Will Ferrel's George W. is at it again!

If you're like me, you think Will Ferrel, formerly of SNL, does the best George W. Bush ever. Check out clip that I haven't seen before of Ferrel's Bush trying to explain global warming:

http://www.devilducky.com/media/38792/

I'M GONNA BE AN UNCLE!

[http://babysparacin.blogspot.com/|Check it out], I'm going to be an uncle!

That's my little brother's blog--stop by! He says he'll keep it updated. I'll be visiting often, bro!! ;)

US PAYS FOR GOOD PRESS IN IRAQ

MAN, this is funny. It's also really sad, but the USG just doesn't learn and clearly has no morals.

Here's what ChicagoTribune.com reported in [http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/bal-te.baghdad30nov30,1,4405919.story?ctrack=1&cset=true|an article] on their website earlier this week:

U.S. paying Iraqi editors to print favorable news

Some military officials in Iraq, Pentagon deplore secret operation

By Mark Mazzetti and Borzou Daragahi
Published November 30, 2005

WASHINGTON // As part of an extensive information offensive inside Iraq, the U.S. military is secretly paying Iraqi newspaper editors to publish stories written by U.S. troops in an effort to burnish the image of the U.S. mission within Iraq.

Working with a private defense contractor, military officials in Iraq are having articles written by U.S. military "information operations" troops translated into Arabic and then placed in newspapers around Baghdad, according to U.S. military officials and documents obtained by the Los Angeles Times.

Many articles are presented as legitimate news accounts in the Iraqi press. The newspapers are paid for publishing the articles, which trumpet the successes of U.S. and Iraqi troops, denounce insurgents and promote U.S.-led efforts to rebuild the country. Records and interviews indicated that dozens of such articles have been placed in Iraqi newspapers in the past year.

There's more to the article, but that's the important bits.

So, let me break this down real quick.

1) USG does what it wants in foreign lands.
2) This pisses off the locals.
3) USG pays local news outlets to write positive stories, ignoring the stuff the pisses off the locals.

Of course, they could just do what the locals want and everything would be cool. Instead, they play "parent" and lie to the locals.

Hm, I seem to remember the USG doing [http://thepete.com/bush-43-admin-lies-breaks-fed-law-again/|something similar here in the US]. When they created news stories without crediting themselves the Bush 43 Administration broke the covert propaganda law, [http://www.gao.gov/decisions/appro/303495.htm|according to] the [http://www.gao.gov|Government Accountability Office's own website]. I wonder if it is still illegal in another country.

Regardless, it speaks of a government less interested in what its people think and more interested in getting its way.

Here's more from the article:

The military's information operations campaign has sparked a backlash among senior military officers in Iraq and at the Pentagon. They argue that attempts to subvert the news media could destroy the U.S. military's credibility in other nations and with the U.S. public.

Well, that hasn't happened in the US, yet--has it? Loads of idiots still line up to watch the evening news and generally trust what the USG tells them even if they don't approve of the way Bush is handling things.

No, until the mainstream press starts doing its job or more of us start to bitch about being lied to, this will continue. I know this because [http://thepete.com/tag/covert+propaganda|it's already been going on for years].

On a side note, I find that the longer I blog from mainstream news sources the more I learn about how the news business works. I first stumbled upon this story in [http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=10010|an article] at AlJazeera.com. They said ChicagoTribune.com was the source for the story. I did a search their and found the article I used for this post. Then, I noticed that right under the headline on the article at the Chicago Tribune were the words "Baltimore Sun." Uh-huh... so I go over there and find [http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/ny-la-woiraq1130,1,7560970.story|this article]. There, I noticed that the writers of the article are credited as being LA Times staff writers. SIGH... then, I go to LATimes.com and find the [http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-fg-infowar30nov30,1,4797092.story|original article there]. What's worse is that the article seemed to change a little with each new location. Crazy stuff.

From LATimes.com:

November 30, 2005

THE CONFLICT IN IRAQ
U.S. Military Covertly Pays to Run Stories in Iraqi Press

# Troops write articles presented as news reports. Some officers object to the practice.

By Mark Mazzetti and Borzou Daragahi, Times Staff Writers

WASHINGTON — As part of an information offensive in Iraq, the U.S. military is secretly paying Iraqi newspapers to publish stories written by American troops in an effort to burnish the image of the U.S. mission in Iraq.

The articles, written by U.S. military "information operations" troops, are translated into Arabic and placed in Baghdad newspapers with the help of a defense contractor, according to U.S. military officials and documents obtained by the Los Angeles Times.

Many of the articles are presented in the Iraqi press as unbiased news accounts written and reported by independent journalists. The stories trumpet the work of U.S. and Iraqi troops, denounce insurgents and tout U.S.-led efforts to rebuild the country.

Though the articles are basically factual, they present only one side of events and omit information that might reflect poorly on the U.S. or Iraqi governments, officials said. Records and interviews indicate that the U.S. has paid Iraqi newspapers to run dozens of such articles, with headlines such as "Iraqis Insist on Living Despite Terrorism," since the effort began this year.

The operation is designed to mask any connection with the U.S. military. The Pentagon has a contract with a small Washington-based firm called Lincoln Group, which helps translate and place the stories. The Lincoln Group's Iraqi staff, or its subcontractors, sometimes pose as freelance reporters or advertising executives when they deliver the stories to Baghdad media outlets.

The military's effort to disseminate propaganda in the Iraqi media is taking place even as U.S. officials are pledging to promote democratic principles, political transparency and freedom of speech in a country emerging from decades of dictatorship and corruption.

It comes as the State Department is training Iraqi reporters in basic journalism skills and Western media ethics, including one workshop titled "The Role of Press in a Democratic Society." Standards vary widely at Iraqi newspapers, many of which are shoestring operations.

Underscoring the importance U.S. officials place on development of a Western-style media, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Tuesday cited the proliferation of news organizations in Iraq as one of the country's great successes since the ouster of President Saddam Hussein. The hundreds of newspapers, television stations and other "free media" offer a "relief valve" for the Iraqi public to debate the issues of their burgeoning democracy, Rumsfeld said.

The military's information operations campaign has sparked a backlash among some senior military officers in Iraq and at the Pentagon who argue that attempts to subvert the news media could destroy the U.S. military's credibility in other nations and with the American public.

"Here we are trying to create the principles of democracy in Iraq. Every speech we give in that country is about democracy. And we're breaking all the first principles of democracy when we're doing it," said a senior Pentagon official who opposes the practice of planting stories in the Iraqi media.

The arrangement with Lincoln Group is evidence of how far the Pentagon has moved to blur the traditional boundaries between military public affairs — the dissemination of factual information to the media — and psychological and information operations, which use propaganda and sometimes misleading information to advance the objectives of a military campaign.

The Bush administration has come under criticism for distributing video and news stories in the United States without identifying the federal government as their source and for paying American journalists to promote administration policies, practices the Government Accountability Office has labeled "covert propaganda."

Military officials familiar with the effort in Iraq said much of it was being directed by the "Information Operations Task Force" in Baghdad, part of the multinational corps headquarters commanded by Army Lt. Gen. John R. Vines. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were critical of the effort and were not authorized to speak publicly about it.

A spokesman for Vines declined to comment for this article. A Lincoln Group spokesman also declined to comment.

One of the military officials said that, as part of a psychological operations campaign that has intensified over the last year, the task force also had purchased an Iraqi newspaper and taken control of a radio station, and was using them to channel pro-American messages to the Iraqi public. Neither is identified as a military mouthpiece.

The official would not disclose which newspaper and radio station are under U.S. control, saying that naming them would put their employees at risk of insurgent attacks.

U.S. law forbids the military from carrying out psychological operations or planting propaganda through American media outlets. Yet several officials said that given the globalization of media driven by the Internet and the 24-hour news cycle, the Pentagon's efforts were carried out with the knowledge that coverage in the foreign press inevitably "bleeds" into the Western media and influences coverage in U.S. news outlets.

"There is no longer any way to separate foreign media from domestic media. Those neat lines don't exist anymore," said one private contractor who does information operations work for the Pentagon.

Daniel Kuehl, an information operations expert at National Defense University at Ft. McNair in Washington, said that he did not believe that planting stories in Iraqi media was wrong. But he questioned whether the practice would help turn the Iraqi public against the insurgency.

"I don't think that there's anything evil or morally wrong with it," he said. "I just question whether it's effective."

One senior military official who spent this year in Iraq said it was the strong pro-U.S. message in some news stories in Baghdad that first made him suspect that the American military was planting articles.

"Stuff would show up in the Iraqi press, and I would ask, 'Where the hell did that come from?' It was clearly not something that indigenous Iraqi press would have conceived of on their own," the official said.

Iraqi newspaper editors reacted with a mixture of shock and shrugs when told they were targets of a U.S. military psychological operation.

Some of the newspapers, such as Al Mutamar, a Baghdad-based daily run by associates of Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Chalabi, ran the articles as news stories, indistinguishable from other news reports. Before the war, Chalabi was the Iraqi exile favored by senior Pentagon officials to lead post-Hussein Iraq.

Others labeled the stories as "advertising," shaded them in gray boxes or used a special typeface to distinguish them from standard editorial content. But none mentioned any connection to the U.S. military.

One Aug. 6 piece, published prominently on Al Mutamar's second page, ran as a news story with the headline "Iraqis Insist on Living Despite Terrorism." Documents obtained by The Times indicated that Al Mutamar was paid about $50 to run the story, though the editor of the paper said he ran such articles for free.

Nearly $1,500 was paid to the independent Addustour newspaper to run an Aug. 2 article titled "More Money Goes to Iraq's Development," the records indicated. The newspaper's editor, Bassem Sheikh, said he had "no idea" where the piece came from but added the note "media services" on top of the article to distinguish it from other editorial content.

The U.S. military-written articles come in to Al Mutamar, the newspaper run by Chalabi's associates, via the Internet and are often unsigned, said Luay Baldawi, the paper's editor in chief.

"We publish anything," he said. "The paper's policy is to publish everything, especially if it praises causes we believe in. We are pro-American. Everything that supports America we will publish."

Yet other Al Mutamar employees were much less supportive of their paper's connection with the U.S. military. "This is not right," said Faleh Hassan, an editor. "It reflects the tragic condition of journalists in Iraq. Journalism in Iraq is in very bad shape."

Ultimately, Baldawi acknowledged that he, too, was concerned about the origin of the articles and pledged to be "more careful about stuff we get by e-mail."

After he learned of the source of three paid stories that ran in Al Mada in July, that newspaper's managing editor, Abdul Zahra Zaki, was outraged, immediately summoning a manager of the advertising department to his office.

"I'm very sad," he said. "We have to investigate."

The Iraqis who delivered the articles also reaped modest profits from the arrangements, according to sources and records.

Employees at Al Mada said that a low-key man arrived at the newspaper's offices in downtown Baghdad on July 30 with a large wad of U.S. dollars. He told the editors that he wanted to publish an article titled "Terrorists Attack Sunni Volunteers" in the newspaper.

He paid cash and left no calling card, employees said. He did not want a receipt. The name he gave employees was the same as that of a Lincoln Group worker in the records obtained by The Times. Although editors at Al Mada said he paid $900 to place the article, records show that the man told Lincoln Group that he gave more than $1,200 to the paper.

Al Mada is widely considered the most cerebral and professional of Iraqi newspapers, publishing investigative reports as well as poetry.

Zaki said that if his cash-strapped paper had known that these stories were from the U.S. government, he would have "charged much, much more" to publish them.

According to several sources, the process for placing the stories begins when soldiers write "storyboards" of events in Iraq, such as a joint U.S.-Iraqi raid on a suspected insurgent hide-out, or a suicide bomb that killed Iraqi civilians.

The storyboards, several of which were obtained by The Times, read more like press releases than news stories. They often contain anonymous quotes from U.S. military officials; it is unclear whether the quotes are authentic.

"Absolute truth was not an essential element of these stories," said the senior military official who spent this year in Iraq.

One of the storyboards, dated Nov. 12, describes a U.S.-Iraqi offensive in the western Iraqi towns of Karabilah and Husaybah.

"Both cities are stopping points for foreign fighters entering Iraq to wage their unjust war," the storyboard reads.

It continues with a quote from an anonymous U.S. military official: " 'Iraqi army soldiers and U.S. forces have begun clear-and-hold operations in the city of Karabilah near Husaybah town, close to the Syrian border,' said a military official once operations began."

Another storyboard, written on the same date, describes the capture of an insurgent bomb-maker in Baghdad. "As the people and the [Iraqi security forces] work together, Iraq will finally drive terrorism out of Iraq for good," it concludes.

It was unclear whether those two storyboards have made their way into Iraqi newspapers.

A debate over the Pentagon's handling of information has raged since shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks.

In 2002, the Pentagon was forced to shut down its Office of Strategic Influence, which had been created the previous year, after reports surfaced that it intended to plant false news stories in the international media.

For much of 2005, a Defense Department working group has been trying to forge a policy about the proper role of information operations in wartime. Pentagon officials say the group has yet to resolve the often-contentious debate in the department about the boundaries between military public affairs and information operations.

Lincoln Group, formerly known as Iraqex, is one of several companies hired by the U.S. military to carry out "strategic communications" in countries where large numbers of U.S. troops are based.

Some of Lincoln Group's work in Iraq is very public, such as an animated public service campaign on Iraqi television that spotlights the Iraqi civilians killed by roadside bombs planted by insurgents.

Besides its contract with the military in Iraq, Lincoln Group this year won a major contract with U.S. Special Operations Command, based in Tampa, to develop a strategic communications campaign in concert with special operations troops stationed around the globe. The contract is worth up to $100 million over five years, although U.S. military officials said they doubted the Pentagon would spend the full amount of the contract.

*

Mazzetti reported from Washington and Daragahi reported from Baghdad.

Copyright 2005 Los Angeles Times

BUSH AGAIN DODGES DUTY TO AMERICA

Like I needed another reason to hate this fucker.

From News.Google.com:

DUDE, YOU TAKE WEEKS AT YOUR RANCH, YOU CAN'T BLOW ONE IN A COURT HOUSE?

Oh, I get it--you don't want to get too close to a trial setting. Giving you the impeachment-willies, huh?

SOLAR CHARGER FOR NINTENDO DS, PSP OR GBA

I don't know how I missed this back in August, but I did. Engadget.com [http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000123056551/|blogged about a solar charger that works on your favorite handheld gaming devices]. I'm all about alternative energy, so I was psyched to see this. It takes 4 hours to charge a handheld and what's better is that it folds up and is roughly the size of a GBA SP. What's even better than that is that it only costs $35. What's worse is that I can only find [http://shop.brando.com.hk/solarchargerforpspnds.php|one vendor for it in Hong Kong].

HUMANS KILLING HUMANS NOT THE WAY YOU THINK

From News.Google.Com:

Would you visit this planet if you were an alien?

BUSH "CRACKS DOWN" ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

Ah, yes, more hollow posturing from theBush 43 Admin. [http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/bush;_ylt=ArGWMEXxQfEV08EnVz4BFZWs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--|An article] from AP.org available over at News.Yahoo.com reports on Bush 43's new plan to "crack down" on illegal immigration.

His plan?

Make illegal immigration less illegal.

Here's an excerpt from the article:

President Bush said Monday he wants to crack down on those who enter the country illegally but also give out more visas to foreigners with jobs, a dual plan he hopes will appease the social conservatives and business leaders who are his core supporters.

So, we nail the folks who aren't succesful in America and reward those lucky enough to find work.

What's next? Legalizing pot, so long as you don't enjoy smoking it?

What about cracking down on car theft--making it OK so long as you plan on giving the car back?

Illegal immigration is just that illegal. If we soften the laws then what's the point of having them at all? I've got nothing against Mexicans or immigrants, period--but the US already makes it easy (compared to most other countries) for foreigners to come in to the US and get work or even become a citizen. Why is it our responsibility to make it even easier?

And responsibility is where this comes down. Allowing folks to come and go across the border just because they have a job is removing the responsibility of their home countries to provide jobs and a workable economy for their own citizens. America supports not just the illegal immigrant, but the alien's home country, too.

Now, I understand that many illegals pay taxes--they pretty much have no choice. However, wouldn't those tax dollars be better spent in their home countries? Perhaps thanks to jobs in said countries?

Here's more from the above-linked article:

Texas and Arizona are home to GOP senators who have been vocal on the need to change immigration laws but who aren't entirely sold on Bush's vision.

The idea for temporary worker visas has been especially divisive and is stalled in Congress. Bush said he does not support amnesty for illegal immigrants, but he does want to give workers a way to earn an honest living doing jobs that other Americans are unwilling to do and issue more green cards.

AH, now we get to the real issue here. Ultimately this isn't about immigration or giving our poorer neighbors to the south a way to make an honest living--it's about filling jobs that Americans are unwilling to do.

First, let's examine why Americans would be unwilling to do such jobs. In my neck of the woods, Los Angeles, most Mexican day-laborers do menial tasks, like cleaning houses or offices. Others work on farms or construction sites. In short, these are all shit jobs. At least, that's what the average American would call them.

Why are they shit jobs? Because they are hard jobs and pay shit.

This is why Americans aren't willing to do the jobs. If the pay was better, I bet more Americans would want to do them.

Right here is where we get to the source of the problem--it's all about pay. In short, Americans just aren't desperate enough to take jobs like these. Work on the farm for eight hours making less than minimum wage? Ha--yeah right.

No, to fill these jobs at these wages, you need a far more desperate person. This is where our brown friends from the south come in. They are the exploited worker class. The new Chinese railroad workers.

Think of it as inverted outsourcing.

Instead of paying an American citizen what he or she is worth, employers/businesses/companies/corporations pay foreigners who are willing to make much less than US workers. This effectively turns these types of workers, whether they're from Mexico or Southeast Asia, into high-paid slaves.

Illegal Immigration isn't about people sneaking across the border, it's not about giving folks in other countries a chance to make a living--it's about keeping things cheap and easy for employers.

It's about letting employers shirk their duty to their fellow American people--their duty to support the American people by providing us jobs and fair wages. Employers, business or corporations that hire foreign companies or workers for less money than they'd pay American counterparts are nothing short of un-American. No, they're worse. They're anti-America.

There should be a law banning foreign workers until every American has a job that keeps them above the poverty level. If our country can't do that, isn't it time to consider a country, a society that can?

From a November 29, 2005 article by AP.org available at News.Yahoo.com:

Bush Vows Crackdown on Illegal Immigrants

By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer 44 minutes ago

TUCSON, Ariz. - President Bush said Monday he wants to crack down on those who enter the country illegally but also give out more visas to foreigners with jobs, a dual plan he hopes will appease the social conservatives and business leaders who are his core supporters.

"The American people should not have to choose between a welcoming society and a lawful society," Bush said from the Davis-Monthan Air Force Base about an hour from the Mexican border. "We can have both at the same time."

The touchy issue of immigration has divided lawmakers on Capitol Hill. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said he will bring up the issue early next year. The House hopes to tackle some border security measures before adjourning for the year, but little time remains and it has other issues on its plate.

Bush also pitches his plan in El Paso, Texas, on Tuesday. Texas and Arizona are home to GOP senators who have been vocal on the need to change immigration laws but who aren't entirely sold on Bush's vision.

The idea for temporary worker visas has been especially divisive and is stalled in Congress. Bush said he does not support amnesty for illegal immigrants, but he does want to give workers a way to earn an honest living doing jobs that other Americans are unwilling to do and issue more green cards.

"Listen, there's a lot of opinions on this proposal," Bush said. "I understand that, but people in this debate must recognize that we will not be able to effectively enforce our immigration laws until we create a temporary worker program."

Also Monday in Phoenix, Bush sought to counter calls by some in Congress for a timetable for withdrawing U.S. forces. "We will stay until the job is done, not a day longer. We will get the job done in Iraq," Bush told 1,300 people at a fund-raiser that was expected to bring in $1.4 million for Republican Sen. Jon Kyl's re-election campaign.

The president also promoted his plans to make tax cuts permanent, praised his Supreme Court picks — new Chief Justice John Roberts and associate justice nominee Samuel Alito — and pitched his immigration and border security proposals.

Earlier in Tucson, Bush spoke to a supportive audience that included border patrol agents and military troops. He was flanked by two black Customs and Border Protection helicopters and giant green and yellow signs that said "Protecting America's Borders."

He said he is providing border agents with cutting-edge technology like overhead surveillance drones and infrared cameras, while at the same time constructing simple physical barriers to entry.

The president's push on border security and immigration comes a month after Bush signed a $32 billion homeland security bill for 2006 that contains large increases for border protection, including 1,000 additional Border Patrol agents.

Bush has been urging Congress to act on a guest worker program for more than a year. Under his plan, undocumented immigrants would be allowed to get three-year work visas. They could extend that for an additional three years, but would then have to return to their home countries for a year to apply for a new work permit.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., along with Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., has proposed providing illegal immigrants in the United States visas for up to six years. After that, they must either leave the United States or be in the pipeline for a green card, which indicates lawful permanent residency.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Kyl support an alternative proposal that would require illegal immigrants to return to their home country to apply for a temporary worker program.

McCain and Kyl appeared with Bush, while Kennedy issued a statement criticizing the president for talking about immigration reform without acting after nearly five years in office. And it wasn't just Democrats saying that — Republican Rep. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee said Americans "are tired of talk and ready for action."

And, she added, "We have no business discussing guest worker programs until we can actually prevent illegal entry."

APPLE MAY HELP US WIN THE DVD FORMAT WARS

Remember my post from yesterday regarding Holo, HD and Blu-Ray DVDs and how I would beat them all? I talked about using a Mac Mini, a USB capture card and a couple USB drives to make my own Mac Media Center. Well, it turns out that Apple may already have something like this in mind.

On Tuesday, Engadget.com posted [http://engadget.com/entry/1234000177070149/|a blog entry] that pointed us to [http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0511macmini2.html|a post] at ThinkSecret.com, which is a Mac rumor site. Turns out Apple just might be prepping for release in January a new Mac Mini that would have video capturing capabilities and Apple's Front Row media management software out of the box. This would mean I'd have one less thing to buy when I implement my plan to skip past all the mess of moving from one DVD format to another. So, instead of the $1600 price tag I gave it in my other post, it's now going to be more like $1500--hey, $100 is still $100.

Of course, this assumes that the ThinkSecret story is true.

This new Mac Mini would also have a built in iPod dock which would make it even more fun. The only bad thing ThinkSecret mentions about this new machine is that it would be a MacIntel box. Blech.

I hate to sound like a Mac purist, but I don't like that idea. My PowerBook runs like a dream with the processor it's got in there already why take a chance on an Intel?

Still, it would be nice to see Apple claim it's rightful places as the platform for home video wrangling. Mac is, after all, the platform that has boasted superior video capabilities for over a decade. From personal experience in editing video on both Macs and PCs, I know this to be true.

"CONSERVATIVE" TEEN BLOGGER BAGS ON PROTESTERS

So, [http://thepoliticalteen.net|this kid] gets his site linked to from Drudge yesterday because he's got [http://thepoliticalteen.net/2005/11/29/protestbushbus/|a screen cap from CNN showing an anti-war protester flipping the bird to the camera]. Kid then goes on to say how the protesters "show their intelligence by whipping out the middle finger and making obscene comments."

Gee, I wonder why protesters would feel the need to resort to middle-fingering!!

Could it be that dissenters have no other option?

Lessee, we tried to vote and when loads of election irregularities popped up Republicans slammed and shut down any attempts to investigate them. This gives us the impression that our votes do no good.

When it looks like Republicans all over the place have lied/misled/broke the law/violated the public trust we turn to the press to go after these stories. Do they? Nope.

Checks and balances in the US are dead and gone.

Anyone who has a differing opinion from the Republicans is essentially screwed and has no other recourse but to go to protest rallies. Since they haven't worked some protesters turn to hand gestures and "colorful" language.

What other choice do we have? I ask you, kid, and anyone else interested in venturing a guess.

What else can we do to get our point across?

Vote?

Doesn't work.

Press?

Not representing us, ignores stories of actual law breaking.

Protest rallies?

Iraq still happened and is still happening.

What else can we do?

You know, when the minority is denied a voice, it's not called a democracy. It's called a dictatorship.

Oh yeah, and so when I go through the effort of registering for this kid's blog so I can post the above at his site? I login and get a comments error--

Fatal error: Call to undefined function: spell_insert_headers() in /home/teen/public_html/wp-content/themes/polteen/comments.php on line 33

Nice blog, kid--and I LOVE your huge banner ads.

Oh yeah, and bagging on Kerry? Keep doing that. Please.

CHINESE ACTORS IN A MOVIE ABOUT GEISHA

There's a funny thing about Political Correctness that sometimes puts respect before truth. Like how you can't really suggest that blacks are better athletes than whites or how a huge amount of people in prison are blacks. Even when you racially stereotype in a postive way (the athletes thing) people get annoyed and perhaps rightfully so.

However, what happens when you make a movie about a particular culture but don't bother including members of that culture in your movie?

In one of my novels I have a Native American character. However, a fellow writer has already suggested that I should get Halle Berry to play her.

"But the character is a Native American," I pointed out.

"That's cool," said my fellow writer-friend, a black man, "but Halle Berry should play her."

On the one hand, a good actor should be able to play almost any part. I stress almost. How can a white guy play an escaped slave in Civil War-era America? In blackface? Sure, but that opens a whole new can of whupass.

Enter the new film directed by Chicago's Rob Marshall. It's called Memoirs of a Geisha and is supposed to be a look into Japanese culture of the 1930s. The problem I have, as a Japanophile is that all of the leads are being played by Chinese actresses. Michelle Yeoh and Zhang Zi Yi play the two leads and both are from China.

Don't get me wrong--I think both actors are brilliant. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon is one of my all time favorite films. However, there are scores of Japanese actresses who American audiences have not seen before. Hell, even myself, as a Japanophile, could only point out the works of a handful of Japanese actresses who have been in Godzilla films or the original Japanese versions of the Ring movies.

I suppose if an ethnic background is well represented, it's cool to throw in an outsider. However, Japanese actors are nowhere in American media so swapping them out for Chinese actors seems to me to be preying on American stupidity.

"Who cares what Americans think? All Asians look alike, anyway!" one could assume Rob Marshal to have thought during the casting process. Perhaps he could have gone on to add: "Besides, I haven't seen a single Japanese actress that didn't suck. I've actually seen these Chinese women in that Crouching Tiger whatsis movie! That shit rocked!"

It turns out that I am not alone with my concerns. Last Monday, Reuters.com posted [http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=entertainmentNews&storyid=2005-11-28T142931Z_01_HO839066_RTRUKOC_0_US-LEISURE-JAPAN-GEISHA.xml&rpc=22|an article] on their site about this very issue. Here are a couple excerpts:

...a day ahead of the world premiere, some in Japan were wondering why homegrown talent was shut out of the leading roles in a film that celebrates Japan's unique culture.

Harsher comments have come from China, where bitter feelings over Japan's 1931-45 occupation of parts of the country make the idea of Chinese playing geisha unacceptable to some.

...

The cast adds up to Asia's A-list, with China's Ziyi Zhang starring as Sayuri, a poor fisherman's daughter who transforms herself into a legend of Kyoto's mysterious entertainment world in the 1930s.

The two other leading roles are played by Gong Li, also of China, and ethnic Chinese Malaysian actress Michelle Yeoh, with Japanese performers relegated to secondary roles.

"Memoirs," reported to have cost its makers $85 million, can ill afford to alienate moviegoers in Japan, the second biggest market for Hollywood films.

In the article, there are quite a few good examples of a certain amount of what I would call "backwardsness" regarding the making of Geisha. Here's one sample:

"According to this film, 'geisha' dance in a bizarre fashion, as if they were in a Los Angeles strip show," one Japanese film fan complained on a Web log, or blog, adding that the lights and special effects were more reminiscent of modern Las Vegas than old Kyoto.

Nice. This reminds me of U-571 a WWII submarine film that told a completely fictionalized account of how the Allied Powers got their hands on a Nazi decoding device. They also ignored certain aspects of physics causing real-life WWII submariners to pan the film.

Here's a bit more from the article that explains the director's point of view:

Director Marshall has long emphasised that he was not trying to create an accurate picture of the Japan of the 1930s and that he felt he had chosen the best actors for each role, regardless of nationality.

"The challenge for me was to bring that world to life. For me, it is an artistic impression of that world," he said on Monday.

Right--so get the best actors? So, there's not a single actress in Japan who was better than Zhang Zi Yi? Not a one?

And what's the point of doing a period movie about a culture if you're not interested in getting it culturally and historically accruate??

I mean, really--what's the point??

Americans already think of Japan as a strange and exotic place where people look funny and talk funny in a language very hard to speak (which is isn't, btw). All this movie is going to be is a reflection of this malformed, ignorant and ultimately, racist view.

What bugs me even more is the way the Japanese seem to be taking it. According to the above-linked article, it's all about the Americans making their movie the way they want:

"It was strange, but not in a bad way," said one magazine writer, who declined to be identified. "I think because they are foreigners they have been able to create a vision of Japanese beauty that we could not, because we would be trying to recreate reality," she added.

Japan has a record of accepting Hollywood versions of itself without complaint. Industry reports said "The Last Samurai" (2003), starring Tom Cruise and set in 19th century Japan, grossed more in Japan than in the United States.

This makes me shudder because, even as a gaijin, I know how much Last Samurai lacked in accuracy (Japanese soldiers crying??). I think that maybe the Japanese people still remember a bit too well having their asses handed to them by us all those decades ago. I think they need to stand up for themselves and their culture a bit more. Sure, it's "American" to stand up for your rights, but America doesn't have the monopoly on the idea protecting one's self and one's culture.