Mel Gibson went on a rampage when he was arrested Friday on suspicion of drunk driving, hurling religious epithets. TMZ has also learned that the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s department had the initial report doctored to keep the real story under wraps. The report says Gibson told the deputy, "You mother f****r. I’m going to f*** you." The report also says "Gibson almost continually [sic] threatened me saying he ‘owns Malibu’ and will spend all of his money to ‘get even’ with me." The report says Gibson then launched into a barrage of anti-Semitic statements: "F*****g Jews… The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world." Gibson then asked the deputy, "Are you a Jew?"
A decorated sergeant and Arabic language specialist was dismissed from the U.S. Army under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, though he says he never told his superiors he was gay and his accuser was never identified.
Sounds like a witch-hunt atmosphere to me.
On Dec. 2, investigators formally interviewed Copas and asked if he understood the military’s policy on homosexuals, if he had any close acquaintances who were gay, and if he was involved in community theater.
Feel safer yet?
Copas now carries the discharge papers, which mention his awards and citations, so he can document his military service for prospective employers. But the papers also give the reason for his dismissal.
So now he ‘outs’ himself to any propsective employer every time.
But the GAO also noted that nearly 800 dismissed gay or lesbian service members had critical abilities, including 300 with important language skills. Fifty-five were proficient in Arabic, including Copas, a graduate of the Defense Language Institute in California.
Discharging and replacing them has cost the Pentagon nearly $369 million, according to the Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
Your tax dollars at work.
How fucking wrongheaded.
U.S. citizens suspected of terror ties might be detained indefinitely and barred from access to civilian courts under legislation proposed by the Bush administration, say legal experts reviewing an early version of the bill. A 32-page draft measure is intended to authorize the Pentagon’s tribunal system, established shortly after the 2001 terrorist attacks to detain and prosecute detainees captured in the war on terror. The tribunal system was thrown out last month by the Supreme Court.
It’s happening faster and faster these days.
Finally. A well-acted, well-written, engaging, suspenseful, honest, intelligent and altogether fantastic film.
For the gay men and women reading: If you could take a pill that made you straight, would you?
Could you turn back years of family friction, workplace tension and social pressure? Would you opt to live a more ‘normal’ life?
That is the issue at hand in Hard Pill. Tim is a ‘not gay enough’ gay guy living with the daily rejection of not being handsome enough or masculine enough or muscular enough to get the right guy. He doesn’t feel accepted by the ‘gay community’ and would just simply rather be straight. This wish comes to fruition with the announcement of a university study for a pill that proposes to turn homosexual men into happy heterosexuals. You might expect lots of big crowd fireworks and media circus, but the filmmakers dump that and opt for a tight claustrophobic chamber piece as Tim’s decision ricochets through the lives of his friends with cringe-worthy results. You know when you watch a movie and you shudder because you know that nothing is going to be simple and you feel for the characters and the pain they are about to experience? This is like that. Points are made about the ethics and morals of the pill but always in direct context to the story – never settling for easy answers and always showing the moral muddling of love, sex and identity.
Watching the special features, you learn that the film was made via a specific story outline, with lots of improvisation of parts of the actual film as well as character development – that’s why it is so well-acted.
An obscure law approved by a Republican-controlled Congress a decade ago has made the Bush administration nervous that officials and troops involved in handling detainee matters might be accused of committing war crimes, and prosecuted at some point in U.S. courts. Senior officials have responded by drafting legislation that would grant U.S. personnel involved in the terrorism fight new protections against prosecution for past violations of the War Crimes Act of 1996. That law criminalizes violations of the Geneva Conventions governing conduct in war and threatens the death penalty if U.S.-held detainees die in custody from abusive treatment.
Anybody know the context of the 1996 law? Why did it come out of committee and get passed? What was happening in the news at the time – or did it pass by easily?
Paul over at Brainshrub does a fantastic, pretty balanced, thumbnail sketch of the Israel/Palestine conflict. Highly recommended for those in the United States of Amnesia. Quote:
Or, to boil the whole thing even further – The I/P conflict is bastards fighting bastards who are backed by rich bastards. It’s doesn’t matter who you want to substitute the first two bastards for: Israelis or Palestinians. It’s a never-ending tale of pain and woe, who’s only justification is: “He started it!”
and in part 2
Palestinians are mad that their homes have been taken from them, and the people left behind are treated like animals…. The Hebrews want a home for their people because they’ve been persecuted everywhere else.
Jeff Jacboy went on a tear about the term ‘chicken hawk’ and how it was a slur. Glen Greenwald responds:
Chicken-hawkism is the belief that advocating a war from afar is a sign of personal courage and strength, and that opposing a war from afar is a sign of personal cowardice and weakness.
and aiming at Bill Kristol
[Kristol] does not plan to fight himself, but rather, that he assigns to himself the courage and strength of those who will actually fight the war, simply because he sits in his office, protected and safe, and advocates that the war be fought.
“Chicken hawks” are not those who simply urge war without fighting in it, but who urge war and then pretend that doing so makes them courageous, powerful and strong.
Also: Does Bill Kristol scare the complete hell out of anybody else? Whenever I see him or Richard Perle speak I just can’t believe what is coming out of their mouths… such exceptionalist/imperialist bullshit.