I've got the weekend/holiday duty, and with vacations I've been quite busy the last two days, so it's been a little difficult both to read enough to be informed as well as to keep current and pertinent on the blog. Oh, well, if it's an avocation and not a vocation, what do you expect. Hey, you get what you pay for.
On the other hand, there have been quite a few stories worth noting, at least briefly, but certainly one or two deserve some detail. First some quick hits
- The Tour de France starts today, and some of the contenders to inherit the yellow jersey from the retired Lance Armstrong will find themselves on the outside looking in. Ivan Basso and Jan Ullrich, among others, will not be riding, having been implicated in a blood-doping scandal. Apparently some frozen blood, steroids and EPO (a hormone to stimulate red cell production) were found in apartments raided in Spain, along with information to implicate the riders. As of Wednesday it seemed Ullrich might ride. Apparently not.
- This story both saddens and angers me. If the allegations against these soldiers are true they deserve a long and uncomfortable stay in Leavenworth, at minimum.
On the other hand, the story at this time makes little sense. I've read that one of the soldiers has confessed to involvement. Still, if big media gets this one wrong I will be furious at them for printing rumors and innuendo once again to the detriment of American efforts in Iraq.
- Germany and Italy moved on to the semifinals in the World Cup. The Argentines played the Germans to a standstill through 120+ minutes, only to lose on penalty shots. Italy, after
lucking outbeing handed a winnarrowly prevailing against a game Australia had little trouble with the Ukraine. England and Portugal, then Brazil and France will finalize the quartet.
- Well, if you're expecting detailed constitutional legal analysis from a middle-aged physician, you've got another thing coming. I didn't jump into the Hamdan fire with both feet yesterday for a simple reason - I was busy. I also wanted to study things a little bit, to see what other informed and intelligent individuals had to say before commenting. By now there has been so much written that I have little to add. I would point you to a couple of interesting pieces, however.
I do want to make one point, or rather ask one question that seems to me to remain unanswered. The Geneva Conventions, General Convention III is referenced as indicating that Al Qaeda operatives, who are not affiliated with any national government when caught on the field of battle, are involved in a conflict "not of an international character" but occurring within a signatory nation, so therefore must be treated as under the Conventions. But that is Article 3 of GC III. Article 4 gives other requirements for treatment under the Conventions, and for Al Qaeda terrorists these do not seem to apply. Why shouldn't both Article 3 and Article 4 have to apply to the individuals for the individuals to be covered?
- Stuart Taylor, writing in National Journal, wants to know where the outrage is from conservatives over Stuart Libby's alleged perjury in l'affaire du Plame. I'm not sure what he's referring to. If Mr. Libby lied to a grand jury, and it's worth it to you to go after him for perjury, then by all means try him and punish him if you must. However, that does not mean that Valerie Plame was 'outed', as the evidence is strong that she was not a covert agent when said 'outing' occurred. It also does not mean that Mr. Libby was the one who 'outed' her, as Mr. Woodward could tell you (if only).
- If you must read anything on the escalating conflict between Hamas terrorists and Israel, read Jay Tea's summation of why he supports Israel in this, and Ken McCracken's insight into the philosophical roots of Palestinian hatred.
7/2/06 0645: link added
