If you wait, you'll be on creaky knees like so many people who sat around us on the return flight. Hobbling and grasping for support to endure a seven-hour flight.
Do it while you can still complete an 11 mile hike into the belly of volcano crater. It's like you're alone on the Moon.
Carpe Deum, JT. Sieze the day. Your kids will forgive you and your wife.
You're right about Hawaii BTW. I got to spend a couple weeks there en route to Japan. I'd love to go back soon.
I would say Fox is biased in many ways. The story you posted about MSNBC was interesting. What's telling about it is that it makes it sound like, well, here we go MSNBC is going to follow FOX. What the story didn't mention is of course that before them 95% of the other talk show guests were to the left. So before the there was no problem, nope no bias there. But they hire 2 conservative talk show guys and suddenly they are turning into the RNC news. Why no story when 95% were left ? Hmmmm, interesting.
FOX is a favorite target of the left, they hate it. What galls me is that some can't or won't admit that the other networks are very biased as well. Can you tell me ABC,CBS, PBS, CNN etc. don't show plenty of bias ? There's no point in giving examples but I'd be happy to if you like. If we're going to have an honest debate about it so be it. One reason perhaps that Fox's coverage was more watched was that they weren't swallowing Iraq's b.s propoganda. They reported their posistion but didn't treat it as gospel. CNN stepped in it with their admission of witholding those stories. I would have done the same due to the circumstances but I also wouldn't have walked around Bagdhad before the war talking to the average citizen complete with minder and treat it as news.
BTW Rick, What do you think of having reporters with our troops ? Seems like it worked pretty well IMO. I think some now perhaps have a different idea that the military isn't some horrid machine that kills indiscriminantly and disregards humanity. I think if anything that is a good thing.
"BTW Rick, What do you think of having reporters with our troops ?"
I get most of my news from print and radio. I avoided all of it in the last week. Some of it has probably been good. Some of it, I don't care for.
If I were an editor, that CNN reporter (that everyone here was soooo impressed with) that did the bonding thing with with Marines who wanted to use his videophone might not have had his ass on the carpet, but he would have gotten a memo about his lack of professionalism. You don't want starstruck reporters in the field. Using the videophone would have been fine, but don't get all weepy and gushy about it. That's not the reporter's job. And I'd remind him of it.
So reporters should never interject any emotion ? I find it funny you would use that example when there's been other cases of it. Was it o.k on 9-11 that reporters did ? Reporters supposed to be machines right or show no empathy ? And for the record I wasn't impressed with him. It had zip to do with the reporter. I wasn impressed but not surprised that these guys took their one chance to call home which is more important than you can fathom, to offer comfort to others.
I edited it. I realize it's not there job but emoption is sometimes part of the story itself. What about on 9-11 I saw plenty of that. Was that out of line ?
Back to the media for a second your story you posted almost showed indignation that FOX's ratings were higher. They beat CBS' morning ratings even though they are availible in 25 million fewer than CBS. Frankly I don't care for their morning show but that's aside from the point. If ABC's ratings beat the Today show is that something to be concerned about ?
We were just on Maui. Our travel style is to post in one place and see as much as we can within easy distance.
"Back to the media for a second your story you posted almost showed indignation that FOX's ratings were higher. "
Maybe. I didn't get that from it. Fox is winning. Some people are concerned that the network's approach is going to slant news coverage. Maybe other networks will say 'to compete we need right-wing slanted news.' I can see it happening.
Maybe other networks will say 'to compete we need right-wing slanted news.' I can see it happening
You mean like MSNBC where 90% of their people were left wing ? Now they hired 2 conservatives and now we are suddenly worried about slanting coverage ? Before that it was right down the middle right ? LOL
I guess we'll see how MSNBC shakes out. They cancelled Donohue, so, if Michael Savage and Joe Scarborough are golden, it will be clear to everyone the direction they should take.
I know what you mean about not running a bunch of places when your on vacation. I'm the same way. I don't like having to run to 20 places just to say you were there. It is one place though I'd reccomend going if you go back.
You might have missed this on vacation.
BTW Re: the NY Times. They approached former Sec. Of State. Lawrence Eagleberger and asked him to write an editorial. He said o.k I assume on the war. This is when we were supposedly bogged down and our plain was horrid and it was Vietnam all over. They flat out said that they wanted critisicm of the Bush Admin. (He refused and didn't write it) Not being in the news biz I was wondering. Is that standard practice that they go to somoene and ask for an editorial and then tell them what content they want ? I mean how do editorials come about, do people submit them or does the paper solicit them ?
how do editorials come about, do people submit them or does the paper solicit them ?
I would assume that most are submitted then edited for spin sake. Although, I wouldn't put it pass the press to contact those 'controversial' writers and ask them to elaborate just a tad.
"God I love listening to the liberals whine now that they no longer have a monopoly on the news. "
I reject the premise that the media was liberally biased. So I don't know who you think is whining. As for a monopoly, I don't know what the hell you're talking about.
"Competition sucks doesn't?"
Why are you so insecure that you need news that constantly reinforces your opinion?
I reject the premise that the media was liberally biased.
You are entitled to your belief as am I.
Why are you so insecure that you need news that constantly reinforces your opinion?
Insecure? Because I read a variety of news sources? I know which ones slant which way. I read, listen and watch most of them and form my own opinion. So what if my opinion is conservative. Why are you insecure about the liberal media being challenged? Scared your opinion may not be the main thrust any more?
Sorry. I'm new to this particular thread and I haven't got to "know" the regulars yet. ;)
No problem, totally understandable. I do not post as often as the others do here. I usally only post when I feel strongly about something. I would hope that most posters here hold a good opinion of me. I read other peoples post and give my own opinion. Trying my best not to offend. I like discussions/arguements. Regardless of the opinion, I try to respect it. I like open discussion.
But I find if poeple set out searching for biased, they can usually find it.
Rick, most if not all of the media is biased. The main broadcast companies (ABC, CBS and lately to a lesser extent NBC), have been very left leaning. That is why their ratings have plumeted. Channels like Fox are right, to very right, leaning. Same goes with the print media. I could do a search and find examples on both sides. That is why I read a variety of news sources. Somewhere in the all the bias's and slants is the truth. I hope by reading, watching and listening to a wide variety helps accomplish that.
Quick question for you, what would you think of Allan Colmes having a national show? He is one I would probably listen to.
Are you a NFL fan? The football board here could use some more posting. I am trying to keep it alive, sometimes it seems by myself. How about you Rick? Football fan?
"Quick question for you, what would you think of Allan Colmes having a national show?"
He's too nebbish. Hannity & Colmes is as scripted as WWF match. The one whose name comes first is the one to be listened to and its obvious throughout.
I think the UN was started with the best of intentions. But I fear it is now only a bloated and inefficient bureaucracy that does little good. Especially the Security Council.
George Galloway, the Labour backbencher, received money from Saddam Hussein's regime, taking a slice of oil earnings worth at least £375,000 a year, according to Iraqi intelligence documents found by The Daily Telegraph in Baghdad.
A confidential memorandum sent to Saddam by his spy chief said that Mr Galloway asked an agent of the Mukhabarat secret service for a greater cut of Iraq's exports under the oil for food programme.
He also said that Mr Galloway was profiting from food contracts and sought "exceptional" business deals. Mr Galloway has always denied receiving any financial assistance from Baghdad.
Asked to explain the document, he said yesterday: "Maybe it is the product of the same forgers who forged so many other things in this whole Iraq picture. Maybe The Daily Telegraph forged it. Who knows?"
When the letter from the head of the Iraqi intelligence service was read to him, he said: "The truth is I have never met, to the best of my knowledge, any member of Iraqi intelligence. I have never in my life seen a barrel of oil, let alone owned, bought or sold one."
In the papers, which were found in the looted foreign ministry, Iraqi intelligence continually stresses the need for secrecy about Mr Galloway's alleged business links with the regime. One memo says that payments to him must be made under "commercial cover".
For more than a decade, Mr Galloway, MP for Glasgow Kelvin, has been the leading critic of Anglo-American policy towards Iraq, campaigning against sanctions and the war that toppled Saddam.
He led the Mariam Appeal, named after an Iraqi child he flew to Britain for leukaemia treatment. The campaign was the supposed beneficiary of his fund-raising.
But the papers say that, behind the scenes, Mr Galloway was conducting a relationship with Iraqi intelligence. Among documents found in the foreign ministry was a memorandum from the chief of the Mukhabarat to Saddam's office on Jan 3, 2000, marked "Confidential and Personal".
It purported to outline talks between Mr Galloway and an Iraqi spy. During the meeting on Boxing Day 1999, Mr Galloway detailed his campaign plans for the year ahead.
The spy chief wrote that Mr Galloway told the Mukhabarat agent: "He [Galloway] needs continuous financial support from Iraq. He obtained through Mr Tariq Aziz [deputy prime minister] three million barrels of oil every six months, according to the oil for food programme. His share would be only between 10 and 15 cents per barrel."
Iraq's oil sales, administered by the United Nations, were intended to pay for only essential humanitarian supplies. If the memo was accurate, Mr Galloway's share would have amounted to about £375,000 per year.
The documents say that Mr Galloway entered into partnership with a named Iraqi oil broker to sell the oil on the international market.
The memorandum continues: "He [Galloway] also obtained a limited number of food contracts with the ministry of trade. The percentage of its profits does not go above one per cent."
The Iraqi spy chief, whose illegible signature appears at the bottom of the memorandum, says that Mr Galloway asked for more money.
"He suggested to us the following: first, increase his share of oil; second, grant him exceptional commercial and contractual facilities." The spy chief, who is not named, recommends acceptance of the proposals.
Mr Galloway's intermediary in Iraq was Fawaz Zureikat, a Jordanian. In a letter found in one foreign ministry file, Mr Galloway wrote: "This is to certify that Mr Fawaz A Zureikat is my representative in Baghdad on all matters concerning my work with the Mariam Appeal or the Emergency Committee in Iraq."
The intelligence chief's memorandum describes a meeting with Mr Zureikat in which he said that Mr Galloway's campaigning on behalf of Iraq was putting "his future as a British MP in a circle surrounded by many question marks and doubts".
Mr Zureikat is then quoted as saying: "His projects and future plans for the benefit of the country need financial support to become a motive for him to do more work and, because of the sensitivity of getting money directly from Iraq, it is necessary to grant him oil contracts and special and exceptional commercial opportunities to provide him with an income under commercial cover, without being connected to him directly."
Mr Zureikat is said to have emphasised that the "name of Mr Galloway or his wife should not be mentioned".
22 April - Still no sighting of Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf (M.S.S.)... The Arab News reports that during the war MSS "stormed into the Al-Jazeera TV offices in Baghdad. He carried a Kalashnikov and threatened to kill the station's employees, cut off their arms and throw their corpses into the desert if they reported that the American forces were approaching Baghdad."
21 April - No M.S.S. An anxious world holds collective breath... France refuses to support breath holding but would still like to be involved "once everyone exhales"
20 April - M.S.S. is sighted! Oh wait, no... no, that's not him. Never mind.
19 April - A company introduces talking M.S.S. doll... GI Joe resigns commission in protest
18 April -- Times of London reports that "coalition military chiefs" are investigating rumors of M.S.S. suicide, but skeptically. "We are still looking for him."... Media coverage of this site -- live appearances yesterday on Sky News, Fox News, CNN -- prompt worldwide calls for strict new code of journalistic ethics.
"Someday..."
If you wait, you'll be on creaky knees like so many people who sat around us on the return flight. Hobbling and grasping for support to endure a seven-hour flight.
Do it while you can still complete an 11 mile hike into the belly of volcano crater. It's like you're alone on the Moon.
Carpe Deum, JT. Sieze the day. Your kids will forgive you and your wife.
"We Strike at the Japs."
The one thing that sounds accurate and he says it sounds biased! Go figure!
Carpe Deum, JT. Sieze the day. Your kids will forgive you and your wife.
Hhhmmm, fix the soffits, pay tuition, take the Family on summer vacation.... or go to Maui?
I'll still enjoy it when I'm old and creaky kneed.
:-)
Hey Rick, Welcome back.
You're right about Hawaii BTW. I got to spend a couple weeks there en route to Japan. I'd love to go back soon.
I would say Fox is biased in many ways. The story you posted about MSNBC was interesting. What's telling about it is that it makes it sound like, well, here we go MSNBC is going to follow FOX. What the story didn't mention is of course that before them 95% of the other talk show guests were to the left. So before the there was no problem, nope no bias there. But they hire 2 conservative talk show guys and suddenly they are turning into the RNC news. Why no story when 95% were left ? Hmmmm, interesting.
FOX is a favorite target of the left, they hate it. What galls me is that some can't or won't admit that the other networks are very biased as well. Can you tell me ABC,CBS, PBS, CNN etc. don't show plenty of bias ? There's no point in giving examples but I'd be happy to if you like. If we're going to have an honest debate about it so be it. One reason perhaps that Fox's coverage was more watched was that they weren't swallowing Iraq's b.s propoganda. They reported their posistion but didn't treat it as gospel. CNN stepped in it with their admission of witholding those stories. I would have done the same due to the circumstances but I also wouldn't have walked around Bagdhad before the war talking to the average citizen complete with minder and treat it as news.
BTW Rick, What do you think of having reporters with our troops ? Seems like it worked pretty well IMO. I think some now perhaps have a different idea that the military isn't some horrid machine that kills indiscriminantly and disregards humanity. I think if anything that is a good thing.
"BTW Rick, What do you think of having reporters with our troops ?"
I get most of my news from print and radio. I avoided all of it in the last week. Some of it has probably been good. Some of it, I don't care for.
If I were an editor, that CNN reporter (that everyone here was soooo impressed with) that did the bonding thing with with Marines who wanted to use his videophone might not have had his ass on the carpet, but he would have gotten a memo about his lack of professionalism. You don't want starstruck reporters in the field. Using the videophone would have been fine, but don't get all weepy and gushy about it. That's not the reporter's job. And I'd remind him of it.
So reporters should never interject any emotion ? I find it funny you would use that example when there's been other cases of it. Was it o.k on 9-11 that reporters did ? Reporters supposed to be machines right or show no empathy ? And for the record I wasn't impressed with him. It had zip to do with the reporter. I wasn impressed but not surprised that these guys took their one chance to call home which is more important than you can fathom, to offer comfort to others.
"So it's not a reporters job to interject any emotion ?"
That's right.
"I find it funny you would use that example when there's been other cases of it."
Glad I'm entertaining you.
"Reporters supposed to be machines right or show no empathy ?"
They're supposed to tell a story. He could have done it a better way. It wasn't just empathy. He crossed a line to opinion.
Rick,
I edited it. I realize it's not there job but emoption is sometimes part of the story itself. What about on 9-11 I saw plenty of that. Was that out of line ?
"What about on 9-11 I saw plenty of that. Was that out of line ?"
Without specifics I couldn't tell you,
BTW Rick,
Did you go over to Pearl ?
Back to the media for a second your story you posted almost showed indignation that FOX's ratings were higher. They beat CBS' morning ratings even though they are availible in 25 million fewer than CBS.
Frankly I don't care for their morning show but that's aside from the point. If ABC's ratings beat the Today show is that something to be concerned about ?
We were just on Maui. Our travel style is to post in one place and see as much as we can within easy distance.
"Back to the media for a second your story you posted almost showed indignation that FOX's ratings were higher. "
Maybe. I didn't get that from it. Fox is winning. Some people are concerned that the network's approach is going to slant news coverage. Maybe other networks will say 'to compete we need right-wing slanted news.' I can see it happening.
You mean like MSNBC where 90% of their people were left wing ? Now they hired 2 conservatives and now we are suddenly worried about slanting coverage ? Before that it was right down the middle right ? LOL
I guess we'll see how MSNBC shakes out. They cancelled Donohue, so, if Michael Savage and Joe Scarborough are golden, it will be clear to everyone the direction they should take.
Maybe it had something to do with his ratings being just slightly higher than the preview channel.
Rick,
I know what you mean about not running a bunch of places when your on vacation. I'm the same way. I don't like having to run to 20 places just to say you were there. It is one place though I'd reccomend going if you go back.
You might have missed this on vacation.
BTW Re: the NY Times. They approached former Sec. Of State. Lawrence Eagleberger and asked him to write an editorial. He said o.k I assume on the war. This is when we were supposedly bogged down and our plain was horrid and it was Vietnam all over. They flat out said that they wanted critisicm of the Bush Admin. (He refused and didn't write it) Not being in the news biz I was wondering. Is that standard practice that they go to somoene and ask for an editorial and then tell them what content they want ? I mean how do editorials come about, do people submit them or does the paper solicit them ?
how do editorials come about, do people submit them or does the paper solicit them ?
I would assume that most are submitted then edited for spin sake. Although, I wouldn't put it pass the press to contact those 'controversial' writers and ask them to elaborate just a tad.
Donahue had a show??????
God I love listening to the liberals whine now that they no longer have a monopoly on the news. Competition sucks doesn't?
Wolvie 4/18/03 3:31pm
It lasted about 6 months as I recall.
Wolvie 4/18/03 3:32pm
Competition sucks doesn't?
Naw... It's just a great way to make sure you stay on your toes and get the job done better than the other guys.
Naw... It's just a great way to make sure you stay on your toes and get the job done better than the other guys.
On this we can agree. Competition brings out the best in people and products.
"God I love listening to the liberals whine now that they no longer have a monopoly on the news. "
I reject the premise that the media was liberally biased. So I don't know who you think is whining. As for a monopoly, I don't know what the hell you're talking about.
"Competition sucks doesn't?"
Why are you so insecure that you need news that constantly reinforces your opinion?
Wolvie 4/18/03 3:43pm
Sorry. I'm new to this particular thread and I haven't got to "know" the regulars yet. ;)
I reject the premise that the media was liberally biased.
You are entitled to your belief as am I.
Why are you so insecure that you need news that constantly reinforces your opinion?
Insecure? Because I read a variety of news sources? I know which ones slant which way. I read, listen and watch most of them and form my own opinion. So what if my opinion is conservative. Why are you insecure about the liberal media being challenged? Scared your opinion may not be the main thrust any more?
Sorry. I'm new to this particular thread and I haven't got to "know" the regulars yet. ;)
No problem, totally understandable. I do not post as often as the others do here. I usally only post when I feel strongly about something. I would hope that most posters here hold a good opinion of me. I read other peoples post and give my own opinion. Trying my best not to offend. I like discussions/arguements. Regardless of the opinion, I try to respect it. I like open discussion.
It never was "the main thrust."
But I find if poeple set out searching for biased, they can usually find it.
Wolvie 4/18/03 3:51pm
Regardless of the opinion, I try to respect it. I like open discussion.
Cool. Same here.
Rick 4/18/03 3:52pm
I've managed to find bias while simply out looking for facts.
Ironic how that happens.
"Get the facts, then you can distort them any way you want." Mark Twain.
I don't think facts are as stubborn as some people do. They can be bent.
Rick 4/18/03 3:58pm
How does one "bend" a fact?
But I find if poeple set out searching for biased, they can usually find it.
Rick, most if not all of the media is biased. The main broadcast companies (ABC, CBS and lately to a lesser extent NBC), have been very left leaning. That is why their ratings have plumeted. Channels like Fox are right, to very right, leaning. Same goes with the print media. I could do a search and find examples on both sides. That is why I read a variety of news sources. Somewhere in the all the bias's and slants is the truth. I hope by reading, watching and listening to a wide variety helps accomplish that.
Quick question for you, what would you think of Allan Colmes having a national show? He is one I would probably listen to.
Rich T,
Are you a NFL fan? The football board here could use some more posting. I am trying to keep it alive, sometimes it seems by myself. How about you Rick? Football fan?
"Quick question for you, what would you think of Allan Colmes having a national show?"
He's too nebbish. Hannity & Colmes is as scripted as WWF match. The one whose name comes first is the one to be listened to and its obvious throughout.
I don't follow football.
Nebbish? Not familiar with that word/term. Colmes seems to me to hold his own and get his opinion across.
I don't follow football.
That's alright, you would probably be a Packer fan anyway. ;^)
Wolvie 4/18/03 4:04pm
Sorry. But I haven't been much of a sports fan in recent years.
Rick,
How does one "bend" a fact?
Rich,
I just went to the web site in your tag line. I agree we should get out of the U.N. Maybe not for all the reasons listed at the web site, but I agree.
That post should get some people riled up..... =)
Wolvie 4/18/03 4:20pm
I think the UN was started with the best of intentions. But I fear it is now only a bloated and inefficient bureaucracy that does little good. Especially the Security Council.
Well when you have Lybia on the Human Rights commission and Iraq on the Disarmiment commission. Kind of makes the point for you.
Wolvie 4/18/03 4:31pm
Exactly.
Well have a goodnight one and all. I am off to play yahoo backgammon.
Been nice posting with you Rich, hope you post more here.
Wolvie 4/18/03 4:37pm
Night wolvie. I think I'll be posting here on a regular basis.
Oh the irony!
I reject the premise that the media was liberally biased.
A lot of people reject reeality. Those that Rrjecting reality are a source of much conflict.
http://images.ucomics.com/comics/bo/2003/bo030421.gif
Galloway was in Saddam's pay, say secret Iraqi documents
By David Blair in Baghdad
(Filed: 22/04/2003)
George Galloway, the Labour backbencher, received money from Saddam Hussein's regime, taking a slice of oil earnings worth at least £375,000 a year, according to Iraqi intelligence documents found by The Daily Telegraph in Baghdad.
A confidential memorandum sent to Saddam by his spy chief said that Mr Galloway asked an agent of the Mukhabarat secret service for a greater cut of Iraq's exports under the oil for food programme.
He also said that Mr Galloway was profiting from food contracts and sought "exceptional" business deals. Mr Galloway has always denied receiving any financial assistance from Baghdad.
Asked to explain the document, he said yesterday: "Maybe it is the product of the same forgers who forged so many other things in this whole Iraq picture. Maybe The Daily Telegraph forged it. Who knows?"
When the letter from the head of the Iraqi intelligence service was read to him, he said: "The truth is I have never met, to the best of my knowledge, any member of Iraqi intelligence. I have never in my life seen a barrel of oil, let alone owned, bought or sold one."
In the papers, which were found in the looted foreign ministry, Iraqi intelligence continually stresses the need for secrecy about Mr Galloway's alleged business links with the regime. One memo says that payments to him must be made under "commercial cover".
For more than a decade, Mr Galloway, MP for Glasgow Kelvin, has been the leading critic of Anglo-American policy towards Iraq, campaigning against sanctions and the war that toppled Saddam.
He led the Mariam Appeal, named after an Iraqi child he flew to Britain for leukaemia treatment. The campaign was the supposed beneficiary of his fund-raising.
But the papers say that, behind the scenes, Mr Galloway was conducting a relationship with Iraqi intelligence. Among documents found in the foreign ministry was a memorandum from the chief of the Mukhabarat to Saddam's office on Jan 3, 2000, marked "Confidential and Personal".
It purported to outline talks between Mr Galloway and an Iraqi spy. During the meeting on Boxing Day 1999, Mr Galloway detailed his campaign plans for the year ahead.
The spy chief wrote that Mr Galloway told the Mukhabarat agent: "He [Galloway] needs continuous financial support from Iraq. He obtained through Mr Tariq Aziz [deputy prime minister] three million barrels of oil every six months, according to the oil for food programme. His share would be only between 10 and 15 cents per barrel."
Iraq's oil sales, administered by the United Nations, were intended to pay for only essential humanitarian supplies. If the memo was accurate, Mr Galloway's share would have amounted to about £375,000 per year.
The documents say that Mr Galloway entered into partnership with a named Iraqi oil broker to sell the oil on the international market.
The memorandum continues: "He [Galloway] also obtained a limited number of food contracts with the ministry of trade. The percentage of its profits does not go above one per cent."
The Iraqi spy chief, whose illegible signature appears at the bottom of the memorandum, says that Mr Galloway asked for more money.
"He suggested to us the following: first, increase his share of oil; second, grant him exceptional commercial and contractual facilities." The spy chief, who is not named, recommends acceptance of the proposals.
Mr Galloway's intermediary in Iraq was Fawaz Zureikat, a Jordanian. In a letter found in one foreign ministry file, Mr Galloway wrote: "This is to certify that Mr Fawaz A Zureikat is my representative in Baghdad on all matters concerning my work with the Mariam Appeal or the Emergency Committee in Iraq."
The intelligence chief's memorandum describes a meeting with Mr Zureikat in which he said that Mr Galloway's campaigning on behalf of Iraq was putting "his future as a British MP in a circle surrounded by many question marks and doubts".
Mr Zureikat is then quoted as saying: "His projects and future plans for the benefit of the country need financial support to become a motive for him to do more work and, because of the sensitivity of getting money directly from Iraq, it is necessary to grant him oil contracts and special and exceptional commercial opportunities to provide him with an income under commercial cover, without being connected to him directly."
Mr Zureikat is said to have emphasised that the "name of Mr Galloway or his wife should not be mentioned".
Update on Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf, Iraqi Minister of Information
http://64.39.15.171/
22 April - Still no sighting of Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf (M.S.S.)... The Arab News reports that during the war MSS "stormed into the Al-Jazeera TV offices in Baghdad. He carried a Kalashnikov and threatened to kill the station's employees, cut off their arms and throw their corpses into the desert if they reported that the American forces were approaching Baghdad."
21 April - No M.S.S. An anxious world holds collective breath... France refuses to support breath holding but would still like to be involved "once everyone exhales"
20 April - M.S.S. is sighted! Oh wait, no... no, that's not him. Never mind.
19 April - A company introduces talking M.S.S. doll... GI Joe resigns commission in protest
18 April -- Times of London reports that "coalition military chiefs" are investigating rumors of M.S.S. suicide, but skeptically. "We are still looking for him."... Media coverage of this site -- live appearances yesterday on Sky News, Fox News, CNN -- prompt worldwide calls for strict new code of journalistic ethics.
Tariq Aziz, AKA "Groucho Aziz" IS now in US custody :)