports than Imus.
And she is right.
Posted by: lurker9876 | April 10, 2007 at 08:22 PM
Bad, check in when you can. We are all pulling for you.
Posted by: clarice | April 10, 2007 at 08:22 PM
Yeah Bad, what Clarice said. We are sending good energy in your direction.
Posted by: Jane | April 10, 2007 at 08:31 PM
Mr Ballard,
Islam itself was only brought to the Middle East and Persia by conquest.The present mess is the dying embers of the Ottoman Empire,hastily extinguished at the end of WWI.Sadly the world powers were too exhausted at the end of the Great War to do a proper job.
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 08:34 PM
"The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all your Tears wash out a Word of it".
-- Omar Khayyam
How things have changed.
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 08:43 PM
Pride of British fleet takes a body blow
The UK's largest electrical retailers, Curry's, today admitted that Sat Nav sets sold to the Royal Navy "may have been a bit iffy". However, the high street giant refused to take the blame for the diplomatic crisis with Iran that ensued.
"The set was 13 months old - we tried hard to explain the benefits of an extended warranty but the Admiralty would have none of it," the spokesman explained. "All I can do is offer is our sincere apology and, as a gesture of goodwill, I am prepared to offer a refund.
Posted by: DEMO | April 10, 2007 at 08:48 PM
Imus' advertisers running for the hills:
"LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Companies including Procter & Gamble Co. and Staples Inc. are pulling advertisements from Don Imus' show due to the shock jock's on-air racial slur about the Rutgers University women's basketball team.
Imus has apologized for referring to members of the team as "nappy-headed hos" on his April 4 show. CBS Radio and NBC Universal, which broadcasts the show on MSNBC cable television, suspended the popular personality for two weeks, beginning next Monday.
But that was not enough to satisfy Procter & Gamble, one of the world's biggest makers of consumer products, or Staples, the world's largest office supplies retailer, which had only recently sponsored the Imus MSNBC TV show.
Reuters Pictures
Editors Choice: Best pictures
from the last 24 hours.
View Slideshow
"Based on recent comments that were made on the show, it prompted us to kind of take a look at our decision to advertise and as a result we decided to stop advertising on that program," said Staples spokesman Paul Capelli said.
Cincinnati, Ohio-based P&G also withdrew its sponsorship.
"Effective Friday, April 6, we pulled all P&G's brand advertising from the MSNBC daytime rotation," said P&G spokeswoman Jeannie Tharrington. P&G would not advertise again "until we can evaluate the Imus situation fully," she said."
http://www.reuters.com/article/peopleNews/idUSN1041502520070411
Posted by: clarice | April 10, 2007 at 09:05 PM
In the article to which Demo linked, I have a hard time understanding the Brits' assertion that the fifteen were not prisoners of war. I'll go back and review the applicable Convention, but from memory I believe they were.
I also find this rather mystifying:
"The ease of their capture led critics to scoff that the pride of the navy had surrendered first and apologised later. Stung by the jibes, one senior defence official said it was easy for armchair warriors to sound off, but the servicemen's instructions 'were not to start a war with Iran.'"
It's a very odd formulation to suggest that, when a nation commits an act of war against your armed forces, they are "starting a war" if they exercise their right (and, in the US Navy, their duty) to defend themselves. Iran's conduct was indeed an act of war, regardless of the position of the various craft at the time.
When you get to the point where an adversary knows that he can commit acts of war against you, and that you will not resist for fear of "starting a war," you can expect trouble down the road.
Posted by: Other Tom | April 10, 2007 at 09:13 PM
PUK says Britain's joining in the ICC has meant that every soldier and his commander fears--rightly--he may be tried for actually fighting a war,OT.
Posted by: clarice | April 10, 2007 at 09:17 PM
Here's the language of the Convention:
"Article 2
"In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace time, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them."
No doubt in my mind that this was an instance of armed conflict. Does anyone have a thought as to why these people were not POW's in the eyes of that unnamed official?
Posted by: Other Tom | April 10, 2007 at 09:19 PM
Other Tom,
Piracy,it was treated as a Law and Order issue as per Transnationalist rules,Clarice can fill you in.
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 09:21 PM
I posted the above without having the benefit of Clarice's 9:17 comment. All I can say is Jesus H. Christ.
Posted by: Other Tom | April 10, 2007 at 09:21 PM
I'm not sure I understand, PUK. Is it the British position that, because what the Iranians did was piracy as opposed to war, their men were entitled to less protection?
Posted by: Other Tom | April 10, 2007 at 09:23 PM
Clarice Other Tom,
A recent high profile case using the ICC rules It has to be noted that this is a left wing government,not the best people to have at your back in a conflict.They are too busy impressing their transnationalist friends.
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 09:27 PM
"s it the British position that, because what the Iranians did was piracy as opposed to war, their men were entitled to less protection?"
Not so much "entitled" as are not going to get.
Think the Clinton way,take an issue rename it,problem solved.
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 09:33 PM
Peter: I saw no reference to the ICC in the article. It appears to have been a British army court-martial, and the issue seems to have been whether the defendants complied with the terms of the Geneva Convention.
Posted by: Other Tom | April 10, 2007 at 09:34 PM
Hey, gang, I'm tired of Conyers, Leahy, et al, going after Gonzales. It's time to write letters to them and your congressmen / women and tell them that they have a non-scandal on their hands and stop wasting our tax money.
Posted by: lurker9876 | April 10, 2007 at 09:38 PM
Test again
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 10, 2007 at 09:40 PM
It's rich, isn't it. Leftists declare war obsolete. They just forgot to tell the other side.
So what will it be? Navies and Armies and AirForce? or suicide bombers in shops? The left obviously prefers the latter.
Posted by: Syl | April 10, 2007 at 09:41 PM
The clue is Lord Goldsmith the Attorney General.
Courts Marshall are exclusively military courts, not in the jurisdiction of the Attorney General.This was bypassed to bring the case.
If a country which is a signatory to the ICC rules does not try the case then the case can be taken before the ICC.
I am not a legal expert,someone like Clarice or our other legal experts need to examine the ins and outs of this.
This is an agreement that your country rightly refused to be a signatory to.
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 09:44 PM
I hope everyone had a great Easter - passover...I am back from an overnighter in ferris land - where a sandwich at a local "deli" (turkey brie on foccacia) costs 9 smackers and not a brown or darker brown person to be seen - well, there was for a little bit because I brought a few on the caravan for the field trip.
The funniest part was riding home with the african american children telling me their group was headed up by weirdo white hippies who weighed their garbage so they could see how much or little they wasted, or admonished the children to eat every bit of food they were given so they didn't "waste it" - confused child said - "man I'm either eating too much or they say to eat more! - they basically laughed and said you white people are crazy!
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 10, 2007 at 09:49 PM
Other Tom,
An extract from Hansard,the official record of the UK Parliament
It has been reported that"Goldsmith was gagging to try this out".
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 09:49 PM
Just popping in while waiting for my dinner to be ready (I am West coast time).
Clarice: your post around 9 pm about the sponsors pulling ads from MSNBC. Where are the sponsors' outrage over Rosie comparing Christians to radical jihadis, or disparaging asians, or stating that our government deliberately killed people on 911? Is everything in this country only about race, and only about the African American race? Last time I looked many, many African Americans were Christians and citizens! Yeah, I know, a lot of them are also Democrats. Still! I would like to see some sponsors start worrying about AMERICANS, not just segments of us.
Posted by: centralcal | April 10, 2007 at 10:00 PM
centralcal
Where are the sponsors' outrage over Rosie comparing Christians to radical jihadis, or disparaging asians, or stating that our government deliberately killed people on 911?
The press is stuck in the '90's. Nothing has happened since the 2000 election except the Iraq war.
Everything else is erased. No comment. Nothing to see.
Posted by: Syl | April 10, 2007 at 10:09 PM
Via Drudge...
Can we get Leahy or Conyers on it? Pillars. Of Honesty and all that is pure and true - would they accept this from the Bush administration? Sheesh, what is up with the media secretive lock down oxygen killing all the time, but demanding of others or they will create a controversy out not even as near the depth of secretive selective censor kind of behavior as they engage in? Same with stupid David Gregory - the crappiest proxy ever.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 10, 2007 at 10:15 PM
Believe me , there is a campaign on to pressure The View's sponsors.
Posted by: clarice | April 10, 2007 at 10:24 PM
Peter, this is an excerpt from the article to which you originally linked:
"The Attorney General was criticised last night over the decision to prosecute troops in Iraq after the most expensive court martial in British history ended in acquittal.
"After more than three years of investigation and at a cost of £20 million, the case against a group of soldiers allegedly responsible for the killing of an Iraqi while in British custody ended after the last two defendants were acquitted.
"A former commanding officer of the regiment involved - the Queen's Lancashire Regiment (QLR) - and lawyers for the soldiers said the prosecution was flawed and should never have been brought.
"A spokesman for Lord Goldsmith last night denied he had personally driven the prosecutions and said he was 'just doing his job.'"
There seems to be no doubt that they were, indeed, courts-martial. How the AG was involved in the decision to prosecute them is beyond my understanding; things would not work that way in the US.
Posted by: Other Tom | April 10, 2007 at 10:29 PM
"s it the British position that, because what the Iranians did was piracy as opposed to war, their men were entitled to less protection?"
Not so much "entitled" as are not going to get.
Think the Clinton way,take an issue rename it,problem solved.
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 10:31 PM
It does not appear to me that the excerpt from the Parliamentary record relates to the cases that were the subject of the courts-martial. The Noble Lords appear to be discussing legislation concerning referrals to the ICC in matters where the Crown had decided not to prosecute--which is clearly not the case here. God, I love that Noble Lord stuff. And I always felt somehow cheated that I didn't get to wear one of those marvelous wigs when I went to court.
Posted by: Other Tom | April 10, 2007 at 10:35 PM
Clarice: I have seen movement toward pressure on the View's sponsors. But, there has not been time or organization to pressure Imus's sponsors - yet - and, they are caving anyway to what they perceive as pressure to come. Apparently, they don't yet "perceive" any (or enough) pressure to pull ads from the View.
I think that says something about all of us as much as it does the sponsors. They know the "black" community will protest loudly and long. Do they know too, that we will just silently (mostly) do little or nothing? (And, yes, as I indicated in my earlier post, there are many people "of color" who are part of the "we" I refer to.)
Posted by: centralcal | April 10, 2007 at 10:40 PM
I'm sorry, I haven't read through, but where is the outrage over dumb Jane Hamsher black-facing Joe Liberman - if Imus is supposed to be the "bad" of commentary and sentiment?
My problem with the manufactured outrage is it's never doled out equally - which means it's all BS - no one is outraged at all, it's just about leverage and political gain. Hence all the Howard Fineman's and others who would loose their cookies if Rush or Ann Coulture said such, **defending Imus.**
But again I haven't read through so I am sure the point has already been made.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | April 10, 2007 at 10:40 PM
Other Tom,
It will bear a lot more investigation,but essentially civilian have got control over prosecution,if the don;t the the ICC has jurisdiction .
I will guarantee that normal Courts Marshall are not that high powered,or expensive
Posted by: PeterUK. | April 10, 2007 at 10:48 PM
TSK9: You are dead on. Liberals know that the AA community is a big part of their voting block. One that they have "used" and abused for years. You have hit the nail on the head about leverage and political gain and the absolute lack of true outrage.
Posted by: centralcal | April 10, 2007 at 10:52 PM
Hmmm - I see Tom Maguire got linked on Red State earlier this evening.
Posted by: centralcal | April 10, 2007 at 10:59 PM
Other Tom,
Glad to see the Gawwds of Typekey are finally cooperating.
This whole Imus thing just POs me. It is such a non-story - just like the firing of the 8 US Attorneys. Manufactured scandal. Katie can plagiarize the WSJ, but nobody cares. Billary can make comments about plantations, but nobody cares. Murtha calls Marines murderers, but nobody cares. Sharpton calls white people keepers of "House Negroes", but nobody cares. But as soon as a white republican male makes an obviously stupid statement, we need to make a federal case over it. It is really sad. I agree with Syl that the Rutgers players (who could probably kick my butt in just about every sport) should have just given him the finger and moved on. Problem solved. Another small point - what gives with Imus making fun of other people's hair? That is too funny.
Posted by: Specter | April 10, 2007 at 11:23 PM