Replying to a 9-11 conspiracy theory.
Topic: Politics
Over at the Hendon Mob forum, 'Lancy Howard' links to a documentary that alleges a US conspiracy on 9-11. I have watched it and wish to refute its conclusions:

Lancy,

I sat and watched that documentary as you suggested and do feel that it raises certain questions and displays some inconsistencies in the official version of events. But I don't think that the evidence presented supports the conclusion that the US government was behind the attacks. In any large event, it's not hard to find inconsistencies. The documentary itself shows how eye witnesses can often disagree on vital details. Merely showing differences isn't enough to persuade me of a conspiracy. A similar tactic is used by Holocaust deniers who look for inconsistencies in the survivors' accounts to promote the idea of a hoax. In an event that involved so many millions, it's not hard to find inaccurate accounts and conflicting versions of events from traumatised people. But this doesn't mean that the holocaust didn't happen.

Physical evidence is of course preferable and the video does a decent job of finding inconsistencies, but it's not hard to find a site online that refutes the Pentagon issues:

A refutation.

I've not had time to examine all of this fully.

Much of the story suffers from another problem - the "comparison with a vacuum". For instance, we're shown fireman talk of explosions. So what? What other word would they use to describe what they say? None of them had scene a jumbo jet fly into a skyscraper before, so they used the vocabulary that they knew.

Another instance - the point that no building has been brought down by fire before. Well, on how many other occasions has this exact same thing happened before? We're told that the fuel doesn't burn to a high enough temperature to cause the alleged damage but unless you recreate the exact same circumstances again, you don't know whether there were other reactions within the buildings that took place for 'innocent' reasons that could have caused the damage.

I don't know what the grainy footage of the plane's crashing was meant to suggest. The shiny rectangle on the site of the plane just before it hit one of the towers didn't prove anything to me. Neither did the dark shadow under the other. The film was much too grainy to discount the possibility of simple shadows and reflections.

Furthermore, it's worth pointing out that the Pentagon is not a typical building. What a plane does hitting a normal building says nothing about what a plane would do hitting the world's largest office, with the toughest security wall in the world. And I also think it would take a very confident Donald Rumsfeld to place himself anywhere in the building knowing that it would be hit, regardless of how well planned his supposed adventure was. His own life would have been on the line!

We are invited to believe that a conspiracy occured that would have involved thousands of people in a cover-up. And none of the conspirators have had an attack of conscience after four years? How hard would it be for one of them to travel to a hostile or neutral country to spill the beans? Once one does it, other would follow. Yet we hear nothing.

Even if you do accept a government conspiracy to plant bombs in the twin towers, it wouldn't necessarily have to be the govt of the US. Iranian agents have been caught taking photographs of the tunnels leading into Manhattan (Lincoln and Holland).

The video makes no serious attempt to explain where the missing planes are that 'didn't' hit the WTC. It leaves that totally in the air, so to speak. Nor does it follow through its own logic and explain how at least TWO conspirators were persuaded to fly suicide missions. What would you have to be paid to kill yourself?

Then there is the question of motive. None is supplied. Bush had won election less than one year earlier and had three years left to run. It's hardly an election year 'October surprise', is it? If the purpose was to support a war to bolster his popularity then you have to ask why Bush would think that war would boost his popularity. His own father had fought and won a war against Iraq, yet still lost the next election, just as Bush's hero Winston Churchill did in 1945. If this was to somehow support war against Iraq, would they not have planted fake evidence of Iraqi involvment? And why did they wait so long afterwards before going to war?

If the purpose was to support war against Afghanistan, then why? What vital resources does it have? None! What possible strategic benefit would there have been? Don't believe that rubbish about a vital pipeline. That has been thoroughly debunked.

Not a lot makes sense here.

Bush wrote (or had written) a book of his philosophy a few years before. In the book 'A charge to keep', one chapter is devoted to explaining his opposition to the entire idea of 'nation building' - the total oppositie of his current plan in Iraq and Afghanistan.

If the purpose had somehow been to make Bush look like a heroic leader, why was it timed to happen when he was being filmed reading a book about a girl's pet goat to a group of young schoolchildren? Nothing he did on that day has ever been made to look heroic.

I could sit and think of other problems with this video if I had the time and energy, but for now I think that will do. I'm sure that the official report made some mistakes. It may have cut corners. But that's a million miles away from supporting a conspiracy theory.

DY

What does a kidnapper have to do to get a bad press?
Topic: Politics
Nothing to see here folks.

Three Britons captured in Gaza. No big deal. Business as usual, just an internal dispute. Everything will come out all right in the wash.

That's the feeling you're left with if you read this report:

Gaza kidnaps not drive by hatred.

I've heard of Stockholm Syndrome, but this is Stockholm Syndrome by Proxy.

Libya rewarded for blackmail
Topic: Politics
I'm saddened by a footnote in this story:

Relief over Libya medics reprieve

It concerns the trial and conviction of five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor for deliberately infecting Libyan children with AIDS.

Just ask yourself how likely that really was.

What upsets me is that the Bulgarian government is going to pay money to Libya. It is being rewarded for charging foreign doctors on a ridiculous trumped up charge and holding them for seven years. Doctors and aid workers working overseas in needy countries have just had a price put on their heads. A sad day.

Israel makes a mistake.
Topic: Politics
As many of you know, I'm mostly on the Israeli side when it comes to discussing the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. I don't intend to elaborate for now on why this is. Instead I want to talk about a dilemma that it faces and why I think it could be about to make a mistake.

I refer to the announcement that it plans to prevent voting in East Jerusalem during January's Palestinian parliamentary elections.

http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=10414

In any normal situation, it would not be controversial to say that a country should never interfere in another country's elections. But in this instance, I can see their concern. Israel is worried that Hamas could achieve power and that does have consequences, because the Hamas charter declares that Israel should not exist. If taken to its logical conclusion, the election of Hamas should surely mean war.

Yet it's not all about war. As Hugh Miles reports in his book 'Al Jazeera' (page 72) "... most Palestinians do not support Hamas because it is violent: they support it because it is kind". And that's part of the problem. The Palestinian Authority is associated with "nepotism, flashiness and hordes of hangers-on" (same source). Hamas's leaders are considered more charitable, just and austere. It's truly tragic to see the more honest party being the more violent one. Imagine if the BNP were known for good works and charitable donations.

Faced with this dilemma, I still think that Israel's best bet is to let events take their course. If Hamas takes power, it will be faced with responsibilities for managing roads, hospitals and schools etc. If they chose to go to war then Israel, then Israel should have no difficulty in pointing out that it has the right to defend itself. But it's also possible that the burden of actual government leads to some moderation.

This point of view might surprise some readers, but it fits with my neo-con views. One of the biggest disasters of the last two decades was the decision to cancel the 1992 Algerian elections. Again the concern was that fundamentalists would take power. For me that isn't a problem, as long as the constitutional arrangements continue to exist by which the people could vote them out of office. Many expressed the view that this would not happen and that there would be 'One Man. One vote. Once'.

But that's being pessimistic and cancelling the election has proved to be the cure that was worse than the disease. Islamic extremism retains its appeal in part because it hasn't been tried (outside Iran and Afghanistan, where it proved massively unpopular after time). Fundamentalists can shout empty slogans like 'Islam in the answer' and never be disputed as long as they are kept out of power. Islamism must be given the chance to fail, democratically.

The day that irony died.
Topic: Misc.
Over at Andy Ward's diary, I tried to be funny in the comment section of a recent lament:

I wrote:

Absolutely. Everyone passes the buck. Nobody takes responsibility any more.

Personally I blame society. Society is to blame for this. I feel helpless to do anything about it.

DY


Was it all in vain, I wonder? In a glorious non-sequitur, a guest writes:

Society, I'm not so sure. Look at America's attitude towards Kyoto.

Er, ... thanks for that.

Language Arts in US publishing.
Topic: Poker

Action or Judgement?
Topic: Poker
Dominic wrote to me recently:

"I thought Big Dave D's blog was quite interesting today. The gist of it is that he has been trying No Limit Hold Em recently, and doesn't like it because it requires judgement. I remember Xxxx Xxxxx telling me pretty much the same thing. Yet there will still be punters who play Omaha because they consider it a 'gambling' game."

I never bought into the idea that omaha was the 'action game'. I certainly never accepted that there was as much mental action involved. I don't mind playing it for a few hours and I think it can make an interesting tournament game, but I find cash omaha boring compared to cash hold'em. For a start you don't get anywhere near as many hands per hour.

There was a long period in this country when you couldn't get a hold'em cash game anywhere and you had to play omaha. I thought it created something I called 'lazy professional syndrome'. If you knew that a king-high flush draw was no good, that an 8-card straight draw was not a wrap and that small trips were often worthless then you could beat up those who didn't. You didn't have to try too hard to put people on hands or project much of an image.

Omaha games at the Vic now resemble those 7-card games of years ago. The average age at the table is nearly double that of the hold'em games. Most people look miserable most of the time. There is very little banter.

Two cards good. Four cards bad.

Best comment I've read about Iraq for a long time.
Topic: Politics
Hat tip to Omar at Iraq the Model for this comment by Joseph Liebermann:

Note that this is a man who stood as Vice-President against Bush and Cheney in the 2000 election.

Key quote:

"I have just returned from my fourth trip to Iraq in the past 17 months and can report real progress there. More work needs to be done, of course, but the Iraqi people are in reach of a watershed transformation from the primitive, killing tyranny of Saddam to modern, self-governing, self-securing nationhood--unless the great American military that has given them and us this unexpected opportunity is prematurely withdrawn.

Progress is visible and practical. In the Kurdish North, there is continuing security and growing prosperity. The primarily Shiite South remains largely free of terrorism, receives much more electric power and other public services than it did under Saddam, and is experiencing greater economic activity. The Sunni triangle, geographically defined by Baghdad to the east, Tikrit to the north and Ramadi to the west, is where most of the terrorist enemy attacks occur. And yet here, too, there is progress.

There are many more cars on the streets, satellite television dishes on the roofs, and literally millions more cell phones in Iraqi hands than before. All of that says the Iraqi economy is growing. And Sunni candidates are actively campaigning for seats in the National Assembly. People are working their way toward a functioning society and economy in the midst of a very brutal, inhumane, sustained terrorist war against the civilian population and the Iraqi and American military there to protect it.

It is a war between 27 million and 10,000; 27 million Iraqis who want to live lives of freedom, opportunity and prosperity and roughly 10,000 terrorists who are either Saddam revanchists, Iraqi Islamic extremists or al Qaeda foreign fighters who know their wretched causes will be set back if Iraq becomes free and modern. The terrorists are intent on stopping this by instigating a civil war to produce the chaos that will allow Iraq to replace Afghanistan as the base for their fanatical war-making. We are fighting on the side of the 27 million because the outcome of this war is critically important to the security and freedom of America.

If the terrorists win, they will be emboldened to strike us directly again and to further undermine the growing stability and progress in the Middle East, which has long been a major American national and economic security priority.

The Western Club opens for business.
Topic: Poker
I went to play at the Western Club on Saturday. The occasion was a #200 NL Hold'em Competition to which the club was adding #5,000. Although I didn't make the money I did enjoy the experience, because the club is something that I've wanted to see in this country for some time: a non-casino poker club based OUT OF TOWN with its own car park.

Tournament director for the day was Roy Houghton, the first TD I ever met (in 1995!):

Corner view.
Topic: Poker


The club itself is spacious and well appointed.

Long view.
Topic: Poker


Keep in mind that this is just one floor! There's another floor above this one which is almost as big and there's also a Kalooki room, which can be used for poker if required.

I've talked to one of the partners in the business and was pleasantly surprised to hear him agree that limit games would be the best way to increase the market. How to achieve the critical mass for this will be the hard part. He agreed with me that creating a new player base is essential, as both Gutshot and the Victoria have their own loyal player base who are unlikely to switch for social reasons, as well as convenience.

Let's wish them well with this new venture.

Link changes.
Topic: Poker
I've made a couple of changes to the Poker links on the left hand side. I've taken out Poker Bastard, due to the infrequency of his posts and replaced him with the prolific Peter Birks. The latter doesn't just write about poker, he also writes about finance and game theory. Personally I find his non-poker stuff a million times more interesting, but that's just me.

Horse racing fans might be interested to know that my friend Dominic Bourke is posting again.

Broken news, Property Ladder and Dispatches.
Topic: Television
Caught a new show on Monday night called 'Broken News'. I highly recommend it. It consists of a series of spoof news programmes and the effect is to create the feeling that you're surfing through all the rolling news channels on digital television. It was utterly hilarious throughout. I hope that it stays this good.

I also watched Property Ladder. The show itself is made quite well, but I despise the very concept of a 'property ladder': the idea that everyone can get rich by developing properties. Perhaps that's because I missed out on the great boom from the mid 90s to a few years ago. Am I the only person who watches the show hoping to see people go broke? The plethora of property development programmes on the box at the moment screams at me as a classic sign of a peak, rather like the moment when the elevator boy is giving you stock market tips. Many of the people on the show go over budget and still make money because they have blundered into a rising market. This can't go on, surely?

Indeed, has it already stopped? I recently went to a charity dinner and was seated next to a letting agent. She told me that she was having to turn away many people who'd bought and tidied up something to let and were desperate for her to find a tenant to cover the outlay. When she confronted them with the harsh reality that the market wouldn't bear the sort of rents they expected, some would stamp their feet, scream and even cry. She blamed programmes like Property Ladder for creating unrealistic expectations.

Lastly I watched Peter Oborne's Dispatches documentary from Iraq. I will address this in a separate piece later this week. My inital feeling was that it lacked perspective.

Michael Arnold's Brave New World.
Topic: Poker
If you've played the cash games at the Victoria, you're bound to know who Michael Arnold is. Famed for his cries of 'One Seat Here' and his ability to fall asleep between hands (I'm not joking), he's one of the card room's most frequent and regular players. For most of the last two years he's played the 100 hold'em games, where he is a consistent winner. He has a style that works and he sticks to it.

Recently those of us who play with him have learned that he has a classification system for his opponents. He grades them as Group 1 (the top grade), Group 2 and Unclassified. It's caused some hilarity, with people saying things like 'That's a Group One bluff' and 'If Michael saw you call that, you'd get relegated'. To me, it's reminiscent of Huxley's Brave New World, where people are born in grades Alpha down to Epsilon.

What's more interesting is how he's put people into these groups. Some of his opinions on other players I agree with. Others are frankly barmy. For instance, there was a female player who appeared on the scene about a year ago, whom he declared to be the best woman player he'd ever seen. She's not been seen for a while. Something to do with the heavy losses she racked up I suppose. I know I was always keen to get into her games.

On another occasion, Michael became convinced that he had identified a new rising star: a young man I shall call 'J'. Whenever I saw 'J', he was playing like a lunatic, but Michael seemed sure that he was the next Cincinnati Kid and after losing a few pots to him he decided that he should consult Colin Kennedy about how to deal with this new threat. He arranged to meet Colin in the bar.

When Colin arrived, Michael outlined the problem:

'I need to formulate a counter-strategy to play against 'J', he explained.

Colin got straight to the point:

'Well you better hurry up before he goes skint'.

France kicks and screams.
Topic: Politics
A few months ago, I wrote a piece titled 'When is it time to forgive France?' in which I argued that France could serve a useful role as a warning to others when its 'social market model' collapsed.

I had no idea that the French were in such a rush to take me up on my suggestion though! For nine consecutive nights there has been rioting. Last night police made 250 arrests. Nine hundred cars, one school and two nurseries were burnt.

It doesn't help calm matters that the rioters are mostly muslims from North Africa. But whatever the effect of Islamism, the chief blame lies in the country's employment protection laws. By making it hard for companies to shed workers, they make it less likely that the unemployed get into the labour market in the first place.

Any French company considering its headcount budget has to take into consideration the difficulty of making people redundant if it later needs to. Therefore in order to avoid the risk of expensive overmanning, it must plan its recruitment targets on the basis of a worst-case scenario. This wouldn't happen in the UK, where companies would hire more people in the first place, knowing that they could lose them later if they had overestimated their personnel needs.

It's a classic case of unintended consequences. Laws that are supposed to protect workers end up preventing people from working in the first place. And who suffers the most from this? Mainly it's the North Africa immigrants who find it hard to get their first job. The high unemployment gives them time on their hands, as well as rage in their hearts. It's been a disaster waiting to happen.

I'm not sure that most people in the UK realise just how high unemployment in continental Europe is. It's been high in Spain, Germany and France for well over a decade. In some regions for two decades. In Britain, we all remember the high unemployment of the early Thatcher years. However awful that was for many, it was shortlived compared to the unemployment that Europe has experienced.

Now that the rioting has entered its second week and has spread to other cities, will the French wake up out of their slumber and make moves to reform their labour markets to get industry hiring again? One can only hope. But I fear that the French are too proud to admit that their 'social market' is in fact profoundly anti-social and has exacerbated ethnic tensions to breaking point.