Blackwater Parachutes into San Diego State’s Halftime

On Saturday night, the San Diego State Aztecs hosted BYU to close out their regular football season.  The game was the 3rd Annual Fleet Week-sponsored game, rescheduled from October 27 because of wildfires.  The Fleet Week Foundation describes the game like this:

San Diego State University plays in this third annual Fleet Week Football Classic.  Pregame and half-time shows will feature flyovers, parachutists, the Navy Region South West and SDSU bands, and a tribute to our wounded warriors at Balboa Hospital and Camp Pendleton as well as a tribute to members of the Legion of Valor.

The festivities have a wide range of public and private sponsors and it’s fun for the whole family right?  Well, for at least the second year in a row (probably all three), the halftime show included an American flag being parachuted onto the field by members of a nation parachutist team…who happen to work for Blackwater and use parachutes emblazoned with the Blackwater logo.

Attached is the promotional video from last year’s (2006) Fleet Week.  You can skip ahead to the 2:43 mark to see the Blackwater parachutist bringing in the giant American flag.  If you want, you can also zip over to about the 3:09 mark to see the flag being dragged across the field during landing.

Fleet Week events, which go on year round, are to honor veterans.  I’ve attended several of them and in my experience they’ve been good opportunities to pay tribute to veterans.  So I have a hard time understanding how Blackwater fits into the puzzle.  They consistently undermine the work being done by our armed forces around the world and especially in Iraq.  It seems a particularly unfortunate inclusion in the festivities; made all the more uncomfortable given that the Blackwater recall election culminates on Tuesday (12/11).

I spoke with Steve Becvar of the SDSU Athletic Foundation, which was involved in planning the event.  He explained that this is the third year that Blackwater-affiliated parachutists had played a role in the Fleet Week game.  He emphasized that the school was not seeking to make any sort of political point, simply to partner with the Fleet Week Foundation to honor veterans.

But despite what may well have been the best intentions of event organizers, Blackwater has NO business honoring veterans.  Blackwater profits from war and has a vested interest in prolonging any military struggle as long as it increases revenue.  They are, in fact, naturally at odds with everything that our veterans should be honored for.  They dishonor the flag and all the people who have bled for it whenever they or their representatives try to wrap themselves or the Blackwater logo in the American flag.

Blackwater knows what it does.  And they know that they’re nothing next to the members of the actual military.  Past that, they know that their only hope for success or survival is to blur the distinction between their criminal behavior and the valor of American servicemen and women.  As the Potrero vote peaks, I hope San Diegans and Americans everywhere refuse to be tricked.  Blackwater is hoping for honor by osmosis, but they end up literally and figuratively dragging the reputations of our soldiers through the mud.

If people wanted yet ANOTHER reason to resist at every opportunity Blackwater’s plans for a training facility in Potrero, here you go.  They’ve taken advantage of SDSU and the Fleet Week Foundation to undermine what otherwise could have been a wonderful evening for veterans.  But Blackwater doesn’t serve the United States or its ideals.  Blackwater serves the dollar.  And they have no business being remotely affiliated with veterans or current servicemembers.

So from San Diego to Blackwater: Get out and stay out.

Invite your friends, challenge your foes. A debate platform for you.


Versions of this invitation cross-posted (and will be cross-posted) at a few other blogs. Please do take a look at the below invitation-we’ll stick around and see if there are any comments, questions, or suggestions! Thanks.


One of the most frustrating things about the current political and media environment is of course the way that reasoned, logical, evidence-based debate (about anything) seems to have been completed replaced by spin and blind repetition of talking points. People of all political leanings feel that others don’t confront arguments or employ reason (and of course in some cases it’s true).


– What if there were a platform where ignoring arguments against one’s perspective wasn’t possible, where people could make their case but also be forced to directly answer the opposing side?

– What if there were a place where nonsense and nonsense peddlers could be exposed as such to the whole world, and strong ideas defended against all comers?

– What if there were a way communities could explore issues in a highly systematic, yet fun and reader-friendly, way?

—>


Now there’s a platform that can do all this and more: Cruxlux. We wanted to accomplish something great for the blogosphere and we’d like to cordially invite you all to try out the tool (either at cruxlux.com or in your own blogs—more on that at the bottom). It’s for you.


Cruxlux is a powerful platform for online debates. Its intuitive format shows supports and counterarguments to any assertion (and supports/counterarguments to those, etc.), neatly decomposing an issue and exposing the facts or values on which differing camps diverge. The credibility and scoring systems move top arguments up and prevent one side from sabotaging another. The ultimate result is a comprehensive but concise resource that captures all sides of the issue and is there for all to see.


Cruxlux allows one to invite allies to explore an issue, or to issue challenges to other members, groups, or outside bloggers/organizations. (If someone’s not willing to back up their views on truly neutral turf—or at least have any supporters willing to do so—that says something in itself.) It is perhaps naïve to think that the most close-minded can be convinced, but at the least it will expose exactly where the differences arise, and lay out the issue for the rest of the world, which hopefully can be convinced. This was some of the promise of the blogosphere, but blogs have become segregated (few people care to visit very different blogs—see Calitics and FlashReport) and also cannot automatically put arguments head to head. As neutral turf and with its powerful format/scoring, Cruxlux can allow blogs to overcome those limitations. We think there really will be impact from having an entire debate, with participation from everyone, in a concise form.


How can you use Cruxlux? Well, either you can use it directly at Cruxlux.com or you can embed Cruxlux within your own blog  (for free), enabling you to have intra- or inter-blog debates from within your own site. If you’re interested in this, contact us.


What are the types of issues that you can explore with Cruxlux? As you can see on the site, anything! One big debate was on waterboarding—http://cruxlux.com/debate/397/congress-should-pass-a-new-law-prohibiting-waterboarding—another smaller sample is on the AMT—http://cruxlux.com/debate/504/h-r-3996-temporary-tax-relief-act-of-2007-should-be-pass. Each post has counterarguments to it below it (and so on). Click on the “>” to the left of a post to expose counterarguments. Mouseover “Focus” to see any supports.


We have debates regarding prominent proposed federal legislation and would love to systematically do the same for state bills (we’re California based ourselves).


What are situations where you might want to use Cruxlux? Perhaps you’re discussing with someone in the comments here about a particular piece of legislation or water plan—you could use Cruxlux to explore the pro/con. Or you want to challenge a conservative group (or just a conservative acquaintance) to debate something—go ahead and issue the challenge through Cruxlux and use us as neutral turf. Or just cross post a diary at Cruxlux.com and see various perspectives. We’re also putting together a few organized initiatives right now, including one around the Presidential campaigns (any of you who are actively supporting someone, and are interested in learning more about this, get in touch).


Hope you find Cruxlux a useful tool. And we’re still improving it too (exciting new features coming soon!). Do let us know if you have any questions or suggestions. As mentioned above, we’re happy to help blogs embed, or just come use Cruxlux.com directly. Thanks!

FlashReport on SD-03: Completely Clueless

I don’t normally comment too much on the FalseReport. It’s just generally not worth my time to quibble with inanities. And my disagreeing with those folks would kind of be a little too expected. So, I generally focus on those who are supposed to be “balanced.”  But, I’ve been tempted by this little piece of so-called analysis on SD-03 by Yolo County Supe Matt Rexroad (hey, Yolo, WTF? Do you let just anybody become supervisor?):

In a one on one race with Migden and Leno — I like Leno’s chances.  He is every bit as liberal only he is much nicer.  That is not saying much.  Leno had done a great job of gathering up all of the anti-Migden forces until others started having the same idea.

“Another clinging on to glory days” Alioto jumped into the race.  He divides the anti-Migden forces once. Now Joe Nation has opened an account.  He is a former Assemblyman from Marin County that might make a play for the Marin County part of the district.  He would divide the anti-Migden forces again..and almost certainly hand her re-election.

The problem with this? Well, apparently Mr. Rexroad didn’t bother to talk to anybody who knows the district, knows the personalities involved, or  do any research whatsoever on this before he wrote this.  If he had, he would have seen a few statements like this from people who actually know the San Francisco-based district.  From Luke Thomas, a local photographer/journalist:

Conventional wisdom, however, suggests Nation, who lives in San Rafael, will likely draw votes away from incumbent Senator Carole Migden who is already facing stiff challenges from Assemblymember Mark Leno and San Francisco Police Commissioner Joe Alioto-Veronese. (FogCityJournal 11.28.07)

Or this analysis from one of the top pollsters in the City, probably the state, David Latterman of Fall Line Analytics :

David Latterman, president of Fall Line Analytics, a San Francisco-based polling company, said Nation’s potential entrance into the race “hurts Carole” Migden. That’s because while both Migden and Leno are well known in San Francisco, a Nation candidacy could take Marin votes away from Migden, which Leno has never represented, he said. (SacBee CapAlert 11.16.07)

Now, I’m not saying that Mr. Rexroad couldn’t be right, it’s just that he’s not even close to being right.  He frames this as a race between Senator Migden vs. Not-Senator-Migden.  And that’s just not the way this works. Assemblyman Leno and Fmr. Assemblyman Nation both have their own name IDs. Mr. Nation isn’t so popular up as he once was in the North Bay considering his primary challenge to Lynn Woolsey. (By the by, Rep. Woolsey doesn’t look like she’s set to let that incident go so quickly either.)

Oh, and apparently Mr. Rexroad also missed the latest self-injection of cash into Sen. Migden’s campaign. The funny thing is here that Mr. Rexroad actually seems to well, dislike Sen. Migden. Now, that’s probably a badge of honor for a progressive like the good Senator, but the article is an odd way of stating that distrust. Maybe next time Mr. Rexroad spills pixels, he’ll think of making sure that he has a solid grip on the facts.