The Next Hurrah: The Next Open Thread

« The Flu Wiki - An Experiment in Public Health And Self-Reliance | Main | Explosions In London's Transport System »

July 06, 2005

The Next Open Thread

Not that the Clean Air Act is worth much anyway, but major applause to Greenpeace for being their badass obnoxious selves:

Last year, Greenpeace activists turned world attention on a dirty little secret: coal-burning power plants were getting away with murder. Six activists risked their lives to expose the truth when they climbed a 700-foot smokestack in Pennsylvania - the heart of coal country. Their aim was to bring attention to the dangers of a dirty power plant and to protest President Bush's energy plan. Now, a year after our protest, five states have accomplished what Bush refused to do: file a federal lawsuit against corporate polluters for violations of the Clean Air Act.

One of their ships, the Esperanza, is docked here in Amsterdam until Sunday. They're having an "open ship", so I think I'll check it out.

Also on the European front, Fabulous Tony Blair is thrilled. Looks like London will host the 2012 Olympic Games. Paris was a contender, but it must have been Chirac's comments about British food that was the deciding factor. (For the snark-impaired, that comment was SNARK.)

Finally, remember that f**king Sasser worm? The "introvert" (read: sociopathic nerd from hell) kid who wrote it is finally in court. Here's some irony:

In the meantime Mr Jaschan [the evil worm writer] has been working for a computer firm that specialises in protecting computers from viruses.

So, there you go.

Have at it. What's new in your world?

July 06, 2005 at 12:18 in Contributor--Plutonium Page, Open Threads | Permalink

Comments

I always thought that was why programmers created computer viruses. To get paid to reverse-hack.

I mean, I'm sure there are some pure thrill-seekers out there, too. But this kid is far from the first to land a job as a "computer security expert" after starting off on the other side.

Posted by: Kagro X | July 06, 2005 at 12:29

Hmm, that's a good point.

I'm still pissed off about that worm, though.

Posted by: Plutonium Page | July 06, 2005 at 12:32

The site doesn't show up correctly for me with Firefox the last few days - instead of the normal site with frames, the whole screen is gray, and there are absolutely no margins. Anyone have ideas for what went wrong?

Posted by: Steve | July 06, 2005 at 12:36

typepad redid the siter, and that started happening. Clear your browser cache and it should be okay....

Posted by: DemFromCT | July 06, 2005 at 12:41

Steve - I'm using Firefox, and it's working for me.

Posted by: Plutonium Page | July 06, 2005 at 12:42

Actually, on the BBC this morning, they had some British writer who said that Chirac's comments about British, Scottish and Finnish food probably did hurt French chances a bit, as it made him look like a haughty clod. By comparison, Blair supposedly did a great job with his presentation.

Posted by: DHinMI | July 06, 2005 at 13:09

Clearing the cache worked for me. Thanks!

Posted by: Steve | July 06, 2005 at 13:16

Clearing the cache worked for me. Thanks!
Posted by: Steve

You're welcome!

Posted by: DemFromCT | July 06, 2005 at 13:28

"Not that the clean air act is worth much.." Check your information and/or pessimism.

Regardless of it's only partially degraded state, it is still critical legislation. Remove it and we'd see vast increases in pollution.

So belittling it is foolish. Don't contribute to the "goverment is worthless" sentiment out there. This is a great success of liberalism.

Posted by: Crab Nebula | July 06, 2005 at 13:38

"Not that the clean air act is worth much.." Check your information and/or pessimism.

Regardless of it's only partially degraded state, it is still critical legislation. Remove it and we'd see vast increases in pollution.

So belittling it is foolish. Don't contribute to the "goverment is worthless" sentiment out there. This is a great success of liberalism.

Posted by: Crab Nebula | July 06, 2005 at 13:39

So belittling it is foolish. Don't contribute to the "goverment is worthless" sentiment out there. This is a great success of liberalism.

Ok, dude, calm wayyyy down.

So, what do you think about George W. Bush?

Posted by: Plutonium Page | July 06, 2005 at 14:03

hey bro, calmness achieved. just that I'd hate to see snarkness become a hallmark of this website, like at others.

G.W.? he's a great American, resolved, resolute and firm. And resolved. And possessing great judgement, with a discriminating and searching intellect.

Posted by: Crab Nebula | July 06, 2005 at 15:00

Matt Cooper will testify, freed from confidentiality by his source.

Surprising that this did not happen earlier. Or maybe it did, and Cooper held on out of principle, hoping to win in the courts.

I bet Novak testified after getting permission to do so from his source. At least now that's what he's going to say. Regardless, he's going to milk it for everything it's worth once he's sure he's not indicted.

Miller has a different source? Or what?

Posted by: TenThousandThings | July 06, 2005 at 15:01

A further thought: That Cooper has known for some time now that he could use the Get Out of Jail Free card his source gave him, as I speculated in my previous comment.

Then Time, Inc. caved. They didn't know Cooper had his ace in the hole [Sorry, I just couldn't resist mixing card metaphors!] ... So Cooper today has to come up with his stupid, "in somewhat dramatic fashion," last-minute story to try to save Time, Inc.'s ass (or face-- choose your body-part metaphor). ...

The big story here is Time, Inc. caving (CJR Daily). I think that is true regardless of when Cooper learned he had permission to testify from his source.

Posted by: TenThousandThings | July 06, 2005 at 15:19

I'm still chewing on this. Apologies for the multiple posts.

I guess the gist of what is bothering me is that I don't think Novak would have testified (apparently, he did) without getting permission from his source. Strange, but I think Novak would have been thrilled to present himself as a principled journalist like Miller and Cooper. But because he is basically a chickenshit, he testified as soon as he got permission to do so.

So I tend to think Cooper must also have received the same permission, assuming he had the same source. It doesn't matter if Time, Inc. knew about it. The point is they caved in to their corporate interest as noted in the above link.

But my original question still stands: Does this mean Miller had a different source, or an additional source?

Posted by: TenThousandThings | July 06, 2005 at 15:37

speaking of greenpeace. did you see the flash video titled "Mr. and Mrs. Smith"?

warning not all that work acceptable, but entertaining.

Posted by: juls | July 06, 2005 at 15:38

"There once was a donkey named Tale

who landed in the DKOS jail

busted by "Thread Security"

For not showing "liberal purity"

and now he's forfeited his bail"

Posted by: donkeytale | July 06, 2005 at 16:23

Miller has different sources or---there is speculation that Miller herself could have been a source. She had a keen interest in WMD; she corresponded by e-mail with David Kelly the British scientist shortly before he committed suicide, allegedly over the "sexing up the intel" business; she had sources in the Iraqi national Congress who conceivably could have been debriefed by Plame's group; she wanted to keep the WMD story alive because she had such an investment in it; etc, etc, etc. There has to be a reason why she never whent to print with whatever it is she knows. Most reporters live and die by the scoop (metaphorically speaking).

All that said, this is a bad business, reporters going to jail.

And if you read the agents statute, the perp has to be someone who is authorized to receive the classified info and knowingly reavels it to a person who is not so authorized, when the gov't has made an effort to keep the agent's name confidential. Rove almost certainly wasn't so authorized, but the real perp was. So Emptywheel is almost certainly right that the focus on Rove is misdirection.

Posted by: Mimikatz | July 06, 2005 at 16:40

I wouldn't mind seeing Rove indicted even if he's not the leaker.

I do have issues with miloler going to jail, as much as I dislike her. OTOH, I don't know exactly what Fitzgerald's got. Seems like no one else does, either.

Posted by: DemFromCT | July 06, 2005 at 17:05

AHA! From the NYT article currently online:

"Mr. Cooper told the judge today while he had been told his source had signed a general waiver of confidentiality, he would only act with a specific waiver from his source, which he said he got today."

So I was right, sort of. I bet the "general" waiver was good enough for Novak and Time, Inc.

Posted by: TenThousandThings | July 06, 2005 at 17:25

I'm not entirely clear on whether or not Rove had the clearance to have known Plame's identity. I've seen it speculated both ways.

I'd be interested to see the other theory of criminal liability under the act revived, though. Those without authorized clearance have to engage in a pattern of activities aimed at the exposure of agents, and I wondered for a while whether the pattern requirement might not be interpreted as it sometimes is for RICO-type indictments -- that is, that what constitutes a "pattern" doesn't necessarily have to relate to the exposure of multiple agents, but can in fact be multiple acts in furtherance of the exposure of a single agent. For example, phoning multiple media outlets. Or in the case of Novak, receiving the information, phoning the CIA to see if it'd be OK to publish, being told it isn't, but deciding to do it anyway.

Not many people were buying that interpretation, though. Still, it now occurs to me that perhaps there were multiple agents compromised. Only one -- Plame -- was named. But from her exposure, we all came to know the name of the consulting firm she used as cover, and thus we (and the rest of the world) came to suspect that everyone associated with that firm was also a covert CIA operative. So maybe that's a pattern.

I guess we'll see, soon enough.

Posted by: Kagro X | July 06, 2005 at 17:30

Some of you may enjoy this survey of Other Cheneys in History.

Posted by: emptypockets | July 06, 2005 at 22:50

mature vs young hard mature women vieille salope mature amatrice mature fuck young young boy and mature mature vieille mature salope mature young first time mature and young boy < mature old fuck mature woman fucking girl hot mature men mature woman asshole mature pics free grosses.femmesmuresx.com grosse femme mature hairy bush mature mature hot movies film mature fuck dogs mature black busty photo penetration femme mature hot nasty mature galerie nylon mature brune mature nu hot wife mature blowjob woman mature mature free galerie rencontre femme mure femme mure amatrice cochon photo de femme mure hard cum her face mature photo x femme mure femme mure pour jeune homme 19ans mature mom cum photo gratuite fellation femme mure age mure nu gratuite x femme mure femme mure tres poilue photo femme mure amateur exhib rencontre coquin femme mure > femme mure et nu gratuit mure femme mure avec jeune mec recette and confiture and and mure photo x femme mure et ronde photo de femme mure xxx femme mure nu photo photo gratuite vieille mature nu mature busty babe gallery nymphomane mature amatrice lady mature mature drunk suck vieille saint girons photo vieille salope gratuit mature collant nylon galerie gratuite mature mature and granny mature lady posing femme amatrice mature vieille salope .com pipe hard concert hard rock berlin hard rock cafe black orchid rock nantes hard audrey tautou film hard archive journal hard pps hard ecoute musique hard rock couple hard roman photo hard film and x and hard photo hard de brigitte lahaie music hard core teen hard preview hard top nissan navara hard and top rencontre hard gratuite pps hard gratuit hard anal fucking photo gratuite femme hard peugeot dangel 505 hard top dvd x hard discount sodomie hard amateur pps humour hard liste hard discount essonne mature riding hard hard tv net hard xxx gratuit