It's one thing to allege that the administration has done a poor job helping US citizens prepare for a second potential  terror attack, or to say that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have been trumped-up exercises that have seen thousands die unnecessarily and have benefited the most elite of corporations. It's quite another thing to say that the entire 9/11 episode was manufactured by the government, and that, with the help of some edge right-wing groups, the government conspired to bring down the World Trade Center, all in the name of promoting war in the middle east. Yet, somehow, that's the theory reached by a group for academics, who say that all the horror of that day was generated by an "inside job".

As someone who enjoys a good conspiracy theory now and then, and has seen the administration, in concert with right-wing splinter groups, accomplish a great deal of harm in the country, not even I can wrap my head around this one. The fear and fumbling of the administration on the day and days following the attacks was very real, something they aren't capable of manufacturing in an historic coverup.

As the UK's Daily Mail reports:

They believe a group of US neo-conservatives called the Project for a New American Century, set on US world dominance, orchestrated the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to hit Iraq, Afghanistan and later Iran. The group says scientific evidence over the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon is conclusive proof. Professor Jones said it was impossible for the twin towers to have collapsed in the way they did from the collision of two aeroplanes.
He maintains jet fuel does not burn at temperatures high enough to melt steel beams and claims horizontal puffs of smoke seen during the collapse of the towers are indicative of controlled explosions used to bring down the towers.

The 9/11 commission's report, following detailed investigation, ruled out any of the mega-conspiracy theories, yet that doesn't mean they will simply fade away. Just like Elvis, they're still out there. The National Ledger follows on to this line of thinking with a survey that shows a small segment of the country believes 9/11 was a conspiracy "orchestrated by government officials".

More than a third of the respondents stated their belief that it was either very likely or somewhat likely that “people in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East.”

There is no doubt that some who see these results will jump to the immediate conclusion that these are leftist anti-Bush liberals who believe in such dreck, which instantly devalues any legitimate concerns we actually do have, and have made clear over the 6 years these guys have been running things. But it's not true. As a group, we are all furious over the administration's response to the attacks, the misguided march to war, and the ineptitude around every facet of our maintaining safety. But we don't believe they had the planning capabilities and tenacity to pull this off. A few dozen extremists "living in a cave" had more foresight.

If there were anything I learned during my time at UC Berkeley, a.k.a "Cal", it's to not get overly excited about the sports teams every year, for no matter their start, no matter the pre-season hype, they will always, always let you down. Whether it's a fourth-quarter fumble or interception, a missed field goal, or a significant injury to a key part of the team's offense, Cal fans have seen it all. Even in my ten-plus years of being a Cal junkie, I can surely give examples for each. As the 2006 college football season started off this past Saturday, Cal was ranked higher than I can ever recall previous to the season getting under way. Many publications had ranked the Golden Bears in the top ten in the country, and the team was favored in their quest to vanquish the also-Top 25 Tennessee Volunteers.

I could have told you how this was going to end before it started. (And I'm somewhat disappointed I didn't do it already)

As nearly everyone knows now, Cal stumbled to a 35-0 deficit after three quarters of football, and managed to put up some points against the Volunteers' second string, only to lose 35-18 when it was all said and done. In the big, bad world of college football, every game is critical, as teams threaten to go 11-0 or 12-0 every year, and the difference between being 10-1 and 9-2 can mean millions for the school in bowl appearances. But to set what are really an untested group of 20-22 year old kids with expectations that they are a top ten team in the land before they've even strapped on their cleats in competition is just plain silly. Sour grapes aside, it simply doesn't make sense to rank teams before the season is underway, especially as the rankings play such a huge part in the game itself.

Especially disappointing as a result of Cal's malaise is that this once again cements the beliefs of those that say the style of football played on the West coast, in the Pacific 10 conference, is somehow easier and less aggressive than that played on the "superior" East coast. ESPN, typically leading the way in its thick-headedness, claimed as much after the game's cheers faded.

From ESPN the Magazine's Bruce Feldman:

After seeing a Tennessee offense, which ranked 101st in the nation in scoring last season, post 35 points in a little more than two quarters, I doubt anyone will take Cal very seriously again for a very long time. Overreaction? Maybe. But I think if the Bears could knock off USC, they probably still would not get back into the top 15. And of course, this blowout has big-picture meaning. Whenever folks talk about the Pac-10 being soft, this Cal-Tennessee game will always come up first. It will live in infamy out here on the West Coast.

Had Cal somehow pulled off the improbable, and won, I might be singing a different tune, but the whole idea that teams are assigned rankings before a single game is played is as silly as declaring a presidential nominee the victor before a single ballot is cast. This even extends to the post-season award process, as for the first time in my memory, a Cal player is being promoted as a potential Heisman Trophy candidate. Marshawn Lynch, a fantastic running back, even has a site dedicated to his Heisman legitimacy. It's like campaigning for MVP in Spring Training. Silly.

Saturday's game isn't going to make us give up our Cal season tickets. When they take on Minnesota next Saturday, we will be at Memorial Stadium, ready to yell "Go Bears!", if we can somehow shoe-horn it around our Saturday A's game. Life is rough when you're devoted to East Bay sports. If only they were as devoted to us, and could promise victory.

Listening to ''Live @ DI.fm 2005-11-11'', by DJ Irish (Play Count: 2)

I swear, if Steve Jobs sneezes, it's bound to hit the Mac rumor sites. I'm surprised if stevejobssneezes.com isn't there with live coverage, a streaming chat site and user forums - all claiming inside information from his general practitioner. Hot off of WWDC, the Apple rumor mill is again abuzz - with suggestions that Steve and the rest of the Apple crew will unveil some "insanely great" updates on everything from the iMac to iPods, their AirPort wireless base stations, and as usual, a kitchen sink of mystery offerings - including the long-rumored, much-anticipated iTunes Movie Store, and even a video streaming device that would interface with your television set.

While Mac aficionados always expect for every single product in the lineup to get an update, plus a surprise, it doesn't really make good business sense for Apple, or any other company, to do away with their entire suite of offerings in one swoop - with inventory, supply and demand issues all being key. Instead, Apple typically updates two products at a time, and alternates their introductions. While WWDC saw updates to the Power Macintosh line, the new mysterious September 12th media invite would focus on iPods and iMacs, and a third, unnamed event later this year might see updates to their line of laptops. It just makes sense.

But here we go... the contest of the rumor sites to one-up the other.

Think Secret, with one of the better track records in this informal business, says new iPods and a new iMac are due on the September 12th event. Think Secret expects higher capacities (as always), and new colors for the iPod Nano. Their expectations for the updated iPod line are less extensive, as the long-rumored touch-screen iPod isn't expected until early 2007, barring an early release to trump Microsoft's warmed-over Toshiba Gigabeat, which they've called Zune. Think Secret also says the iTunes movie store has been postponed, for unknown reasons.

This of course conflicts with AppleInsider's expectations. With some instances of success, AppleInsider is typically more aggressive and fanciful with their expectations from Apple. The site once expected "strawberry" pink G3s, and has expected handhelds or Apple cell phones every few months for the last several years... but they try.

AppleInsider also expects new iMacs and iPod Nanos. But they take things further by expecting that Steve Jobs and Apple have even bigger plans than anyone has anticipated - video streaming of iTunes movies to television sets in customers' living rooms - extending the functionality of Airport Express, which now offers streaming to home stereos (including mine).

They also claim that rumored delays of the touchscreen iPod are overblown. But only one of these sites can be right, which will be seen next week. We'll be watching, of course.

Listening to ''Hymne & Sail'', by DJ Armin van Buuren (Play Count: 5)

Some days, the lineups are baffling, the pitching moves keep us guessing. Role players rot on the bench. Starters stay in too long - or not long enough. It's all part of being an armchair manager. But one guy, Ken Macha, gets to do it for real. This week, we investigate "The Mind of Ken Macha".


Click to See Larger Comic

Also: Take the Poll: Who should be 2006 AL Manager of the Year?

2005 Comics | 2006 Comics | Poll