MOVIE star Nicole Kidman is expecting her first child in the Spring. The Aussie, who wed country singer Keith Urban six months ago, proudly showed off her bump this weekend. She is expected to make an official announcement shortly.
Hubby Keith, 39, was not with Nicole yesterday because he is in drug rehab in Australia.
otherwise engaged
November 27th, 2006 — celebrity culture
I remember it well
November 27th, 2006 — media
Glenn Garvin describes the four days in November 1963 when the people of the United States were united by television:
Within moments of that first announcement on Dallas’ ABC affiliate WFAA — the reporter, Jay Watson, had dashed to the studio from the scene of the assassination a few blocks away, dragging witnesses along with him — America’s three broadcast television networks were, for the first time, dumping their regular programming for a breaking news story.
The soap operas, Westerns and quiz shows would not return until after Kennedy’s funeral, four days and $40 million in lost commercials later. By then, 175 million Americans had tuned in to the networks’ coverage for an average of 32 hours apiece.
Along with TV cameras, they had toured the sniper’s nest from which the shots were fired, seen the accused assassin arrested and then murdered, visited the rotunda where the president’s body lay in state, and burst into tears as his little boy saluted the flag-draped coffin. Newspapers churned out extra editions all weekend, but they were keepsakes, not news: We’d already seen it on television.
“That was the weekend that everything changed in American journalism,” says CBS Washington correspondent Bob Schieffer, recalling Kennedy’s assassination 43 years ago Wednesday. “Up until that weekend, most people got their news from print media — newspapers and magazines. From that weekend on, people turned to television.”
Yes indeedy. And for the first time they turned away from newspapers.
”How quickly TV took over!” says Ruth Ann Rugg, director of interpretation at Dallas’ Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza, the assassination-site center that earlier this year hosted an exhibit on reporting that day. “It was the first time that Americans were glued to their TV sets. What happened, what was going on with the suspect, [Lee Harvey] Oswald getting killed, the funeral procession — it was all right there on TV.”
Reporters didn’t necessarily realize that the entire paradigm of journalism was shifting around them –
You can say that again! And it wouldn’t be the last time, either.
radiated to death for oil?
November 27th, 2006 — geopolitics, spy vs. spy
Following up on my earlier post, here’s someone else speaking up on murdered Soviet spy Litvinenko’s behalf, with some even more enticing tidbits:
It emerged yesterday that Mr Litvinenko travelled to Israel just weeks before he died to hand over evidence to a Russian billionaire of how agents working for President Putin dealt with his enemies running the oil company.
He passed this information to Leonid Nevzlin, the former second-in-command of Yukos, who fled to Tel Aviv in fear for his life after the Kremlin seized and then sold off the £21 billion company.
Mr Nevzlin told The Times that it was his “duty” to pass on the file. “Alexander had information on crimes committed with the Russian Government’s direct participation,” he said.”He only recently gave me and my attorneys documents that shed light on the most significant aspects of the Yukos affair.”
Investigators have told The Times that Mr Litvinenko had apparently uncovered “startling” new material about the Yukos affair and what happened to those opposing the forced break-up of the company.
This only looks like a mesmerizing entertainment, folks. It has the potential to cause untold chaos geopolitically, however. Because of everything else going on in the world, we’re not really in a position to mess with Russia, our putative ally. And you all thought the Middle East was complicated!
Darwin the terrorist
November 27th, 2006 — global culture war
Creationism isn’t just for “Christianists” anymore. It’s all the rage in Turkey too, only there’s an Islamic twist:
A lavishly illustrated “Atlas of Creation” is mysteriously turning up at schools and libraries in Turkey, proclaiming that Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution is the real root of terrorism. …
“Atlas of Creation” offers over 500 pages of splendid images comparing fossils with present-day animals to argue that Allah created all life as it is and evolution never took place.
Then comes a book-length essay arguing that Darwinism, by stressing the “survival of the fittest”, has inspired racism, Nazism, communism and terrorism.
“The root of the terrorism that plagues our planet is not any of the divine religions, but atheism, and the expression of atheism in our times (is) Darwinism and materialism,” it says.
This book has got a big audience in Turkey, too:
Creationism is so widely accepted here that Turkey placed last in a recent survey of public acceptance of evolution in 34 countries — just behind the United States.
Just sayin’.
spy stories
November 27th, 2006 — intrigue, spycraft
At one time in my life, I considered myself to be John Le Carre’s number-one fan (okay, okay: I was young): I loved, loved, loved to read about Cold War intrigue. So I would be totally delinquent if I went without mentioning on this blog the extraordinary—in the full meaning of the word—case of the Russian spy who was just murdered in London by radation poisoning from a substance that is 250 million times more potent than cyanide.
I can’t possibly link to all the stories, but I will quote an enticing tidbit from today’s report in the Houston Chronicle—which first details the fears that other people may have been contaminated and then concludes with this [emphasis mine]:
London’s Metropolitan Police said they were investigating it as a “suspicious death” rather than murder. They have not ruled out the possibility that Litvinenko may have poisoned himself.
Yes, it would be a gross failure of imagination to discount that possibility, particularly after the statement Litvinenko wrote on his deathbed.
I would like to thank many people. My doctors, nurses and hospital staff who are doing all they can for me; the British police who are pursuing my case with vigor and professionalism and are watching over me and my family. I would like to thank the British government for taking me under their care. I am honored to be a British citizen.
I would like to thank the British public for their messages of support and for the interest they have shown in my plight.
I thank my wife, Marina, who has stood by me. My love for her and our son knows no bounds.
But as I lie here, I can distinctly hear the beating of wings of the angel of death. I may be able to give him the slip but I have to say my legs do not run as fast as I would like. I think, therefore, that this may be the time to say one or two things to the person responsible for my present condition.
You may succeed in silencing me but that silence comes at a price. You have shown yourself to be as barbaric and ruthless as your most hostile critics have claimed.
You have shown yourself to have no respect for life, liberty or any civilized value.
You have shown yourself to be unworthy of your office, to be unworthy of the trust of civilized men and women.
You may succeed in silencing one man but the howl of protest from around the world will reverberate, Mr. Putin, in your ears for the rest of your life. May God forgive you for what you have done, not only to me but to beloved Russia and its people.
Maybe it’s cheap psychology, or maybe I’ve witnessed, read about, and heard about way too many betrayals in my lifetime, but that statement is one of two things: the truth or the last great sleight-of-hand by a master manipulator. We may never know.
There’s one person with no doubts, however: Oleg Kalugin, now an American citizen and formerly the head of counterintelligence of the Soviet-era KGB. He thinks Putin had Litvinenko “eliminated.” Here he is on CNN’s American Morning.
S. O’BRIEN: … Poisoning by Polonium. How unusual would this be, even for the KGB. Is it possible? Does it strike you as a mode the KGB would indeed do?
OLEG KALUGIN, FORMER KGB COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE CHIEF: Well, KGB uses different ways to eliminate people — different poisons. The one they used now against Mr. Litvinenko, something which I never heard of. But, that does not mean they don’t work more for — other ways to eliminate people. This is a criminal regime, and Mr. Putin had personal reasons to get rid of Mr. Litvinenko. So the substance they use, I say, may differ, but the ultimate result is the same. They remove physically the enemies of Putin’s regime.
S. O’BRIEN: So when you — Litvinenko before his death said that it had all — you know, it was sort of a classic case or had all the fingerprints, essentially, of the KGB. You would agree with that. Are you saying that the president, Vladimir Putin would even be knowledgeable of something like this?
KALUGIN: I’m pretty sure that he is knowledgeable. Mr. Litvinenko never hided his disdain and contempt for President Putin. In fact, in his first book written in Moscow and translated into English, as a matter of fact, “Blowing up Russia,” Mr. Litvinenko said that Mr. Putin’s elevation to power was thanks to a major plot to bomb apartment buildings and that allowed Putin to ride a wave of indignation become president. Mr. Litvinenko exposed the plot by the FSB to put their man in charge of Russia.
Now Mr. Litvinenko in his daily — I mean, sorry, weekly reports to the Chechen press, and I used to read them regularly, he actually was very vicious about President Putin. He would blame him personally for many things. He never showed any respect. In fact, he brought in his articles some nasty personal things about Putin’s character and behavior.
S. O’BRIEN: But did all of that add up to a dire threat that Mr. Litvinenko posed to the Russian president and the administration as a whole? I mean, some people described him as more of a gadfly. As you say, personal attacks, consistent attacks, regular reports, but was he so dangerous?
KALUGIN: Well, since Mr. Putin took over as chief of the Russian Security Services in 1998, there were a number of deaths attributed to the Russian Security Services. Some people were poisoned. For instance, Yuri Scheckachefin (ph), a top editor of the Russian liberal newspaper, he died under circumstances similar to that of Mr. Litvinenko. The Ukrainian president, current president, Mr. Yushchenko, was also poisoned, and the substance used against him was obviously manufactured by the Russian KGB laboratories.
So Mr. Putin may look benign on the service, but he’s a former KGB guy of the old Soviet school, and the regime he has now been nurturing reminds me of the old Soviet days, not the worst type of Soviet days, but obviously very much in line with the practices of the Soviet KGB.
S. O’BRIEN: We’re out of time, sir, but I’m curious, are you fearful for your own safety?
KALUGIN: Well, I’ve always been aware of potential threats, and I have been taking measures. I received anonymous calls. I received anonymous letters with threats. I would deliver all these messages to the U.S. law enforcement authorities, and that’s the way I protect myself, and I’m also going public. This is another way to feel safer in this world.
Most fascinating.
an opportunity for progress in the Middle East
November 27th, 2006 — Hamas, Israel, Middle East war, war
Grabbing a tiny window of opportunity amidst the imminent “three civil wars” predicted by Jordan’s King Abdullah and before the international shit hits the fan for Israel to do something, Ehud Olmert makes his move:
In a major policy speech, Mr Olmert pledged humanitarian and economic incentives if militants freed a captive Israeli soldier and violence ceased. …
Mr Olmert said Palestinians would see substantive improvements in their lives if they chose the path of peace.
“I hold out my hand in peace to our Palestinian neighbours in the hope that it won’t be returned empty,” Mr Olmert said.
Mr Olmert spoke of releasing many long-term Palestinian detainees in Israeli jails, lifting restrictions on the occupied territories, dismantling settlements and ultimately creating a viable state.
However, he also warned of the dire consequences if violence continued. …
The speech comes against a backdrop of increased international diplomacy.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s aides said talks should resume immediately and unconditionally.
Hamas is skeptical (and, of course, annoyed that Olmert has seized the moral high ground).
Hamas government spokesman Ghazi Hamad called Mr Olmert’s statement a “conspiracy” and “a new manoeuvre”.
“Mr Olmert is speaking about the Palestinian state without giving details about the borders,” Mr Hamad said.
That’s true. And I don’t blame them for being deeply skeptical. As the Beeb notes:
The BBC’s Jon Leyne in Jerusalem said all Mr Olmert’s pledges have been made before,
and yet:
[the] importance [of Olmert's pledges] lies in the context in which they are now being made.
The last four months have seen an upsurge of violence in the Gaza Strip which has killed more than 300 Palestinians, including scores of civilians. Five Israelis have also died.
Israeli troops re-entered Gaza - which they quit more than a year ago in a unilateral withdrawal - after Palestinian militants captured a soldier in a cross-border raid in June.
Mr Olmert won elections in March on a pledge to make further unilateral withdrawals, but credibility in the policy was dashed in a summer of conflict in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip.
Despite the terrible setbacks and the ferocious recent bloodletting, there is an opportunity for a better future for the Palestinian people.
Let us hope that both parties swallow their bitterness and do the grim work of moving forward.
the survivor’s secret
November 27th, 2006 — books, celebrity culture, gossip, media, publishing
…is cynicism.
“Would everybody stop being so naive? Of course I got paid,” [O.J.] Simpson said with a laugh.
Read all about it here.
In case you’re interested, Simpson claims the Regan project (her idea) was not a confession:
In the radio interview, the former football star was asked point-blank if he killed the pair.
“Absolutely not, and I maintained my innocence from day one,” he replied, adding a little later: “No matter what everybody wants to say, I didn’t do it.”
As for the “If I Did It” title, he added: “That was their title. That’s what they came up with. I didn’t pitch anything. I don’t make book deals.”
As for that other survivor, Judith Regan, Newsweek implies her power is on the wane.
But Regan’s meddlesome-free days are almost certainly over. Her projects will come under intense scrutiny, and the loose “organizational structure” under which she operated will likely change, according to News Corp. insiders who didn’t want to be identified discussing the embarrassing episode’s fallout.
Newsweek is really stretching it—why would an “organizational structure” change (whatever that means) result in a loss of power for Regan, who reportedly brings in over $100 million a year for HarperCollins and NewsCorp?
common sense
November 27th, 2006 — aside
Why does the Occam’s Razor answer (aka common sense) always appear at the end of a newspaper article?
Eugene O’Donnell, a professor of police studies at John Jay College, said a high number of shots fired underscores the threat the officers felt.
“The only reason to be shooting in New York City is that you or someone else is going to be killed and it’s going to be imminent,” he said. “It’s highly unlikely you fire a shot or two shots. You fire as many shots as you have to, to extinguish the threat. You don’t fire one round and say: ‘Did I hit him? Is he hit?’ ”
Because it’s the sensational gist (Officers Fire 50 Bullets and Kill a Young Groom on His Wedding Day)—and in this case the immediate conspiracy-theory angle proffered by the appearance of Al “I’m Here to Advocate on Behalf of Black People Hurt by Racism” Sharpton—that makes it a media story, that’s why.
Roughly 300 protesters gathered at a fiery rally led by Mr. Sharpton in front of Mary Immaculate Hospital yesterday, where Mr. Benefield and Mr. Guzman were recovering from their bullet wounds. Some protesters called for the ouster of Mr. Kelly; others demanded that the five officers resign.
Malcolm Smith, a Democratic state senator from Queens, urged calm, saying an impartial investigation was under way, but was drowned out by a chorus of shouts and boos. When Thomas White Jr., a councilman who represents the 28th District in Jamaica, said “We are not going to be angry,” the crowd roared back: “Oh, yes we are!”
Many at the protest saw parallels between Saturday’s shooting and the death of Amadou Diallo, an unarmed Western African immigrant who was fatally gunned down by police officers in 1999. One sign read, “41 now 50,” a reference to the number of shots fired at Mr. Diallo and the number fired Saturday night.
Here’s where the conspiracy angle starts to fall apart, or to heat up, depending on your point of view:
In Mr. Diallo’s shooting death, though, the four officers who fired at him were white. The undercover officer who fired the first shots Saturday was a Hispanic black, according to the police. Two other officers who fired at the Altima were black, and another two were white, one of whom went through one clip and reloaded his pistol, firing a total of 31 shots.
Let’s see. On Saturday there were five cops. The first one to shoot (the one who started the “contagious shooting” in the theory cited by the Times in the first article linked above) was black. Two others were black. (That’s three out of five, including the first one to shoot.) The two others were white. Of the 50 shots fired, a white cop fired 31 shots.
The “contagious shooting” theory would seem to indicate that the white guy who fired 31 times was acting pretty much on reflex after getting the danger signal from the first (black) cop.
Not a very sexy story, is it? Conspiracy theories (in this case, racism) are so much more satisfying. As stories, that is. Problem is: when we buy in to them, we perpetuate them.
