Slashdot Mirror

If your own brain and the "Weekly World News" origination weren't enough...

Do a search on news.google.com for "Andrew Carlssin" to see if it's "legit news" and you'll get 4 hits, one of which is this rebuttal from the Times Online, a UK paper.

Snopes also looked into this and explains it's false here. When something is too much to believe, wouldn't you check there first?

--LP

If your own brain and the "Weekly World News" origination weren't enough...

Do a search on news.google.com for "Andrew Carlssin" to see if it's "legit news" and you'll get 4 hits, one of which is this rebuttal from the Times Online, a UK paper.

Snopes also looked into this and explains it's false here. When something is too much to believe, wouldn't you check there first?

--LP

I like clickable links

WWI cemetary desecration: "Dig up your rubbish, it is contaminating our soil" - referring to 11,000 British buried in Etaples, France

France, go fuck yourself!

Just to show you how fscked up the French are:
From The Times Online

By Charles Bremner and Alan Hamilton

ILL-FEELING between Britain and France over the invasion of Iraq has plumbed new depths with the desecration of that most sacred of memorials, a war cemetery.
The defilement of Commonwealth war graves in northern France coincided with a poll for The Times which found that 54 per cent of Britons no longer regarded France as a close ally because of its opposition to the war.

Relations will be further rent by a second poll, in Le Monde, showing that only a third of the French felt that they were on the same side as the Americans and British, and that another third desired outright Iraqi victory over "les anglo-saxons".

Eleven thousand Allied soldiers lie buried in well-tended peace at Etaples, on the Channel coast near Le Touquet, victims of the struggle by Anglo-Saxons to liberate the French from the German invaders during the First World War.

Last week the obelisk raised in their memory was defiled by red-painted insults such as "Rosbeefs go home"; "May Saddam prevail and spill your blood"; and, in a reference to the long-dead casualties beneath the manicured turf, "They are soiling our land".

Local gendarmerie have launched an inquiry, but have so far found no clues. They say there had been no significant demonstrations against the war in that area of France.

The graffiti have been scrubbed off, but the incident has provoked outrage among British politicians, war graves staff and the few remaining relatives of those buried at Etaples. French politicians have joined the condemnation.

Bruce George, Labour chairman of the Commons Defence Committee, said: "Remembering what sacrifice these men made for the liberation of France, I cannot believe any mature, sane person would be so stupid as that."

David Uffold, 63, a Shropshire farmer, is the only surviving relative of Rifleman Frederick Uffold of the London Regiment, who is buried at Etaples. "I find it sickening that anyone would vandalise the cemetery," he said. "It is the last place they should be protesting about Iraq. These fellows were drafted in to fight for France. I can't see any connection between the men buried at Etaples and the war in Iraq."

Peter Francis, of the Commonwealth War Graves Commission, said he was disgusted that a place remembering those who died defending freedom in world wars long ago should be dragged into a current political debate.

French politicians did their best to portray the desecration as an isolated act, but it nonetheless underlined anti-American and anti-British emotions running through France over what is seen there as a bungled invasion rapidly turning into a humanitarian disaster.

President Chirac's spokesman said: "We are indignant and shocked by the desecration of the graves of soldiers who fought for our liberty." Jean-Pierre Raffarin, the Prime Minister, said: "The Americans are not the enemy; just because we are against this war, it does not mean that we want the victory of dictatorship over democracy."

As stated here.

"In the key period between 1973-91 the US exported a mere $5 million of weapons to Iraq; more reprehensibly the UK sold $330 million-worth of arms. Of much greater interest are the arms export totals to Iraq of the four countries most against military action: Germany with $995 million, China $5,500 million, France $9,240 million, and the Russians a massive $31,800 million. So the claim that we armed Saddam has to be treated with a degree of care, particularly by those who would award the moral high ground in this debate to the leaders of nations such as Germany, France and Russia."

At least the U.S. is willing to do something to try to fix this mess...the U.S. was certainly NOT alone in creating it. They are likely a smaller factor than many seem to want to make them out to be. I'm not saying that the U.S. is completely innocent, but they sure as hell weren't alone in arming him.

"The first job of Delta Force commandos will be to isolate Saddam from his military commanders. They plan to hack into and shut down Iraq's communications and power facilities using laptop computers"

The truth is, unfortunately, is that it is certain that innocent Iraqis will die. The only question will be whether they die in a war to liberate their countrymen or, for example, in machine designed to shred plastic, or with their son's limbs in the jaws of wild dogs. Sorry for the harsh language but if you can't distinguish this as evil, the problem is with you.

Oh, by the way: show me the Iraqis in your anti-war protests. Better yet, listen to this Iraqi on the subject. And while you're at it, show me the other country that has ever pledged to avoid civilian casualties at all turns. China? Russia? And while I'm at it, imagine a world in which either of those lovely fellows dominate the world. Having trouble? Ask a Tibetan or Hungarian (that thought courtesy of John Derbyshire).

Finally, you are factually incorrect about no consensus in the U.N. We absolutely have a consensus; it is simply that there are countries that oppose us and possess veto power.

Why do you cry only now, when Hussein's regime has caused the death of more than 2 million Iraqis? Note sadly the innocents that will die in this conflict, and then weep with joy at the lives they will be free to live when this is over.

Listen to this mp3 and tell me how Bush is just as bad as Saddam. You'd have your sorry ass murdered for equating Bush to Saddam if you were in Baghdad and your family would be billed for the bullet (unless of course the Iraqis decided to kill you with their human shredder).

Wow. I don't get how something so idiotic gets modded up.

Won't even answer the killed 100 people slant, but two bit dictator? Tell that to the witnesses who saw Saddam do this: "There was a machine designed for shredding plastic. Men were dropped into it and we were again made to watch. Sometimes they went in head first and died quickly. Sometimes they went in feet first and died screaming. It was horrible. I saw 30 people die like this. Their remains would be placed in plastic bags and we were told they would be used as fish food . . . on one occasion, I saw Qusay [President Saddam Hussein's youngest son] personally supervise these murders."" Saddam is a mass murderer

Here is an interesting link. Short version: Iraqi agents use plastic shredders to execute people. You know, shredders to recycle plastic objects. Big metal drums that grind stuff up.

The correct location of the article my fellow AC cites.

Um, he didn't say war was a dumb idea, but he did express reservations. Here. I'm not too surprised this wasn't widely reported in American media, even though the address took place at a US University.

According to a Sunday Times report the other day, Microsoft is the "best" UK employer. Scary quote from the article:

"We aren't the Moonies, but it is like a family. I met my wife, Moira, at work and when we got married the canteen even offered to bake our cake!"

I expect their children will automatically be indentured at the age of 16 ;-).

According to a Sunday Times report the other day, Microsoft is the "best" UK employer. Scary quote from the article:

"We aren't the Moonies, but it is like a family. I met my wife, Moira, at work and when we got married the canteen even offered to bake our cake!"

I expect their children will automatically be indentured at the age of 16 ;-).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A213 40-2003Feb3.html
http://slate.msn.com/id/2078104/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A167 19-2003Feb2.html
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/035/oped/Rebuild ing_the_dream_of_space_exploration+.shtml
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/editorial/17 63385
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/editorial/68231. htm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,482-564534 ,00.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/03/opinion/03ALDR.h tml
http://www.msnbc.com/news/867640.asp?0cv=KB10
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Artic les/000/000/002/204pkfxj.asp
http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101030210/sctone. html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A134 74-2003Feb2.html
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/ 5086944.htm
http://www2.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/bev02 022003.htm

OMG! Kartoffelkanone Desktop Environment.....
it starts to make sense to me now.

You really should have included the link to the potato bazooka story.

From a story by John Le Carre

America has entered one of its periods of historical madness, but this is the worst I can remember: worse than McCarthyism, worse than the Bay of Pigs and in the long term potentially more disastrous than the Vietnam War.
The reaction to 9/11 is beyond anything Osama bin Laden could have hoped for in his nastiest dreams. As in McCarthy times, the freedoms that have made America the envy of the world are being systematically eroded. The combination of compliant US media and vested corporate interests is once more ensuring that a debate that should be ringing out in every town square is confined to the loftier columns of the East Coast press.

The imminent war was planned years before bin Laden struck, but it was he who made it possible. Without bin Laden, the Bush junta would still be trying to explain such tricky matters as how it came to be elected in the first place; Enron; its shameless favouring of the already-too-rich; its reckless disregard for the world's poor, the ecology and a raft of unilaterally abrogated international treaties. They might also have to be telling us why they support Israel in its continuing disregard for UN resolutions.

But bin Laden conveniently swept all that under the carpet. The Bushies are riding high. Now 88 per cent of Americans want the war, we are told. The US defence budget has been raised by another $60 billion to around $360 billion. A splendid new generation of nuclear weapons is in the pipeline, so we can all breathe easy. Quite what war 88 per cent of Americans think they are supporting is a lot less clear. A war for how long, please? At what cost in American lives? At what cost to the American taxpayer's pocket? At what cost -- because most of those 88 per cent are thoroughly decent and humane people -- in Iraqi lives?

How Bush and his junta succeeded in deflecting America's anger from bin Laden to Saddam Hussein is one of the great public relations conjuring tricks of history. But they swung it. A recent poll tells us that one in two Americans now believe Saddam was responsible for the attack on the World Trade Centre. But the American public is not merely being misled. It is being browbeaten and kept in a state of ignorance and fear. The carefully orchestrated neurosis should carry Bush and his fellow conspirators nicely into the next election.

Those who are not with Mr Bush are against him. Worse, they are with the enemy. Which is odd, because I'm dead against Bush, but I would love to see Saddam's downfall -- just not on Bush's terms and not by his methods. And not under the banner of such outrageous hypocrisy.

The religious cant that will send American troops into battle is perhaps the most sickening aspect of this surreal war-to-be. Bush has an arm-lock on God. And God has very particular political opinions. God appointed America to save the world in any way that suits America. God appointed Israel to be the nexus of America's Middle Eastern policy, and anyone who wants to mess with that idea is a) anti-Semitic, b) anti-American, c) with the enemy, and d) a terrorist.

God also has pretty scary connections. In America, where all men are equal in His sight, if not in one another's, the Bush family numbers one President, one ex-President, one ex-head of the CIA, the Governor of Florida and the ex-Governor of Texas.

Care for a few pointers? George W. Bush, 1978-84: senior executive, Arbusto Energy/Bush Exploration, an oil company; 1986-90: senior executive of the Harken oil company. Dick Cheney, 1995-2000: chief executive of the Halliburton oil company. Condoleezza Rice, 1991-2000: senior executive with the Chevron oil company, which named an oil tanker after her. And so on. But none of these trifling associations affects the integrity of God's work.

In 1993, while ex-President George Bush was visiting the ever-democratic Kingdom of Kuwait to receive thanks for liberating them, somebody tried to kill him. The CIA believes that "somebody" was Saddam. Hence Bush Jr's cry: "That man tried to kill my Daddy." But it's still not personal, this war. It's still necessary. It's still God's work. It's still about bringing freedom and democracy to oppressed Iraqi people.

To be a member of the team you must also believe in Absolute Good and Absolute Evil, and Bush, with a lot of help from his friends, family and God, is there to tell us which is which. What Bush won't tell us is the truth about why we're going to war. What is at stake is not an Axis of Evil -- but oil, money and people's lives. Saddam's misfortune is to sit on the second biggest oilfield in the world. Bush wants it, and who helps him get it will receive a piece of the cake. And who doesn't, won't.

If Saddam didn't have the oil, he could torture his citizens to his heart's content. Other leaders do it every day -- think Saudi Arabia, think Pakistan, think Turkey, think Syria, think Egypt.

Baghdad represents no clear and present danger to its neighbours, and none to the US or Britain. Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, if he's still got them, will be peanuts by comparison with the stuff Israel or America could hurl at him at five minutes' notice. What is at stake is not an imminent military or terrorist threat, but the economic imperative of US growth. What is at stake is America's need to demonstrate its military power to all of us -- to Europe and Russia and China, and poor mad little North Korea, as well as the Middle East; to show who rules America at home, and who is to be ruled by America abroad.

The most charitable interpretation of Tony Blair's part in all this is that he believed that, by riding the tiger, he could steer it. He can't. Instead, he gave it a phoney legitimacy, and a smooth voice. Now I fear, the same tiger has him penned into a corner, and he can't get out.

It is utterly laughable that, at a time when Blair has talked himself against the ropes, neither of Britain's opposition leaders can lay a glove on him. But that's Britain's tragedy, as it is America's: as our Governments spin, lie and lose their credibility, the electorate simply shrugs and looks the other way. Blair's best chance of personal survival must be that, at the eleventh hour, world protest and an improbably emboldened UN will force Bush to put his gun back in his holster unfired. But what happens when the world's greatest cowboy rides back into town without a tyrant's head to wave at the boys?

Blair's worst chance is that, with or without the UN, he will drag us into a war that, if the will to negotiate energetically had ever been there, could have been avoided; a war that has been no more democratically debated in Britain than it has in America or at the UN. By doing so, Blair will have set back our relations with Europe and the Middle East for decades to come. He will have helped to provoke unforeseeable retaliation, great domestic unrest, and regional chaos in the Middle East. Welcome to the party of the ethical foreign policy.

There is a middle way, but it's a tough one: Bush dives in without UN approval and Blair stays on the bank. Goodbye to the special relationship.

I cringe when I hear my Prime Minister lend his head prefect's sophistries to this colonialist adventure. His very real anxieties about terror are shared by all sane men. What he can't explain is how he reconciles a global assault on al-Qaeda with a territorial assault on Iraq. We are in this war, if it takes place, to secure the fig leaf of our special relationship, to grab our share of the oil pot, and because, after all the public hand-holding in Washington and Camp David, Blair has to show up at the altar.

"But will we win, Daddy?"

"Of course, child. It will all be over while you're still in bed."

"Why?"

"Because otherwise Mr Bush's voters will get terribly impatient and may decide not to vote for him."

"But will people be killed, Daddy?"

"Nobody you know, darling. Just foreign people."

"Can I watch it on television?"

"Only if Mr Bush says you can."

"And afterwards, will everything be normal again? Nobody will do anything horrid any more?"

"Hush child, and go to sleep."

Last Friday a friend of mine in California drove to his local supermarket with a sticker on his car saying: "Peace is also Patriotic". It was gone by the time he'd finished shopping.

America has entered one of its periods of historical madness, but this is the worst I can remember: worse than McCarthyism, worse than the Bay of Pigs and in the long term potentially more disastrous than the Vietnam War...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-530647,0 0.html

• The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is considering an investigation into accusations that fundamental flaws in the proposed "Son of Star Wars" system have been covered up.

  After months of demanding an inquiry into the affair, Ed Crawley, the chairman of MIT's aeronautics and astronautics department, has reversed previous refusals and recommended an investigation.

  The issue in question goes to the heart of missile defence technology, an article of faith among many Republicans and a key plank in Mr Bush's 2000 presidential manifesto.

  Dr Postol and fellow critics say the ability of an interceptor missile to distinguish between an incoming warhead and the decoys likely to accompany it is deeply suspect. Any such doubts would cripple the credibility of the system.

Again, all as a matter of national security, and which did not make a splash stateside. The story at the link is much more detailed.

So what is the government going to do about this outbreak of integrity in the halls of learning?

Euro is being adapted by "progressive" nations like North Korea and Iraq...

North Korea is not the only state to adopt the euro. Iraq said that it would use it to sell oil and has converted its holdings at the UN. Cuba uses it for international transactions and has made it legal tender in the resort of Veradero Beach.

Way to go, eurotrash.

Really? They only need registration for special areas, like cricket coverage. I don't consider the Times worth reading, but the Guardian is, and is also free.

It's really against the nature of the web to put measures in place that prevent linking to information (as opposed to requiring reg for a subscription service). The existence of reg-free partner links basically acknowledge this. The NYTimes wants its content available on Google News, but at the same time, it tries to make most of its users play a silly marketing game.

Like I say, if the NYT wants accurate demographics, they should use sampling. If they want people to sign up for opt-in marketing mails, they should sell ads on a useful e-mail newsletter or something. The registration is annoying, and also likely to give them misleading information.

They may oppose Microsoft, but the government of Namibia is gearing up to be another Robert Mugabe administration -- plunging the entire country and African economy into chaos by committing ethnic cleansing against the white minority.

Don't be fooled by their opposition to Microsoft: the black government are nothing but racist, communist thieves who could care less about open source.

More on their white hitlist can be read here:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0%2C%2C3-4620 88%2C00.html

Certainly not! However, there are a few countries that have events and issues that are newsworthy to the rest of the world... and Iceland and Finland, and the others vaunted in this article, are less frequently among that group.

Let's take a look at what is on the front page of one of Reykjavik's major newspapers today... Well, quite a bit of news from the USA! Hmm, how about the New York Times? Or the London Times? Or the Moscow News? Any stories about Iceland there? Not likely.

The point I'm trying to make is that an article stating that the US is 17th in "Freedom of the Press" is like saying that Moosejaw, Montana* is doing a better job than Los Angeles, California at managing rush-hour traffic congestion. You can't make blanket comparisons between the United States and most other countries in an apples-to-apples manner, as this article tried to do.

email sent by Robert Hughes, disgruntled Time art critic, to AOLTimeWarner macher Gerry Levin, quoted by Tina Brown:

Seems like some of the Time Warner employees are feeling some strong emotions about their management's attempt to hitch themselves to a sinking ISP...

Another article, with pictures of the pyramid rover, and also some background on the Rudolf Gantenbrink controversy. He's the robotics engineer who (some argued) was left uncredited and uninvolved (not even invited to the opening?). I don't know the whole story.

CNN blurb on this special (with video clip)

The ananova take on the special.

The Times (UK) take. Pretty good.

A little on Zahi Hawass

An American friend who was staying in London noticed the difference. "I got funny looks when I was using my laptop on the Tube," he told me. I know those funny looks -- they stopped me using my laptop or handheld on public transport in the UK.

I could deduce some revealing sociological basis for this -- the brashness of the American male, the technophobia of the British bourgeoisie. But it would be balderdash. After all, the British show strong hardware-bonding instincts with the mobile phone.

The reason is simpler: cash. The average $1,500 American laptop, mapped to take account of the difference in average annual income in the UK, costs the equivalent of £600. British laptops cost closer to £1,500.

In the UK, a laptop is a luxury, perhaps grudgingly paid for by a company, rarely purchased by the individual. They are not possessions, they are fragile prizes, too costly to be flashed around in public, too precious to be damaged with cheap paint jobs.

Here in America, laptops are a utility, a personal effect, as opposed to the mobile phone. These are still expensive to rent and run, are bought mainly by businesses, and are hardly something to sully with stickers. The idea of customising a phone with different ring tones and coloured panels has been slow to catch on. Even carrying it around all the time is thought of as needlessly ostentatious by many Americans.

It is a subtle swaparound, but one that might have a bearing on how future technologies spread. Perhaps there will be a split between the specialist, sprightly, throwaway mobile-phone-loving nations, and the general-purpose, hefty but powerful, laptop-wielding old school of the States.

As has been mentioned this is not such a problem in other countries that have had a proliferation of mobile phones longer than the US and we are growing out of it. I have a feeling that this would end up like those (aprocryphal) laws often quoted on joke sites - "It is illegal to drive a pig to market while not wearing shoes"

Maybe the American press are skirting the issue - but the British press certainly aren't: try
The Guardian ("fraud" appears 5 times) and The Times which even uses the word "scam".

Zack

RIP.

.ad afgjk uba dooba doo DRUDGE REPORT 2002
Support The DrudgeReport; Visit Our Advertisers

WASH POST: Bush Admin Split over Iraq...

IRAQ 'CLOSE TO NUCLEAR BOMB GOAL'

Passive smoking can kill your cat... TIMEWARNER to charge flood victims for cable boxes... Archerd: Democrats seeking Hollywood money... Republicans will tie ANWR to Iraq; Say threat in Baghdad necessitates oil drilling in Alaska... Ventura Goofs On God... AP WORLD
AP NATIONAL
AP WASHINGTON
AP BUSINESS
AP ENTERTAINMENT
AP ON THE HOUR
AP HEADLINES
AP BREAKING
SEARCH
Headline:
Date Range:
Within 14 Days Within 13 Days Within 12 Days Within 11 Days Within 10 Days Within 9 Days Within 8 Days Within 7 Days Within 6 Days Within 5 Days Within 4 Days Within 3 Days Within 2 Days Within 1 Day
Any word(s) in article:


ANANOVA
DOW JONES
BLOOMBERG
PAKISTAN WIRE
PAKISTAN BROADCASTING
ISLAMIC REPUBLIC WIRE
ITAR-TASS
KYODO WIRE
PR NEWSWIRE
[SHOWBIZ] PR WIRE
SCRIPPS HOWARD
US INFO WIRE
U.S. NEWSWIRE
WORLDWIRES
XINHUA ABC NEWS
AD AGE DEADLINE
BBC
BBC AUDIO
BILLBOARD
BOSTON GLOBE
BROADCASTING & CABLE
CBS NEWS
C-SPAN SCHEDULE
CHICAGO TRIB
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE
CNN
CNN TRANSCRIPTS
DAILY VARIETY
D.C. DAYBOOK
E!
ELECTRONIC MEDIA
EMERGENCY NET
ENT WEEKLY
FINANCIAL TIMES
FORBES MAG
FOX NEWS
INTERNATIONAL HERALD TRIB
HILL
H'WOOD REPORTER
HUMAN EVENTS
INSIGHT MAG
INVEST BUS DAILY
JERUSALEM POST
JEWISH WORLD REVIEW
LA DAILY NEWS
LA TIMES
LUCIANNE.COM
MEDIA CHECK
MEDIA LIFE
MSNBC
MUCHMUSIC
NATION
NATIONAL ENQUIRER
NATIONAL REVIEW
NEW REPUBLIC
NY DAILY NEWS
NY OBSERVER
NY POST
NY TIMES
NEW YORKER
NEWSBYTES
NEWSWEEK
N. KOREAN NEWS
PEOPLE MAG
R & R
REASON MAG
ROLL CALL
SKY NEWS
SLATE: PAPERS
STAR
TIME MAG
TV SHOPTALK
[U.K.] DAILY MIRROR
DAILY RECORD
[U.K.] EVENING STANDARD
[U.K.] EXPRESS
[U.K.] GUARDIAN
[U.K.] INDEPENDENT
[U.K.] NEWS OF THE WORLD
[U.K.] PEOPLENEWS
[U.K.] STAR
[U.K.] SUN
U.K. TABLOIDS
[U.K.] TELEGRAPH
[U.K.] TIMES
US NEWS
USA TODAY
VILLAGE VOICE
WASH POST
WASH TIMES
WEEKLY STANDARD
WORLDNETDAILY
UPDATE: Mob Kills 2 in Ill. After Van Crash... US Senate Fails to Pass Medicare Drug Plan... Agents leaving Border Patrol in droves, union says... French spa to host next G8 summit... GLASSMAN/HASSETT: Dow 36000 Revisited... MATT DRUDGE
3 AM GIRLS
CINDY ADAMS
ARMY ARCHERD
DAVE BARRY
MICHAEL BARONE
PETER BART
BOB BARTLEY
STEPHEN BATTAGLIO
MARILYN BECK/SMITH
BLANKLEY
GLORIA BORGER
L. BRENT BOZELL
BRESLIN
DAVID BRODER
PAT BUCHANAN
BILL BUCKLEY
MONA CHAREN
ELEANOR CLIFT
RICHARD COHEN
PAUL COLFORD
JOE CONASON
ANN COULTER
STANLEY CROUCH
MICHAEL DALY
LOU DOBBS
MAUREEN DOWD
STEVE DUNLEAVY
ROGER EBERT
JOSEPH FARAH
SUZANNE FIELDS
ARI FLEISCHER
MICHAEL FLEMING
ROGER FRIEDMAN
JOHN FUND
LEAH GARCHIK
BILL GERTZ
GEORGIE GEYER
JONAH GOLDBERG
ELLEN GOODMAN
MARTIN GROVE
LLOYD GROVE
PETE HAMILL
CARL HIAASEN
NAT HENTOFF
CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS
H'WOOD REPORTER E-MAIL
ARIANNA HUFFINGTON
INSIDE BELTWAY
INSIDE POLITICS
INSIDE THE RING
MOLLY IVINS
AL KAMEN
MICKEY KAUS
KEITH J. KELLY
MICHAEL KELLY
MICHAEL KINSLEY
HARRY KNOWLES
MORT KONDRACKE
KRAUTHAMMER
LARRY KUDLOW
HOWIE KURTZ
JOHN LEO
DAVID LIMBAUGH
RUSH LIMBAUGH
HAL LINDSEY
RICH LOWRY
MICHELLE MALKIN
CHRIS MATTHEWS
MARY MCGRORY
MICHAEL MEDVED
DICK MORRIS
PEGGY NOONAN
BOB NOVAK
OFF THE RECORD
KATE O'BEIRNE
MARVIN OLASKY
BILL O'REILLY
PAGE SIX
ANDREA PEYSER
JIM PINKERTON
JOHN PODHORETZ
TV PROGRAMMING INSIDER
WES PRUDEN
ANNA QUINDLEN
WILLIAM RASPBERRY
REX REED
RICHARD REEVES
J. MAX ROBINS
RICHARD ROEPER
RUSH/MOLLOY
BILL SAFIRE
SCHLAFLY
TOM SHALES
GAIL SHISTER
LIZ SMITH
MICHAEL SNEED
JOE SOBRAN
THOMAS SOWELL
ANDREW SULLIVAN
HELEN THOMAS
CAL THOMAS
HUNTER S. THOMPSON
NEAL TRAVIS
TV COLUMN
DEB WEISS
JEFFREY WELLS
GEORGE WILL
WALTER WILLIAMS
WASHINGTON WHISPERS
BILL ZWECKER
GERTH ZEROS IN ON CHENEY... AIRLINES TO TRIM FLIGHTS ON SEPT 11... Accounting controls on EU budget 'unreliable'... Man Accused of Raping Nine Women He Met Through Internet... Pentagon: Hamas experimenting with chemical weapons... AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
AFP INTERNATIONAL
AFP NEWS WRAP
AFX
UPI WIRE
UPI NATIONAL
UPI WORLD
AP/REUTERS PHOTO WIRE
REUTERS ROUNDUP
REUTERS SPOTLIGHT
REUTERS WORLD
REUTERS POLITICS
REUTERS ODD
SEARCH






*FINDS ANY STORY LINKED ON DRUDGE WEATHER ACTION
QUAKE SHEET x x x x x VISITS TO DRUDGE
07/31/02

004,776,309 IN PAST 24 HOURS
107,519,403 IN PAST 31 DAYS
895,224,122 IN PAST YEAR DRUDGE ARCHIVES DRUDGE REFERENCE DESK EMAIL: DRUDGE@DRUDGEREPORT.COM SUPER-POWERED BY ALLEGIANCE TELECOM... DRUDGE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB SPEECH TRANSCRIPT

The Times is a great paper thats been arround longer then america, this article is from the New York Times

For what it's worth, science fiction, fantasy and speculative fiction regularly appears on the bestseller lists in the UK.

E.g. at the Times this week [1] I see books by Steven King and David Gemmel, Star Wars Episode II.

I don't know whether that's because people in the UK have wider reading habits, or whether it's because the list is less subject to political coruption, for example. The UK music charts sometimes have a classical work, such as Gorcki's 3rd symphony or (less recently) the pie Jesu from Lloyd Webber's Requiem, which was number 1 in the singles charts for several weeks.

Or maybe it's because there's only 20% of the population of the US, so there's less flattening to mediocrity, I don't know.

[1] www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,264-289569,00.htm l