Dean's World

At least $8.8 billion in Iraqi funds that was given to Iraqi ministries by the former U.S.-led authority there cannot be accounted for, according to a draft U.S. audit set for release soon.

The audit by the Coalition Provisional Authority's own Inspector General blasts the CPA for "not providing adequate stewardship" of at least $8.8 billion from the Development Fund for Iraq that was given to Iraqi ministries.

The audit was first reported on a Web site earlier this month by journalist and retired Col. David Hackworth. A U.S. official confirmed the contents of the leaked audit cited by Hackworth were accurate.

The development fund is made up of proceeds from Iraqi oil sales, frozen assets from foreign governments and surplus from the U.N. Oil for Food Program. Its handling has already come under fire in a U.N.-mandated audit released last month.

Among the draft audit's findings were that payrolls in Iraqi ministries under Coalition Provisional Authority control were padded with thousands of ghost employees.

In one example, the audit said the CPA paid for 74,000 guards even though the actual number could not be validated. In another, 8,206 guards were listed on a payroll but only 603 people doing the work could be counted.

Beth Donovan has begun the Carnival of the Recipes. Man, some of those look good too....

I would like to see Senator Kerry, rather than shrieking that it's all Bush's fault, simply answer this ad's allegations.

Predictions: Kerry will continue to try to make this about who gave the Swift Boat Vets money rather than about what they're saying.

Sondra notes an effort to counter the work of racist, pro-fascist hate-freak Michael Moore.

In my rambling essay on sex, violence, and western civilization last week, I made extensive reference to a site called "Body in Mind."

The Egoist not long ago interviewed the proprieter of Body & Mind, a site dedicated to the non-sexually-explicit depiction of the female form, right here. The guy's just a little overserious, especially because few women can actually aspire to the kind of physical perfection he likes to portray in his wares. Then again, few men can aspire to Michelangelo's David, or just about any Greek or Roman statue, either.

I'll also be blunt: so far as "unrealistic body images" go, this guy's wares are miles ahead of what they peddle at women's magazines such as Cosmopolitian, Elle, or Vogue.

I intentionally invoked a well-known phrase recently, and a reader over at Jessica's Well named Vaughn called me on it. He's completely, and I mean completely, called me out on it. I wish I were so clever with a turn of phrase but I'm not. Read about it here.

Attention world: I was intentionally being snarky and faux-clever. That is all.

All that aside, it is pretty cool, aint it? (Evil grin.)

Jessica's Well thinks something Dean said is quite delicious.

I'm sure I'll come to regret this in some way 30 years hence.

Swift Boat Vets author and advocate John O'Neill will be on gun-loving freak Cam Edwards' show on NRA Radio today at 3:45 Eastern Time today. This is an open-mic, call-in radio show that you can view (or just listen to) over the Internet for free.

Call in. You can ask any question you want. Question his integrity, question his story, question his version of the events. Go ahead, he's just daring you. You can call in and get on the air and say anything you want. Listen to it here.

Go on, guys. Call O'Neill (or Cam) a liar, a partisan hack, an un-patriotic creep and a fascist, or just a very very wrong guy, if that's what you believe.

Go on, I dare you. Call in and tell the world why John O'Neill and his friends are liars. I'll even go one further: if Cam cuts you off or distorts your words, I promise to allow you to make any claim you like right here on this weblog, and to publish it unmodified, and even reprint it on my front page tomorrow morning.

Go on. Tell us all why the Swift Boat Vets for Truth are liars. We're listening, and we're watching. I won't censor any comments left to this post. Go on, tell us, tell us why it's all lies. I'll reprint it all, whatever you say, without a single modification.

(By the way, I didn't tell Cam I was going to do this. But I'm about to shoot him a note now that I've posted it. Either he's going to love it, or he's going to be really mad at me. Probably he won't be mad, but now he's on the spot. Heh. Sorry Cam. You asked for it.)

Oh, and before some cretin asks? I've never even spoken to Cam or Mr. O'Neill, and not one penny has passed between us. I just find this whole thing delightful.

I have been mildly amused to watch the Bush-hating left's reaction to the Swift Vet's story. First it was shock. Then it was angry denunciation and ridicule. Then it became an increasingly frenzied panic, while the mainstream press--whose reporters and editors vote overwhelmingly Democratic in every election--have maintained almost complete silence except to sneer at the Swifties.

The latest attempt has been by the increasingly laughingstock New York Times, which today finally broke its silence on the story with the shocking, stunning revelation that some of the Swift Boat Vets for Truth have long hated John Kerry (oooh! aaaah!) and that after the Democratic Convention was over, some big-money Republicans gave them money to fund an ad.

Which anyone who's actually read the Swift Boat Vets for Truth web site already knows.

What's been most stunning about the Vets' story, however, is not their allegations, but the fact that this group has been able to completely bypass the mainstream media. Even more stunning, when Kerry-friendly newspapers have launched attacks on them, they have been able to attack back, answering charges, pointing out where they feel they've been misquoted or misrepresented, and answering their accusers point-by-point--and they have not had to rely on sympathetic reporters and editors to get their message out. Just a web page, and a host of citizen journalists (i.e. "webloggers") to point their message out.

What's even more laughable is those in the press (like the amazingly pompous and inane New York Times) who are now tut-tutting about how awful it is that these independently funded groups are allowed to be heard. Oh, what is it you're afraid of, Mr. News Editor Man? That you don't get to be the gatekeeper of what people are allowed to hear about anymore?

The Kerry campaign has been in an absolute frenzy this week, and it's reached its fever pitch with this advertisement attacking the Swift Boat Vets. The funny part being, it doesn't actually answer most of their charges, or even identify who they are, but it lets us know that people who've given Bush money have also given the Swifties money. Oh My GOD! People who like Bush are willing to give money to a group that opposes Kerry? CALL THE FBI!!! WHAT AN OUTRAGE!!!

The most hilarious thing has been watching John Kerry suddenly come out and demand that George W. Bush condemn the Swift Boat Vets. Even though, since he helped pass the campaign finance laws that made the Swift Boat Vets for Truth possible, he knows perfectly well that it would be illegal for Bush to coordinate with them. Furthermore, John Kerry has stood silently or even applauded when independent groups like Michael Moore and the utterly vicious MoveOn.org have said some of the most horrible things imaginable about President Bush over the last year.

But now suddenly, a completely independent group has just smacked Senator Kerry in the toe with a hammer, and he's howling for Bush to make it stop!

In the meantime, the Swift Vets have strongly answered the more recent press assaults on them, as well as other charges against them.

You can smell the fear in the Kerry camp: a huge collection of John Kerry's band of brothers hates his guts, including men who served on his Swift Boat, the commanders of the boats that served alongside his, several people who were in combat with him, and every single officer in his chain of command during Vietnam. More and more people are learning of this, and the best Kerry can do is ask Bush to make them shut up!

Meanwhile, the Swifties are showing up on more and more television and radio shows. Furthermore, as Instapundit notes, it appears that a growing number of very well-known reporters are meeting with the Swifties behind the scenes and finding them far more credible than they expected.

But here's the bigger story: The New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the Boston Globe are no longer the arbiters of what's important and what's not, of whose criticisms of our politicians will be heard and whose will be ignored.

The Internet has detected the mainstream media as a form of censorship and simply routed around them.

There are only 29 days left until International Talk Like A Pirate Day.

The latest roundup of the Iraqi webloggers, the Carnival of the Liberated, contains much fascinating reading. Anyone who cares what's going on in Iraq should read it.

American political junkies will also likely enjoy the latest Casa de Catsup.

Now will you check this out? They're experimenting with using old inkjet printers to create skin grafts, spraying cells onto a gauze scaffolding and then using that to grow new sheets of skin.

What can you say about that but, "wow?"

(Via Gerund.)

My goodness. I'm starting to really regret simply asserting that Larry Thurlow's credibility was shot. I simply accepted the Washington Post's assertions. But if you go to the Swiftfets site, because they apparently take this very seriously, they've appended a bunch of responses right below the ad.

Thurlow's sticking to his guns, and saying that this is consistent with his version of events, as are Van Odell and Jack Chenowith, all of whom were there (or are lying and weren't there, I guess).

By any reasonable standard, what I think this tells us (again) is that the big media is now being bypassed with greater and greater frequency--and we have less reason than ever to simply accept their version of events.

The Queen is holding a beauty contest.

All of this Swift Boat/Cambodia stuff may well help John Kerry be elected. He may be able to make everyday voters righteously angry in his defense. So what? Yes I like Bush better than Kerry, and yes I am still mad at Democrats (for now). That's all a side issue. My world doesn't end if I watch John Kerry be sworn in as our 44th President.

The big story is, the universe recently changed when no one was looking. That cartoon really says it: Everybody who watches politics is talking about a story the mainstream press is choosing to either completely ignore, or to dismissively sniff at.

As Mark Noonan points out here, I may, due to my own willingness to just take the Washington Post's word on something, have wrongly dismissed Larry Thurlow. Maybe, maybe not, but I simply bought it without thinking. So what does that say about me, and maybe other people, and the willingness to just accept what we're told by the news media?

More to the point: The possible future President of the United States is working himself up into a lather today, angrily denouncing a story that everybody in the mainstream press was and still is trying to dismiss. The current President of the United States is trying to duck the story, even as he is being called upon to denounce a small-time political group with a few measley hundred thousand dollars, simply because they have a story that everybody in the mainstream press is still trying to dismiss.

And you cannot point to any single source for this. Not Instapundit, not Roger Simon, not me, and not even to the Swifties themselves. Just to the wild collective mass that is the blogosphere.

Don't tell me the world hasn't changed, and that the way that news junkies get their information hasn't fundamentally changed. It quite obviously has.

Roger Simon has more.

* Update * Wow. We know now how The New York Times will respond.

Has anyone checked out the game Frontrunner? Obviously they're an advertiser but I've never seen the game. It kind of looks fun, has anyone tried it?

Look. I swear like a muleskinner and I cut my kid's hair into a mohawk (well, my wife did, anyway, and I applauded). It's not like I'm Mr. Straight Laced.

But Jesus Christ on a pogo stick, WHAT THE HELL IS THIS?!?!?!

I admit it, I giggled for two seconds... and then thought about it harder.

(Via the eminently reasonable Joe Gandelman.)

This is a truly hilarious site: Baby's Named A Bad, Bad Thing.

It's not the names so much as the comments on them. The Queen and I will be keeping some of the site's owner's advice to heart, although some of it's just too snarky. You'd think she hates anyone who isn't named "Joe" "Cindy" or "Susan."

(Thanks, Kacie.)

Time to get U.S. troops out of places where they don't belong!

Hey, wait a minute....

Please tell me this is a joke. The people running the web site for the games this year want you to agree to terms and conditions before you can link their site?

Who do they think they're kidding?

(Via An Englishman's Castle.)

Impressive. I hadn't heard about this. Apparently, using materials from an extracted tooth and a sliver of jawbone, some blind people can now have their sight restored.

(Thanks to Rhianna for sending this fascinating story. I'll have to search the medical journals for more details on this!)

* Update * Willow Tree has more technical details on the surgery. Fascinating.

If you're a weblogger who has served in the military, or is currently serving, Jeff Quinton wants to know about you.

Well, Operation Give is getting some press on the Atlas Shipping fiasco. That and a hired team of lawyers may see us through things.

In any case, toys continue to be shipped. That's the important part.

It looks like one of the Swift Boat Vets has has developed a credibility problem.

I always thought talking about the medals was probably a bad move, even if they do have sworn affidavits that you can use in court.

Rather fascinating that the regular reporting press hasn't brought up Christmas in Cambodia yet, though, or the war crimes accusations, and that the AP sees fit to mention that Thurlow doesn't want to release his records but doesn't mention that Kerry doesn't want to either.

Although I have the feeling that all the Kerry camp is doing is waiting until October, and will then execute a document dump, under the assumption that it'll take weeks for anyone to go through. That's probably their best strategy if they think there's something to hide.

I see that a group of left-wing hate-freaks calling themselves the "Black Hat Hackers Bloc" is pledging to bring down any Republican site they can during the Republican National Convention.

Meanwhile, while some have urged protestors to practice peaceful civil protests, others have angrily refused to renounce violence, and openly say they plan to do whatever they can to make the police look bad.

I fully expect Dean's World to be one of the attacked sites during the Republican convention, since we're one of the blogs covering the convention. We've been attacked by thugs who didn't like what we had to say before, so it'll be nothing new. I'll just have to talk to the Powerblogs folks to make sure they're prepared for the worst.

All you other RNC bloggers should do the same thing: write to your hosting provider and warn them that this threat is out there. I'm sure the folks at Hosting Matters, Verve, Bloghosts, Powerblogs, etc. can make at least some preparations.

And if the cowards chicken out, so much the better.

AnotherFred, in the comments right here, notes that the FBI once questioned him and a group of fellow activists who went to a political event to protest Al Gore during election season.

So what happened? What always happens. The FBI filmed them, asked some polite questions, and then left them alone.

Oh the cruel fascist police state we live in, where officers of the law are allowed to speak to citizens and ask them questions! They probably run around accosting old women and saying "Ni!" to them as well.

These are dark days indeed my friends.

(Only one question, Fred: you sure they weren't Secret Service? Not that it makes any real difference.)

Heh.

(Via Anticipatory Retaliation.)

The latest Carnival of the Vanities--the 100th!--is available at Fringeblog.

Interestingly, a researcher says she's figured out what makes some names sexier than others.

Her methodology looks pretty sound to me. Although someone should try duplicating her results of course.

I remember that growing up I hated the name "Dean" but as I've gotten older I've learned to appreciate having a distinctive name.

I keep forgetting to link this: apparently, there's a group running a reality show about illegal immigrants, with the "winners" in the show getting the services of immigration lawyers.

I'm all for liberalized immigration laws (sorry righties, just deal with it. And don't tell me I don't know anything about it, I get tired of hearing that. I'm from Texas and have had family working in immigration enforcement for decades), but this seems terribly exploitive to me. Although there's some possibility that the show will just raise sympathy for illegals, this just doesn't seem right.

How's this for cutting edge? Two well-known Iraqi bloggers are running for the national assembly.

The world's changing in amazing ways.

(Via Babalu Blog.)

I got an email from a group called Democrats For America's Future (who I assume are the arch-enemies of Democrats Against America's Future) telling me that, like Nixon, Bush is using the FBI to harass his political opponents. I was quite concerned about this until I read their article carefully.

Twease out the hyperbole and the silly Watergate comparisons, and all you've got here is the FBI visiting a few people and telling them they had better not be violent.

Considering that we know for a fact that some on the hard left are planning violence and dangerously disruptive behavior in New York, I am relieved to know that the FBI is watching these folks and letting them know that protest is fine but they'll be watched carefully for any sign of violence.

The presumption that a law enforcement officer just talking to you is somehow illegal or immoral is just plain silly.

NASA reports that the Cassini-Huygens probe has found two new moons around Saturn.

Well, new to us. I'm sure they've been there a while. ;-)

The journal Nature has a piece about two researchers who have determined that the body makes less effcient use of protein than carbs for fuel. They found that more energy is released as waste heat when the body metabolizes protein than when it metabolizes carbs. Thus the notion that "a calorie is a calorie" is in their view quite mistaken.

I honestly don't know why this is a surprise. To utilize carbs or protein for fuel, the body has to convert it to glucose. Carbs are closer to glucose than protein, and the conversion is generally pretty fast, even for so-called "complex" carbs. To convert protein to glucose, a process called gluconeogenesis, requires more steps. We should therefore expect more energy waste in the process.

Low-carb diets work very well for some people, and not so well for others. I continue to fail to see why they're so controversial. I mean, I've seen people actually get angry over them. What's the point in that? The low-carb dieters I've known who've been successful have all reported the same thing: low-fat, high carb diets made them miserable and hungry all the time. On low-carbing they sometimes had cravings but were otherwise quite happy and no longer hungry all the time.

What's the big deal? Do what works for you.

Joe Gandelman notes the train wreck that is Alan Keyes.

Ya think he's so berzerk because the ad is strongly influencing independent voters?

Gotta wonder.

Xavier Cortez is planning to cycle from coast to coast, Los Angeles to Savannah, in order to raise money for the children of fallen service members. May I suggest that you visit his site and perhaps leave a donation?

(Via Branching.)

Some schmuck keeps trying to register here with an account of "bigdick."

Over and over he keeps trying.

No thanks, dork. Give me a real name and working email address and we'll talk. Otherwise, please go away.

Have you seen the Liberating Iraq weblog?

It's cool. And a recent blogroll addition.

Blogger Kevin Drum thinks that Bush-hatred is not as terrible as Clinton-hatred was. Steve Verdon takes him to task rather effectively.

Yet somehow, while mentioning the "Bush AWOL" bullshit (which Kevin Drum himself was personally responsible for), Steve forgets to mention the Halliburton bullshit, the Harken Energy bullshit, and the "Bush lied about WMDs" bullshit, and doesn't even bring up George Soros and his millions. Not to mention the flush-with-cash MoveOn.Org, which is even now trying to spin the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth as a Bush-run enterprise even though legally Bush can't even talk to those people. Nor does he mention the people on the left are calling Bush a "fundamentalist extremist" because he's moderately pro-life and thinks that religious organizations should be allowed to compete with secular organizations for Federal dollars.

Yeah, there's no such thing as extremism on the left.

Question for Kevin Drum: will America and Planet Earth survive if Bush is re-elected? Just curious.

* Update * Alan Blue has more.

The latest Toast-O-Meter is available for political junkies' reading pleasure.

Peter Bagge has a most excellent comic on Modern Art that you should all read.

By the way, after reading it, may I suggest that you visit the Art Renewal Center?

(Thanks, Gerund.)

Scott Harris makes a terrifically good point about why political partisanship is okay and low voter turnout is a non-issue. Read it here.

Although I'm fortunate enough to have rarely encountered a FAX spam, I understand that this phenomenon does exist. Others call it "blast FAX," and I kind of like that appellation.

In any case, Tony Woodlief (who is always, always, always worth reading) recently received one, and you should read about it.

Heh. I'm still chuckling.

Fred Schoenman thinks you should.

Andrew's band now has merchandise.

I ought to do that one of these days....

I got an email recently from the folks at MoveOn.Org, asking me and President Bush to condemn this ad.

I won't. Here's why.