Watchwatcher

edd, i'm sorry, but i simply do not embrace the mainstream media's chorus that THE PATH TO 9/11 was a fabrication. You should read the following rebuttal from Mr. Nowrasteh carefully, it counters many of the mainstream commentary... again, who is spinning who... when the news media lines up squarely on one side, i'll take the other side on a bet anyday. REMEMBERING 9/11 - The Path to Hysteria My sin was to write a screenplay accurately depicting Bill Clinton's record on terrorism. BY CYRUS NOWRASTEH Monday, September 18, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT I am neither an activist, politician or partisan, nor an ideologue of any stripe. What I am is a writer who takes his job very seriously, as do most of my colleagues: Also, one who recently took on the most distressing and important story it will ever fall to me to tell. I considered it a privilege when asked to write the script for "The Path to 9/11." I felt duty-bound from the outset to focus on a single goal--to represent our recent pre-9/11 history as the evidence revealed it to be. The American people deserve to know that history: They have paid for it in blood. Like all Americans, I wish it were not so. I wish there were no terrorists. I wish there had been no 9/11. I wish we could squabble among ourselves in assured security. But wishes avail nothing. My Iranian parents fled tyranny and oppression. I know and appreciate deeply the sanctuary America has offered. Only in this country could a person such as I have had the life, liberty and opportunity that I have had. No one needs to remind me of this--I know it every single day. I know, too, as does everyone involved in the production, that we kept uppermost in our minds the need for due diligence in the delivery of this history. Fact-checkers and lawyers scrutinized every detail, every line, every scene. There were hundreds of pages of annotations. We were informed by multiple advisers and interviews with people involved in the events--and books, including in a most important way the 9/11 Commission Report. It would have been good to be able to report due diligence on the part of those who judged the film, the ones who held forth on it before watching a moment of it. Instead, in the rush to judgment, and the effort to portray the series as the work of a right-wing zealot, much was made of my "friendship" with Rush Limbaugh (a connection limited to two social encounters), but nothing of any acquaintance with well-known names on the other side of the political spectrum. No reference to Abby Mann, for instance, with whom I worked on "10,000 Black Men Named George" (whose hero is an African-American communist) or Oliver Stone, producer of "The Day Reagan Was Shot," a film I wrote and directed. Clearly, those enraged that a film would criticize the Clinton administration's antiterrorism policies--though critical of its successor as well--were willing to embrace only one scenario: The writer was a conservative hatchetman. In July a reporter asked if I had ever been ethnically profiled. I happily replied, "No." I can no longer say that. The L.A. Times, for one, characterized me by race, religion, ethnicity, country-of-origin and political leanings--wrongly on four of five counts. To them I was an Iranian-American politically conservative Muslim. It is perhaps irrelevant in our brave new world of journalism that I was born in Boulder, Colo. I am not a Muslim or practitioner of any religion, nor am I a political conservative. What am I? I am, most devoutly, an American. I asked the reporter if this kind of labeling was a new policy for the paper. He had no response. The hysteria engendered by the series found more than one target. In addition to the death threats and hate mail directed at me, and my grotesque portrayal as a maddened right-winger, there developed an impassioned search for incriminating evidence on everyone else connected to the film. And in director David Cunningham, the searchers found paydirt! His father had founded a Christian youth outreach mission. The whiff of the younger Mr. Cunningham's possible connection to this enterprise was enough to set the hounds of suspicion baying. A religious mission! A New York Times reporter wrote, without irony or explanation, that an issue that raised questions about the director was his involvement in his father's outreach work. In the era of McCarthyism, the merest hint of a connection to communism sufficed to inspire dark accusations, the certainty that the accused was part of a malign conspiracy. Today, apparently, you can get something of that effect by charging a connection with a Christian mission. "The Path to 9/11" was intended to remind us of the common enemy we face. Like the 9/11 Report itself, it is meant to enable us to better defend ourselves from a future attack. Past is prologue, and 9/11 is merely another step in an escalating Islamic fundamentalist reign of terror. By dramatizing the step-by-step increase in attacks on America--all of which, in fact, occurred--we are better able to see the pattern and anticipate the future. That was the point of the series, its only intention. Call it the canary in the coal mine. Call it John O'Neill in the FBI. Despite intense political pressure to pull the film right up until airtime, Disney/ABC stood tall and refused to give in. For this--for not buckling to threats from Democratic senators threatening to revoke ABC station licenses--Disney CEO Rober Iger and ABC executives deserve every commendation. Hence the 28 million viewers over two nights, and the ratings victory Monday night (little reported by the media), are gratifying indeed. "The Path to 9/11" was set in the time before the event, and in a world in which no party had the political will to act. The principals did not know then what we know now. It is also indisputable that Bill Clinton entered office a month before the first attack on the World Trade Center. Eight years then went by, replete with terrorist assaults on Americans and American interests overseas. George W. Bush was in office eight months before 9/11. Those who actually watched the entire miniseries know that he was given no special treatment. It's good to have come to something approaching the end of this saga, whose lessons are worth remembering. It gave us, for one thing, a heartening glimpse (these things don't come along every day) of corporate backbone in the face of phenomenal pressure--and an infinitely more chilling one testifying to the power and reach of politically driven hysteria. A ripe subject for a miniseries, if ever there was one. Mr. Nowrasteh wrote the screenplay for "The Path to 9/11." *****

edd... you may be missing my point (or emphasis). during one chapter of my life, i worked in close contact with some master 'spinners.' They had more charisma and personal warmth than you could imagine. You would believe them 200% of the time and trust them more than your own mother. If anyone ever accused them of lying, they could twist the truth like a pretzel until whoever it was that pointed the finger looked like the devil himself. I would guess that 99.9% of the American public has never come in direct contact with people like this. They are rare. Consequently, few people even understand who they're dealing with... they just like the way this guy sounds... he sounds sincere... he sounds truthful... he's the guy you want on your team... someone you'd want to tell others is your friend... etc. People like this are very calculating. They enjoy their ability to shape and mould perceptions. They believe they are more intelligent than most other people. It is a selective form of megalomania--a character flaw. Usually if you look back in the person's personal history you will find severe imbalances (this is very evident with both Bill and Hillary, both of which had extremely difficult relationships with their parents during childhood). I'm not saying that everyone is naive, but my observation of Clinton is that he is this rare kind of a person and you simply cannot take him at first impression ... you have to look at the second derivative and ask yourself... why would he say this, what is his motive, how does this benefit his next few moves on the chess board.

Clinton is an ACTOR, pure and simple. Arguably an even more convincing ACTOR than Reagan at his best. Since the 9/11 film pointing out the lack of response from him, Clinton has known he would need to come out in a very bold and public way to attempt to change public opinion... what you saw was a completely plastic calculated performance which the media gobbled up in exactly the way Clinton had anticipated. Whether you like him or hate him, you can be ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that when Bill Clinton is on national TV, his every move, every glance, and every word is completely calculated to MANIPULATE the press and as many naive viewers as possible... in that regard, Clinton is quite reliable.

Ulich... you are kidding right? For 1/50th price you can have 99% of the watch.

30+ I tend to wear certain watches in cycles of a couple weeks each. Since i dive/swim at least a few days a week, i tend toward the ones with operable bezel which have been waterproofed. generally don't wear un-waterproofed. my diving watches also are built to handle the day to day beating that i dish out, and my days of wear pinstripes 24-7 are long over (even though i still appreciate a great dress watch). i'm long overdue to weed down to maybe 1/2 as many as I have, but i promised not to add anymore without funding them largely from liquidating older ones. i've got a couple YMs which were among the first i acquired... don't wear them much, but wouldn't part with them... one has a fantastic MOP face and the other has a beautiful deep blue face. also holding on to my cartier convex grid which i never see reps of this quality...

thank you for setting me straight, pulled out the loop again and you're correct.

i went over it with a loop and would say that it looks stunning. for those who were asking, the panda subdials do have concentric circles (i don't know if the gen does or not). if you did not know what an iwc was and saw this on someone's wrist, you would have the impression that it was quite a watch. as i mentioned before, i don't like the rep strap and the watch is screaming for a very expensive looking strap...most likely black croc. NOW... COULD SOMEONE PLS TAKE A STAB AT THESE QUESTIONS??? 1) this is the first of the new 7750s i have bot... i recall with the old 7750s, it was recommended that the watch be run in a certain way for the first few days to 'break in' the movement. IS THIS ALSO the case with these movements, and if so, what is the process? 2) i understand that these movements arrive dry... are most of you having it lubed by a watchsmith right away or is there some other solution?

Panda arrived today... quick. Two questions for the rest of you... 1) this is the first of the new 7750s i have bot... i recall with the old 7750s, it was recommended that the watch be run in a certain way for the first few days to 'break in' the movement. IS THIS ALSO the case with these movements, and if so, what is the process? 2) i understand that these movements arrive dry... are most of you having it lubed by a watchsmith right away or is there some other solution? THANKS, Watch looks great, i like the nice domed shaped of the crystal. strap looks like vinyl.

the first rep i picked up a few years ago was a pasha convex grid (eta) and i still love the looks of it... a cross between giorgio armani and arnold schwartzenegger. there are very few reps of the 'convex' grid which is the man's version of the watch--most have a flat grid like the smaller women's version. the seatimer seems to be an attempt to update the image of the watch and perhaps give it a more masculine look.

rec'd EMS tracking today... so looks like it should be landing sometime in the next week...

tribal, first, thx, great comparison. second, would have been interesting if you had NOT told us which was which. that would have demonstrated the fact that an expert or anyone on this forum would not be able to distinguish which of these watches is the MBW. the more gens you look at the more you realize that CG shapes are all over the place, particularly on the older pieces...

REMEMBERING 9/11 - The Path to Hysteria My sin was to write a screenplay accurately depicting Bill Clinton's record on terrorism. BY CYRUS NOWRASTEH Monday, September 18, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT I am neither an activist, politician or partisan, nor an ideologue of any stripe. What I am is a writer who takes his job very seriously, as do most of my colleagues: Also, one who recently took on the most distressing and important story it will ever fall to me to tell. I considered it a privilege when asked to write the script for "The Path to 9/11." I felt duty-bound from the outset to focus on a single goal--to represent our recent pre-9/11 history as the evidence revealed it to be. The American people deserve to know that history: They have paid for it in blood. Like all Americans, I wish it were not so. I wish there were no terrorists. I wish there had been no 9/11. I wish we could squabble among ourselves in assured security. But wishes avail nothing. My Iranian parents fled tyranny and oppression. I know and appreciate deeply the sanctuary America has offered. Only in this country could a person such as I have had the life, liberty and opportunity that I have had. No one needs to remind me of this--I know it every single day. I know, too, as does everyone involved in the production, that we kept uppermost in our minds the need for due diligence in the delivery of this history. Fact-checkers and lawyers scrutinized every detail, every line, every scene. There were hundreds of pages of annotations. We were informed by multiple advisers and interviews with people involved in the events--and books, including in a most important way the 9/11 Commission Report. It would have been good to be able to report due diligence on the part of those who judged the film, the ones who held forth on it before watching a moment of it. Instead, in the rush to judgment, and the effort to portray the series as the work of a right-wing zealot, much was made of my "friendship" with Rush Limbaugh (a connection limited to two social encounters), but nothing of any acquaintance with well-known names on the other side of the political spectrum. No reference to Abby Mann, for instance, with whom I worked on "10,000 Black Men Named George" (whose hero is an African-American communist) or Oliver Stone, producer of "The Day Reagan Was Shot," a film I wrote and directed. Clearly, those enraged that a film would criticize the Clinton administration's antiterrorism policies--though critical of its successor as well--were willing to embrace only one scenario: The writer was a conservative hatchetman. In July a reporter asked if I had ever been ethnically profiled. I happily replied, "No." I can no longer say that. The L.A. Times, for one, characterized me by race, religion, ethnicity, country-of-origin and political leanings--wrongly on four of five counts. To them I was an Iranian-American politically conservative Muslim. It is perhaps irrelevant in our brave new world of journalism that I was born in Boulder, Colo. I am not a Muslim or practitioner of any religion, nor am I a political conservative. What am I? I am, most devoutly, an American. I asked the reporter if this kind of labeling was a new policy for the paper. He had no response. The hysteria engendered by the series found more than one target. In addition to the death threats and hate mail directed at me, and my grotesque portrayal as a maddened right-winger, there developed an impassioned search for incriminating evidence on everyone else connected to the film. And in director David Cunningham, the searchers found paydirt! His father had founded a Christian youth outreach mission. The whiff of the younger Mr. Cunningham's possible connection to this enterprise was enough to set the hounds of suspicion baying. A religious mission! A New York Times reporter wrote, without irony or explanation, that an issue that raised questions about the director was his involvement in his father's outreach work. In the era of McCarthyism, the merest hint of a connection to communism sufficed to inspire dark accusations, the certainty that the accused was part of a malign conspiracy. Today, apparently, you can get something of that effect by charging a connection with a Christian mission. "The Path to 9/11" was intended to remind us of the common enemy we face. Like the 9/11 Report itself, it is meant to enable us to better defend ourselves from a future attack. Past is prologue, and 9/11 is merely another step in an escalating Islamic fundamentalist reign of terror. By dramatizing the step-by-step increase in attacks on America--all of which, in fact, occurred--we are better able to see the pattern and anticipate the future. That was the point of the series, its only intention. Call it the canary in the coal mine. Call it John O'Neill in the FBI. Despite intense political pressure to pull the film right up until airtime, Disney/ABC stood tall and refused to give in. For this--for not buckling to threats from Democratic senators threatening to revoke ABC station licenses--Disney CEO Rober Iger and ABC executives deserve every commendation. Hence the 28 million viewers over two nights, and the ratings victory Monday night (little reported by the media), are gratifying indeed. "The Path to 9/11" was set in the time before the event, and in a world in which no party had the political will to act. The principals did not know then what we know now. It is also indisputable that Bill Clinton entered office a month before the first attack on the World Trade Center. Eight years then went by, replete with terrorist assaults on Americans and American interests overseas. George W. Bush was in office eight months before 9/11. Those who actually watched the entire miniseries know that he was given no special treatment. It's good to have come to something approaching the end of this saga, whose lessons are worth remembering. It gave us, for one thing, a heartening glimpse (these things don't come along every day) of corporate backbone in the face of phenomenal pressure--and an infinitely more chilling one testifying to the power and reach of politically driven hysteria. A ripe subject for a miniseries, if ever there was one. Mr. Nowrasteh wrote the screenplay for "The Path to 9/11." *****

i have not received it yet, although i did receive notification that the order was received. i asked last week for an update and was told that there had been some qc issues with a batch and therefore they were waiting for a new batch.

76-78mm on buckle side, 118mm on other side, plus 44mm lengthwise measurement of case, total is therefore 238mm. using tightest buckle hole, you're looking at about 175mm or roughly 6 3/4" I would say this strap probably works well down to about a 7" wrist. my own wrist is 7.5" and I'm using the next to tightest hole in the strap.

for the more modern PAMs, i prefer the newer buckle which also works very well onthis strap... check it out on this GMT Tux.... http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?showtopic=11682&hl=

I like this one, but am wondering if there is an easy way to correct the alignment of the 8 and 10 markers?

check with ofrei, they have decent quality one, although you'll probably have to buy a minimum of a dozen.

pacemaker for reps with weak movements?

Saw this rubber sub strap for 44mm from Josh a couple weeks ago and decided to pick one up. Was pleasantly surprised to find that it is extremely comfortable, has excellent detailing and also has the 'wave' structure in the band near the lugs. I generally wear bracelets rather than straps, simply because as my wrist swells later in the day, a strap begins to feel like a tourniquet -- the wave, provides for bit of expansion, makes this strap almost unnoticeable. Anyhow, the strap came with one of the flared buckles (pre-V?), which to my eye looked a little distracting from the nice clean lines of the band, so I swapped in a standard straight pam buckle. OK, now a word of caution to those of you who are PAM purists... yes, i've gone and done it here by picking and choosing these components--watch--band--buckle--from different models... so if you are faint of heart, please stop right here... go back to your reading on some other forum... maybe one about happy little pam elves... and don't look at the following pics... HOWever if you are a little more daring, take a look and let me know how many violations i've commited. but for my money this is one nice looking and very comfortable combo platter... PAM 029 Tux One more shot... see how nice that buckle works with this strap *****

<<made up out of whole cloth>> arch, unless you know what was taken out, how can you make that judgment. all we know is that Clinton successfully twisted the arm of ABC to remove things that were not consistent with the 'Clinton version' of history... and we all know how completely unbiased and reliable that is... all i am saying is that anyone who knows loren c., also knows that he would not be associated with a movie or any other form of media, which was intentionally untruthful. as you read the bloggers whose imaginations have run wild by connecting dots and coming up with right-wind conspiracy stories, you also find that they completely discredit themselves when they take a guy like cunningham and his organization and refer to it as 'cultish' or some kind of wacko 'reconstructionist theocratic' political movement... these ridiculous remarks come from people with their own agenda... i leave you to figure out what that is....

nice work. before you go to much further you should also have an architect review your plans. it is a very small price to pay to avoid major headaches down the road. i've seen some very intelligent people develop and build home additions costing several hundred thousand... only to find a serous design flaw afterward. btw, i'm not an architect, but in building my own home several years ago, i learned that architects are usually right and can see critical issues that an untrained eye simply will not. best of luck!

beautiful! had one of these and loved the solid feel of the jubilee bracelet. only problem was it never got any wrist time... congrats & enjoy!

i'm researching same... 40" lcd or plasma. frankly, the burn in issue for plasma is no longer an issue with new technology that prevents it. lcd and plasma both have about the same life 30,000 hrs,etc. it comes down to narrowing it down to a few sets and then going to a local store and looking at them and deciding which you like. if you are looking at the 40" Sony Bravia S series KDL-40S2000, check out LCDTVs.com ... only $1695 (!) Next up the ladder would be the Sony Bravia XBR KDL-V40XBR1 at $2275. I'd use the online prices to negotiate with your local store, then buy it local for service. Let us know what you decide on and how you like it!

Arch, no disrespect intended. i'd rather talk about watches.

From the picture it would appear that the rep is actually very close to the gen, in fact, i'm having a hard time seeing differences. could you maybe give a rundown on what is actually different between the two? thx... actually makes me feel even better about the quality of my own conq (same model with blk face).