Which Door Would Jerry Coyne Choose?

David Klinghoffer offers an interesting thought experiment: For Jerry Coyne a Hypothetical Choice:  You May Knock on One and Only One Door.

The Charter of Hamas

I thought I would post a link to the Charter of Hamas, in case anyone wanted to take a look at it.  So far, I've only read the first thirteen articles, but it doesn't look good for any peace process, unless everyone agrees to a Muslim state where Israel presently exists.  But maybe they make room for compromise somewhere in the next twenty-one articles.

UPDATE: I have to admit that reading the charter helps me understand why Egypt is siding with Israel in the conflict.

NEW UPDATE:  A friend shared a link to a paper that cites more recent Hamas documents and argues that Hamas is capable of compromise. My friend added that he does not like Hamas.

Behe Throws Down the Gauntlet

When professor Michael Behe begins his An Open Letter to Kenneth Miller and PZ Myers with

"Talk is cheap. Let's see your numbers,"

You know this could get interesting.

UPDATE:  Ann Gauger offers further light on the significance of Behe's point.

FBI Knew About Saudi 9/11 Hijacker Ties, But Lied To Protect "National Security"

From WhoWhatWhy journalist Russ Baker's story:

"...The Freedom of Information request that prompted these reluctant admissions was filed by the Broward Bulldog, a South Florida nonprofit investigative site which first covered the Saudi connection in 2011.
The Bulldog’s reporting explained how a family living in an exclusive gated community outside Sarasota, on Florida’s West Coast, had apparently vanished suddenly some 10 days before the 9/11 attacks. Investigators, including a swarm of FBI agents, found that the family’s departure was clearly so sudden that they left almost their entire household intact, down to cars, clothing, and food in the refrigerator. Most significant, though, investigators had established that several of the men publicly identified as among the 9/11 hijackers, including purported ringleader Mohammed Atta, had visited the house and/or been linked to it through a web of telephone communications.
The FBI told none of this to Congress, and it was not mentioned in the original 9/11 Commission report released in 2004.
WhoWhatWhy, in an original investigation, went deeper, and established that the owner of the house was  a prominent Saudi businessman who works directly for the Saudi prince most involved with aviation—including being the first Saudi who trained to fly planes in South Florida.  You can read our complete story here.
The significance of this cannot be stated strongly enough. Although many people think they “already know” about ties between the hijackers and Saudi royals, they confuse these important revelations with reports that prominent Saudis were permitted to leave the country shortly after 9/11, as popularized in Michael Moore’s film Fahrenheit 9/11.
This new revelation is far more significant. The older story shows possible favoritism toward, or at least concern for, well-connected Saudis on the part of the US government in permitting them to leave. The Sarasota story, however, shows that the US government came upon what may have been a command or control center for the men we are told hijacked the planes.
And with the connections documented by WhoWhatWhy, it is almost impossible not to conclude some kind of awareness, either before or after the act, on the part of Saudi Prince Sultan bin Salman bin Abdul Aziz Al-Saud and the powerful clique he represents within the royal clan. Again, for more on this, please read the entire story, which continues over three pages on our site....
The Biggest Revelations, Ignored
Fortunately for the FBI, almost the entirety of the media—from the corporate owned “mainstream” to purportedly outsider ”alternative” news outlets and websites—have steered clear of the entire subject.
The recent FBI court filings were revealed by a Bulldog article published in conjunction with one mainstream outlet—the Miami Herald. Previous revelations that appeared in The Herald were generally ignored by the rest of the press, and we may reasonably expect the same disturbing indifference to the latest bombshell."
- See more at: http://whowhatwhy.com/2014/07/20/classic-who-fbi-knew-about-saudi-911-hijacker-ties-but-lied-to-protect-national-security/#sthash.bYgYe0BX.dpuf

I'm curious if alternative news outlet "Democracy Now!" covered this.  Or maybe Glenn Greenwald.  Surely they wouldn't pass it up.

Why Hamas doesn't have bomb shelters.

For a combination of reasons?

Or would Hamas refuse to build bomb shelters, no matter how much cement it had?

Grandmother Sentenced to One Year in Prison after Protest at US Drone Base.

Grandmother sentenced to one year in prison after protest at US drone base.

Why Wouldn't NY1 Show the Collapse of WTC 7?

In case you didn't watch the clip of the news story by the local television station, NY1, about the High Rise Safety Initiative, it's really a story about the collapse of WTC 7.  The story shows a video clip of the building before it collapses.  And they show a clip of the building after it collapses.  But they don't show a clip of the actual collapse of WTC 7, even though there were plenty of them to be had:

So why didn't they show it?  Were they afraid that people might wonder if it was a controlled demolition, the way that controlled demolition expert, Danny Jowenko, concluded that it was? But why would a news show let that stop them from reporting a complete story, which in this case would include showing a clip of the collapse of WTC 7? Isn't there job to just report the story and let the public draw their own conclusions? Or is their job to shape the story to make sure the public draws the conclusion that somebody else wants them to draw?

And if the story was shaped to please "somebody else," who would that somebody else be?

Follow up Question: Why is it Missing?

JDB gave the right answer.  NY1's Coverage of the High Rise Safety Initiative doesn't show the collapse of WTC 7.

Here's the follow up question:  Why doesn't the report show the collapse?  This is one of those questions where you are allowed to give a subjective answer, since, unless you work for the station, you probably don't know for sure why they didn't show the collapse.

Short Quiz: What is missing?

What is missing from NY1's report?


NY1's Coverage of the High Rise Safety Initiative.

Praising and Criticizing Israeli Policies

Jewish author William Saletan, writing for Slate, praises the Israeli policy of warning Gaza residents ahead of time that they are targeting their homes for attack, allowing the residents time to flee.

The same author also criticized Israel for demolishing the homes of suspected Palestinian terrorists.

RetractionWatch.com

Hat tip to David Klinghoffer  for letting us know that there is a publication that reports on the retraction of peer reviewed papers with the not unreasonable name, RetractionWatch.com.  I wonder if it is peer reviewed.

EDIT:  I retracted the original title of this post.

38 Journalism and Open Government Groups Call on Obama to Stop Excessive Information Control

38 Journalism and Open Government Groups Call on Obama to StopExcessive Information Control.

So much for the most transparent administration in history. According to the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), 38 journalist and open government groups called on President Obama to “stop practices in federal agencies that prevent important information from getting to the public.”
The Obama Administration has expanded its war on whistlerblowers into thwarting basic journalism by prohibiting more federal employees from speaking to the press and monitoring interviews that do occur. The extremely tight rules are reportedly disrupting the flow of information to the public – threatening to prevent the public from being able to make informed decisions.
According to David Cuillier, president of the SPJ, “The practices have become more and more pervasive throughout America, preventing information from getting to the public in an accurate and timely matter. The president pledged to be the most transparent in history. He can start by ending these practices now.”
The practices SPJ notes are:

• Officials blocking reporters’ requests to talk to specific staff people;
• Excessive delays in answering interview requests that stretch past reporters’ deadlines;
• Officials conveying information “on background,” refusing to give reporters what should be public information unless they agree not to say who is speaking.
• Federal agencies blackballing reporters who write critically of them.

Whether the plea from journalists and transparency advocates changes anything is hard to say, but at least the mythology of President Obama’s historic transparency is becoming harder to sustain. Though Obama and company can keep telling everyone they are transparent, the facts tell a different story.

Peer Reviewed Paper Challenging Official Explanation of WTC Collapses

Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis.