Balta1701

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Dec 7, 2005 -> 09:43 AM) LOL! Do you really believe the Mossad doesn't torture people? I HIGHLY doubt that. Link

QUOTE(ptatc @ Dec 7, 2005 -> 09:07 AM) There are many who will diagree with this statement. He follows the Tom House theory of mechanincs (as does Larry Rothschild). Many believe that these mechanics, especially the manner in which you throw breaking pitches, increases stress on the elbow. I happen to agree that it increases stress on the elbow. Not saying it's right or wrong but many people wil disagree that he puts litlle stress on his arm. I would say that of course pitching of any sort puts stress on his arm, but because of the way he uses his legs, his pitching tends to put less stress on the arm than the pitching style of say a Kerry Wood or an Eric Gagne...guys who drive the ball much more with their arms. Their fastballs probably put more stress on the arm than Prior's breaking ball puts on his...to say nothing about their breaking balls.

QUOTE(SoCalSouthSider59 @ Dec 7, 2005 -> 09:27 AM) 58,000, and i agree with YASNY.......I know of two of them whose names are on The Wall too, they belong to my brave Uncles who fought and died in 'Nam.........I take that asshole Dean's comments very personally, and i'll say to him again, :finger !!! Ok, so yeah, go read Dean's statement, he was clearly saying not that 25,000 people died in 'Nam, but that 25,000 additional ones died after the point at which we should have gotten out of there - shortly after Tet, 1968, when Johnson basically had a peace treaty brokered which would have let us get out of there (it was basically killed by Nixon's people, who wanted to stay the course and had a "secret plan" for victory there too.)

Here we have a very disturbing case. Based on the story of this man, he is a German citizen...he was traveling to Macedonia, at which point he was grabbed by the U.S. He claims he was held without trial for nearly half a year, during which time he was subjected to beatings, among other methods of torture. When asked about the particular case in Germany yesterday, Sec. State Rice refused to comment on it, however she did admit that "Mistakes" could happen in the war on terror. German Chancellor Merkel said that the U.S. had acknowledged making a mistake in al-Masri's case...a statement which has aroused angerin both the U.S. and Germany...in the U.S. because the government says Rice never said that, and in Germany because the people want answers as to why one of their citizens was abducted, held without trial, and tortured.

By the way, here's Another worthy piece from Cole on exactly where these Shi'ite militias came from, how close they are with Iran, and why the U.S. is backed into the corner of gradually giving them control of Iraq.

I think McCarthy is going to be better than Willis...for longer than Willis, and will be cheaper than Willis for years. I still worry that at some point, Willis's motion is going to cause some major injury problems too, even though there's not great evidence of that happening yet.

Actually, it doesn't, and furthermore, it totally ignores the actual facts on the ground. What it does do is lay out what I would call "Goals". In other words, it gives general ideas focused on staying the course, but gives absolutely no criteria whatsoever for determining when those goals are met. Here is a prime example: You see what he did there? I think it's fairly obvious...he talked about how we're "Building an effective Iraqi security force" without ever defining how we should judge the effectiveness of that Iraqi security force. This is almost exactly the "In the fight" dodge that was all over the "Victory strategery" document that they released last week, where they came up with a new term regarding the training of Iraqis - "In the fight", without ever telling us what In the fight actually meant in terms of training, equipment, capabilities, or even loyalty to the national government. He says that Iraqi forces will be allowed to "take the lead". Ok, fine, when will that be possible? How many Iraqi troops will need to reach this level of training before we can begin to fallback? And most importantly, how does he react to the DOD's statement before Congress that the # of Iraqi battalions capable of independent operation has declined from 3 to 1 in the last year? Based on that metric, the number of Iraqi troops able to "take the lead" would have declined, not increased. Furthermore, Bush at one point holds up the example of Najaf, a place where the U.S. troops actually have pulled back, giving control to "Iraqi Forces". The problem is...the only Iraqi forces on the ground who have managed to control anything have not really been forces loyal to the national government, they've been forces under the control of the Shi'ite Militia groups, such as the Badr corps, who have been casually folded into the national army since the Shi'ites have taken control over the national government. Here is Juan Cole on this particular topic a few days ago. Now, if we're willing to basically hand over Iraq to the Shi'ite militias, we probably would see a civil war, but the Shi'ites would win based on numbers and Iranian support. That is basically who is controlling Najaf right now - the Shi'ites. And his speech even goes so far as to basically ignore what actually happened in Najaf...where the U.S. challenged Al Sadr's militia, and Al Sadr backed off on orders from Sistani...only to emerge a few months later with his militia in tact as a very strong political force. This speech contains no more details than any other one. All it says is "things are working and we must stay the course". However, as usual, it only gives anecdotes to describe how things are working...it gives no general specifics through which we could evaluate the progress of the war. It gives no way by which we could determine how long we're going to be there. It gives no hint how long any of these processes will take. And it subtly glosses over the real risks we're taking to try to make the place look more appealing - risks like relying on Kurdish and Shi'ite militia groups to control territory.

Juan Cole on this topic.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 7, 2005 -> 08:52 AM) Do you think there is any chance the Sox would consider Harris a candidate to play CF? I don't think I'd be terrifically surprised to see him play a game or two out there next year...not after seeing Timo play 1b, but as a regular? No way.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 7, 2005 -> 03:15 AM) Howard Dean. What a joke. This guy had the nerve to compare it to Viet Nam as an unwinnable war. He's certainly an expert on history and the Viet Nam War. He said something along the lines of 25000 young Americans lost their lives in Nam. Considering the number was closer to 50000 tells you this dips*** doesn't have a clue about the Viet Nam War, and therefore probably knows jacks*** about Iraq. Back during the first year of the Iraq mess, Assistant SecDef Paul Wolfowitz was asked in front of Congress what the current casualty count was in Iraq. He was off by something pretty close to a factor of two also.

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Dec 7, 2005 -> 08:21 AM) I'll take Pablo and Willie over Tony G. Both are cheaper and wouldn't let a crucial ground ball cross them up in a big game. He is an okay player, but personally I want Pablo to be our main utility guy. I think the whole reason for looking for another utility guy is that it's entirely possible that Crede may not be able to give us a full season with his back. If that happens...Pablo may wind up being our regular 3rd baseman for a couple stretches next season, and without another backup, where does that leave us? What happens if anyone else on the team needs a day off? Pablo's been useful both in the infield and the outfield, and Willie Harris has been mainly useful at 2nd base and in a big pinch shortstop.

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Dec 7, 2005 -> 07:53 AM) He's an ardent Christian. From what I remember he didn't feel that was well-recieved or something to that end. Then again, that whole clubhouse seemed to love Tony G, as well as the fan-base. So, I'll step aside and let someone like Steff field this one. But, I'm pretty sure that was the case. Well, if that's the case...I have 2 words for Tony: Carl Everett.

Well, at least this ends that silly "Pierre to the Sox" talk. I still think B.A. will wind up both producing more runs and saving more runs than Pierre next year.

Does the bill do anything to guarantee the right to inspect companies to see if they have immigrants working there? If memory serves, a few motnhs ago, Walmart settled one of those immigrant-worker cases, and somehow got the DOJ to agree that any time the government wants to actually check a Walmart, they have to give something ridiculous like 24 hours notice.

Why are these threads not getting moved to Trade Winds?

Brian Westbrook's season is over. "Foot injury". My God...all of a Sudden the Eagles look like they couldn't beat the Texans. How's that for a turnaround.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 6, 2005 -> 04:55 PM) I'm not saying two wrongs make a right here, but videotaping behadings and passing them around the world like candy is torture. Rape rooms and guns to your head and shooting your relatives to make you sing like a canary is torture. Sleep deprevation and things of that nature, which is condoned as allowable interrogation techniques and that sort of thing doesn't rise to that level. If idiots break that law beyond that, they deserve to be punished to the full extent of the law. You are implying that George Bush himself is authorizing this stuff by always putting his name with the quote. Go ahead, Flaxx, join in the fun, because you think the exact same thing. The executive Administration of George W. Bush has threatened to veto John McCain's anti-torture provision within the defense appropriations bill entirely because it does not include a statement exempting the CIA. Regardless of whether or not you support that proposal...the Administration is clearly asking for the right to inflict physical harm as a method of extracting information. Therefore, either Mr. Bush is actively supporting that sort of behavior, or he is turning his head while others within his administration actively support it being legal.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Dec 6, 2005 -> 04:45 PM) he might have fabricated the whole story. Then he'll soon be charged with filing a false police report. It's actually surprisingly hard to, you know, fake having the sh*t beaten out of you.

QUOTE(juddling @ Dec 6, 2005 -> 04:29 PM) LIke it or not, it has been done before Bush, and will continue to be done after Bush. We just hear about it now because it is harder to keep secrets nowadays. If you think we DIDN'T do it before Bush, you need to put down the latte and wake up. And I'll say the exact same thing about the next executive branch that either turns its head the other way or actively encourages that behavior.

QUOTE(maggsmaggs @ Dec 6, 2005 -> 04:25 PM) great for Grady, I still don't know why people blame him for the Red Sox in 2003. Because he made 1 bad decision and it cost them the ALCS. He left Pedro in too long, and it was obvious he was doing so to everyone watching. The game wound up tied...went to Extras, and Aaron Boone. Maybe none of that happens if Pedro comes out...maybe it would have, but there was still no reason Pedro should have stayed in there.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 6, 2005 -> 03:56 PM) :rolly And yes, that's appropriate here. How long are you going to kick the s*** out of that horse? Until we stop doing it.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Dec 6, 2005 -> 03:53 PM) Great news. He has the coolest voice in sports, by far. I missed hearing him in his postgame pressers the last 2 years. It may be a couple more years before you get that luxury again.

He'll be back. And I'm still not kidding.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Dec 6, 2005 -> 03:32 PM) Like when GWB told the media he didn't think the Global War on Terror was winnable? :rolly No, more like the President saying "We do not torture."