"There are many good books on mankind's practice of human sacrifice -- again, it is our "default" religion -- but perhaps the best one is Violence Unveiled by Gil Bailie, because he places it in the context of the overall arc of salvation. I cannot possibly do justice to his full argument here, but in his view, human beings were actually in desperate need of a cure for religion, and Christianity turned out to be this cure. "Ironically," Jesus was a victim -- and as a result, a permanent reminder -- of that which he came to cure -- the ritual scapegoating of victims in order to create social solidarity. For nothing creates social solidarity and temporarily eases the war of each against all so much as when everyone's aggression is hypnotically focussed on a sacrificial victim.
Once you understand the sacrificial mechanism, you only see it everywhere. It is a sort of "master key" that explains the inexplicable, especially in regions outside Judeo-Christendom untouched by the "arc of salvation." To cite one obvious example, what do you think it is that maintains any semblance of solidarity in the entire Muslim world (or the U.N., come to think of it) -- including, sad to say, the majority of Muslims blessed to be living in the Judeo-Christian world? What unifies this disparate group that would otherwise mindlessly be killing each other, as they are doing in Iraq?
Obviously, it is ritual scapegoating of the Jews. I have no opinion as to whether there may actually be some obscure light of vertical revelation contained somewhere in Islam -- the existence of certain Sufi sects argues that there might be, but they represent far, far less than 1% of all Muslims, and nowhere are they considered remotely normative. No, sorry to say that what unifes the Islamic world -- including wretched Muslim spokesholes such as CAIR -- is human sacrifice. But this irrational obsession with hatred of scapegoats is not an "aberration" if we consider the entire arc of salvation, including the period of time before the old covenant, i.e., Phase I."
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Kumbaya
"Great stuff. It was like catching a glimpse behind the curtain at a Kumbaya concert and finding the entire cast not only out of character, but making fun of their lines. Here's Geffen on the subject of the Clinton Royal Family from Arkansas. "Obama is inspirational, and he’s not from the Bush royal family or the Clinton royal family. Americans are dying every day in Iraq. And I’m tired of hearing James Carville on television. ... It’s not a very big thing to say, ‘I made a mistake’ on the war, and typical of Hillary Clinton that she can’t." There in fact was the key problem in the whole Geffen-Obama-Hillary mess. It raised the question of which was the play and which was reality on the liberal political platform. Just as churchgoers who, after reading in the papers that their pastor was a involved in some sordid drug and sex scandal might wonder whether every Sunday service was a lie, Geffen's outtakes raise doubts about whether politicians (not just Democrats) believing in anything at all."
Mask Slippage In Italy
"This exposed the hypocrisy of the European Left when it insisted its anti-war activism only applied to Iraq, and that the Afghanistan effort had its support. The basis for this breakdown came from an American request to expand its facilities in Vicenza, which conducts support operations for the Afghanistan mission. This would normally have received a fairly straightforward approval, but in this case the Left wanted to use it as a wedge to end Italy's deployment with the NATO forces in Afghanistan."
Vietnam The Paragon?
"Now, "If you talk to these sheiks, they’ll tell you that they’re in no hurry to see the Americans leave al-Anbar," he said.
"One thing Sheikh Sattar keeps saying is he wants al-Anbar to be like Germany and Japan and South Korea were after their respective wars, with a long-term American presence helping ... put them back together," MacFarland said. "The negative example he cites is Vietnam. He says, yeah, so, Vietnam beat the Americans, and what did it get them? You know, 30 years later, they’re still living in poverty.""
"One thing Sheikh Sattar keeps saying is he wants al-Anbar to be like Germany and Japan and South Korea were after their respective wars, with a long-term American presence helping ... put them back together," MacFarland said. "The negative example he cites is Vietnam. He says, yeah, so, Vietnam beat the Americans, and what did it get them? You know, 30 years later, they’re still living in poverty.""
Why Indeed?
"Why would you make war on Americans, a people with whom you had no previous contact? Jefferson asked the pirate-king’s ambassador in London. When the ambassador replied that the koran justified the attacks, Jefferson’s curiosity was naturally aroused."
Nice Pigs, Sir
"A joke has spiraling around in military circles for the past few weeks that makes you wonder just how much congressional action against the troop surge is affecting the military’s (or the country’s) approval of the Democrats.
Okay, here’s the joke:
Last Tuesday, as President Bush got off the Marine One helicopter on the White House’s south lawn, he was carrying a piglet under each arm.
The squared-away Marine guard snaps to attention, salutes, and says: “Nice pigs, sir.”
The President replies “These are not pigs. These are authentic Arkansas Razorback Hogs. I got one for Senator Hillary Clinton and I got one for Speaker Nancy Pelosi.”
The squared-away Marine again snaps to attention, salutes, and says,
“Excellent trade, sir.”"
Okay, here’s the joke:
Last Tuesday, as President Bush got off the Marine One helicopter on the White House’s south lawn, he was carrying a piglet under each arm.
The squared-away Marine guard snaps to attention, salutes, and says: “Nice pigs, sir.”
The President replies “These are not pigs. These are authentic Arkansas Razorback Hogs. I got one for Senator Hillary Clinton and I got one for Speaker Nancy Pelosi.”
The squared-away Marine again snaps to attention, salutes, and says,
“Excellent trade, sir.”"
Facilitating The Non-Worms
"Hey, maybe he just changed his mind. Two possibilities are more likely, however. One is that some anonymous Iranian functionary bamboozled Amanpour as part of a disinformation campaign designed to weaken support for the Bush administration's effort to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. The other is that events since 2003 have convinced Khamenei that his policy of confrontation with the U.S. is unwise, and he would be better advised to seek an accommodation.
In either event, CNN seems to have missed the real story by serving as a conduit for Iranian propaganda."
In either event, CNN seems to have missed the real story by serving as a conduit for Iranian propaganda."
What WMD?
"Not even the use of banned chemical weapons against civilians is enough to get al-Reuters to use the word “terrorist:” Second chlorine bomb may show new militant tactic. ***
Notice: Reuters doesn’t even mention that these weapons have been banned under numerous international treaties for nearly a century."
Notice: Reuters doesn’t even mention that these weapons have been banned under numerous international treaties for nearly a century."
Today's "If Only..."
"The national disgrace of gerrymandering has created a system in which the vast majority of House seats are safe for one of the two parties. As a result, the real action is in the primaries, which tend to be dominated by activists. As a result, we see the polarization of Congress, as GOP candidates tend hard right to win their primaries and vice-versa for the Democrats. Now the netroots plan to exacerbate the problem.
The solution seems obvious. A national system of nonpartisan redistricting designed to maximize the number of truly competitive seats. In such a system, candidates would succeed by appealing to the center rather than the extremes, which in turn would reduce the destructive influence of the rabid partisans on both sides of the net." [ I have pointed the need for this out for a long time also. I seriously doubt it has a chance until it becomes an option for recovering from catastrophe for two reasons: 1) The very congressional plutarchs it would target fully understand its danger and won't let it happen until their dying breaths. 2) The media culture has so mentally pulverized and cynicized the population that they not only don't appreciate the value (cynicism) but don't have the attention span to pay attention to the concept. Back to the Britney rehab news now... -ed. ]
The solution seems obvious. A national system of nonpartisan redistricting designed to maximize the number of truly competitive seats. In such a system, candidates would succeed by appealing to the center rather than the extremes, which in turn would reduce the destructive influence of the rabid partisans on both sides of the net." [ I have pointed the need for this out for a long time also. I seriously doubt it has a chance until it becomes an option for recovering from catastrophe for two reasons: 1) The very congressional plutarchs it would target fully understand its danger and won't let it happen until their dying breaths. 2) The media culture has so mentally pulverized and cynicized the population that they not only don't appreciate the value (cynicism) but don't have the attention span to pay attention to the concept. Back to the Britney rehab news now... -ed. ]
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Shiva Rising
"Passive acceptance of Iran's program would lead to a highly unstable three-sided arms race in the region. Unlike the Cold War, this arms race would lead to a real war. Internationally-supervised sanctions could in theory be effective (especially in light of the recent experience with North Korea) but won't happen due to cheating. Ironically, an American air strike on Iran's nuclear industry would be the most humane treatment for the problem." [ Oppenheimer understood the level of danger that he created and his recollection of the Bagavad Gita and Shiva at Trinity was entirely appropriate ("I am become death, destroyer of worlds"). But he and his fellow scientist's "solution" of spreading A-Bomb technology didn't forsee the consequences of eventual arrival at second and third tier powers with short missile throws and no boomers for insurance. That alone will almost certainly lead to real war just based on "mistakes" even if they were "sane". Never mind in the hands of the Islamists who were insane enough to invade Israel in 73 even knowing that they likely had nukes at the time ... and who now are making that lunacy into the very epitome of rationality by comparison. -ed. ]
VDH Has A Worms Reprise
"The most famous example was the 1974 Foreign Relations Act. Passed in the wake of Watergate scandal, the congressional resolution cut off all military assistance to the South Vietnamese government. But that pubic stand-down only encouraged the North Vietnamese communists to violate the Paris peace accords and renew the war—without any more worries of U.S arms shipments or air strikes.
The Neutrality Acts of the 1930s, passed by an isolationist Congress, forbade U.S. military assistance to, or trade in war material with, any belligerent, regardless of whether they were aggressors or victims. Such actions of “conscious” only emboldened Nazi Germany, Italy, and Japan to attack democracies and other neutral states. Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo were convinced that whatever their provocations, the United States had no stomach to stand up to any of them, or even to join Britain and France in a united front of resistance. World War II with its 50 million dead followed.
Often even mere assurances of restraint by American officials, that suggest either inaction or weariness, have had the same effect as congressional resolutions in assuring interested observers that the United States would either not act in the face of aggression—or tire more quickly of ongoing fighting than their our enemies.
In a routine policy address Cold War warrior and Secretary of States Dean Acheson once warned the communist bloc that the American defensive perimeter in the Pacific went from Aleutians to Japan to the Ryukyus and onto the Philippine Islands. But Acheson, perhaps inadvertently, left out the Korean Peninsula. Many argued at the time that this omission gave the green light for the communists to invade South Korea in 1950 on their erroneous assumption that the United States would not intervene in an area outside its sphere of influence. Three years and hundreds of thousands of war dead followed.
Jimmy Carter had a far worse habit of telegraphing his intention to enemies. In 1977 he declared that America had outgrown its “inordinate fear of communism”. But by that time, global communism from Stalin to Mao had killed nearly 100 million of its own and invaded dozens of natural countries. Nothing “inordinate” about that.
So next when Carter made it clear that he would not retaliate immediately against Iran for storming of the US embassy in November 1979, it was not much of a surprise that the Soviet Union quickly invaded Afghanistan—unafraid of an America that wouldn’t use force to free its own diplomats or punish those who took them.
In a July 1990 in a meeting with Saddam Hussein, then American ambassador Arpil Glaspie purportedly assured the Iraqi government that “ we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.” Saddam attacked Kuwait a little more than a week later."
The Neutrality Acts of the 1930s, passed by an isolationist Congress, forbade U.S. military assistance to, or trade in war material with, any belligerent, regardless of whether they were aggressors or victims. Such actions of “conscious” only emboldened Nazi Germany, Italy, and Japan to attack democracies and other neutral states. Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo were convinced that whatever their provocations, the United States had no stomach to stand up to any of them, or even to join Britain and France in a united front of resistance. World War II with its 50 million dead followed.
Often even mere assurances of restraint by American officials, that suggest either inaction or weariness, have had the same effect as congressional resolutions in assuring interested observers that the United States would either not act in the face of aggression—or tire more quickly of ongoing fighting than their our enemies.
In a routine policy address Cold War warrior and Secretary of States Dean Acheson once warned the communist bloc that the American defensive perimeter in the Pacific went from Aleutians to Japan to the Ryukyus and onto the Philippine Islands. But Acheson, perhaps inadvertently, left out the Korean Peninsula. Many argued at the time that this omission gave the green light for the communists to invade South Korea in 1950 on their erroneous assumption that the United States would not intervene in an area outside its sphere of influence. Three years and hundreds of thousands of war dead followed.
Jimmy Carter had a far worse habit of telegraphing his intention to enemies. In 1977 he declared that America had outgrown its “inordinate fear of communism”. But by that time, global communism from Stalin to Mao had killed nearly 100 million of its own and invaded dozens of natural countries. Nothing “inordinate” about that.
So next when Carter made it clear that he would not retaliate immediately against Iran for storming of the US embassy in November 1979, it was not much of a surprise that the Soviet Union quickly invaded Afghanistan—unafraid of an America that wouldn’t use force to free its own diplomats or punish those who took them.
In a July 1990 in a meeting with Saddam Hussein, then American ambassador Arpil Glaspie purportedly assured the Iraqi government that “ we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.” Saddam attacked Kuwait a little more than a week later."
The Real Warren's Ash Wednesday Sermon
"Sometimes it seems even our own bishops have forgotten, that “the catholic truth” is entirely incompatible with the “happyface” of pop doctrines. Even what we mean by the words “life” and “death” is incomprehensible, without heaven and hell. Baudelaire once said, “Everyone believes in God, but nobody loves Him; nobody believes in the devil, and yet his smell is everywhere.” Except that belief in God has declined, this strikes me as a fair description of Western man in late modernity.
Lent, in its penitential spirit, can make no sense except in terms wherein the reality of evil has been acknowledged -- not as some ancient myth, but as a present force working to our destruction. This was what was faced down in the garden of Gethsemane, where Christ began to lift upon himself the full weight of the sins of this world, the full horror not only of the evil that was done, in times past, but would be done, in times future. For the last time in his earthly ministry, he was tempted by the devil, and offered the “happyface” of a life without suffering, of a mission that might not involve the Cross; offered the intensely attractive lie of an easy way out -- the lie that every human being is offered. It is the side of the devil we find hardest to type-cast: the side that is offering that happyface grin.
For it is an offer that we, collectively, have bought -- hook, line, and sinker. It is an offer that we could only accept, on the assumption that someone else will take care of it, that someone else can pay, since the yoke is thus lifted off our shoulders."
Lent, in its penitential spirit, can make no sense except in terms wherein the reality of evil has been acknowledged -- not as some ancient myth, but as a present force working to our destruction. This was what was faced down in the garden of Gethsemane, where Christ began to lift upon himself the full weight of the sins of this world, the full horror not only of the evil that was done, in times past, but would be done, in times future. For the last time in his earthly ministry, he was tempted by the devil, and offered the “happyface” of a life without suffering, of a mission that might not involve the Cross; offered the intensely attractive lie of an easy way out -- the lie that every human being is offered. It is the side of the devil we find hardest to type-cast: the side that is offering that happyface grin.
For it is an offer that we, collectively, have bought -- hook, line, and sinker. It is an offer that we could only accept, on the assumption that someone else will take care of it, that someone else can pay, since the yoke is thus lifted off our shoulders."
Hillary The Racist?
"So: Barack Obama is playing the race card against Hillary Clinton!
***
It's interesting how quickly the two campaigns came to blows, figuratively speaking. After all, it was David Geffen, not Obama, who attacked Hillary. Her campaign didn't have to respond by pinning the attack on Obama, but it did. Likewise, Obama didn't have to ratchet up the hostility by playing the race card. But he did.
2008 is a long way off, of course, and there's plenty of time for the candidates to make up. Still, it's striking how little it took for the first fur to fly; much worse aggravations will occur before the primary season is over. Whether the candidates are ultimately able to unite on a ticket may ultimately depend on whether the Clintons are forgiving people or vindictive people.
Hmm." [ Of course they'll be able to unite if they think it's advantageous. Vindictive will only happen if she feels she doesn't need Barack on the ticket. In the mean time I predict Barack will be painted as aserial murdering racist who moonlights as a child molester Uncle Tom who was raised on the lap of Clarence Thomas. The MSM will simply flush this little incident along with Barack's "Uncle Tom"ness down the memory hole when it's required to do so with 24/7 coverage of adoring minorities fawning over her every word and Barack calling her "Mom". Why she's married to our first "black president" after all. How could she possibly be racist? She's going to be our second black president! You racist! -ed. ]
***
It's interesting how quickly the two campaigns came to blows, figuratively speaking. After all, it was David Geffen, not Obama, who attacked Hillary. Her campaign didn't have to respond by pinning the attack on Obama, but it did. Likewise, Obama didn't have to ratchet up the hostility by playing the race card. But he did.
2008 is a long way off, of course, and there's plenty of time for the candidates to make up. Still, it's striking how little it took for the first fur to fly; much worse aggravations will occur before the primary season is over. Whether the candidates are ultimately able to unite on a ticket may ultimately depend on whether the Clintons are forgiving people or vindictive people.
Hmm." [ Of course they'll be able to unite if they think it's advantageous. Vindictive will only happen if she feels she doesn't need Barack on the ticket. In the mean time I predict Barack will be painted as a
The Righteous View From The Comfy Couch
"Viewing the violence from a comfy couch, it is easy to conclude that "these people are animals. We can't help them." But imagine what would have happened in Los Angeles if the 1992 riots had gone on for weeks, with no police or military intervention. L.A. could have come to resemble Baghdad or Sarajevo, with Anglo, African American, Latino and Asian gangs rampaging out of control.
To extend the analogy, violence could have spread throughout Southern California. That's what happened in the Balkans when fighting spread from Slovenia, the first province to secede, to Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo. A wider spillover was averted thanks to American-led intervention."
To extend the analogy, violence could have spread throughout Southern California. That's what happened in the Balkans when fighting spread from Slovenia, the first province to secede, to Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo. A wider spillover was averted thanks to American-led intervention."
Murtha's Howling Pixies
"Arguably, his maneuver will be the most blatant congressional intrusion on the president’s war-making powers in the nation’s history. Congress choked off the Vietnam War in the 1970s, but only after U.S. ground troops were mostly already out of the country and chiefly as a matter of cutting off aid to South Vietnam.
Just as disturbing is Murtha’s cynical reliance on failure in Iraq as a political strategy. The plan aptly has been described by Politico.com as a “slow-bleed” antiwar strategy. The surge is the best chance of turning the war around. By hampering it, Democrats will ensure that the war continues to fail, and thus that domestic political support for it plummets to the point where Democrats feel safe in defunding it.
The subconscious logic of their position on the war has thus taken a subtle turn. It used to be that the war had to end because it was a failure; now it must fail so that it can end.
Democrats don’t see this distinction, since they simply believe the war is irretrievably lost. But they still pay laughably unserious lip service to the notion of success. Murtha says there’s no military solution in Iraq, that we can win in Iraq only through the political process — as if it has no effect on the political process whether Shia militias are murdering Sunnis unchecked or laying low to avoid the surge. In a howler, he maintains that if we leave, “al Qaeda’s going to disappear.” Maybe if we spread pixie dust and close our eyes?
President Bush will have no choice but to reject the Murtha restrictions should they reach his desk. But a veto is problematic. As Murtha points out, a veto means that Bush doesn’t get the continued funding for the war. He might have to sign the bill, take the funding and ignore the restrictions as an unconstitutional trespass on his powers. In that event, a cry to impeach him will go up from the increasingly powerful antiwar Left.
The result of the Democrats’ clever gambit could be a constitutional implosion from which no one — certainly not the country — will emerge a winner."
UPDATED WITH A REPRISE: "As I recall, Marshal Petain managed to prostrate himself right quickly before the Nazis despite his status as a WWI hero, too. Besides, where exactly will Murtha draw that line -- New York City? Logan Airport?"
Just as disturbing is Murtha’s cynical reliance on failure in Iraq as a political strategy. The plan aptly has been described by Politico.com as a “slow-bleed” antiwar strategy. The surge is the best chance of turning the war around. By hampering it, Democrats will ensure that the war continues to fail, and thus that domestic political support for it plummets to the point where Democrats feel safe in defunding it.
The subconscious logic of their position on the war has thus taken a subtle turn. It used to be that the war had to end because it was a failure; now it must fail so that it can end.
Democrats don’t see this distinction, since they simply believe the war is irretrievably lost. But they still pay laughably unserious lip service to the notion of success. Murtha says there’s no military solution in Iraq, that we can win in Iraq only through the political process — as if it has no effect on the political process whether Shia militias are murdering Sunnis unchecked or laying low to avoid the surge. In a howler, he maintains that if we leave, “al Qaeda’s going to disappear.” Maybe if we spread pixie dust and close our eyes?
President Bush will have no choice but to reject the Murtha restrictions should they reach his desk. But a veto is problematic. As Murtha points out, a veto means that Bush doesn’t get the continued funding for the war. He might have to sign the bill, take the funding and ignore the restrictions as an unconstitutional trespass on his powers. In that event, a cry to impeach him will go up from the increasingly powerful antiwar Left.
The result of the Democrats’ clever gambit could be a constitutional implosion from which no one — certainly not the country — will emerge a winner."
UPDATED WITH A REPRISE: "As I recall, Marshal Petain managed to prostrate himself right quickly before the Nazis despite his status as a WWI hero, too. Besides, where exactly will Murtha draw that line -- New York City? Logan Airport?"
The State Of State
"I recently de-mobilized after spending a total of three years at CENTCOM HQ beginning in Feb 2003. I didn't work on the OIF plan but I do know something about it. Phase IV was the least planned (by CENTCOM) part of OIF since nobody knew what would happen after the end of major combat activities and the Organization for Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (ORHA) was supposed to do the planning and carry out many of the activities. In the end, there was little humanitarian assistance to be carried out and little reconstruction due to combat. Declaration of Phase IV has many legal implications in regard to the Geneva Conventions, the Law of Land Warfare, etc... I also believe that it is the demarcation of when the Department of State takes the lead. In any case, the slides, if they show anything, show that the enemy has a vote in how things turn out.
As I see it, things are turning out better than we expected from a GWOT point of view. Al Qaeda's decision to make a stand in Iraq has provided us with an opportunity to deal them a significant blow. They have invested many resources - there aren't that many suicide bombers out there - and much of their reputation counts on defeating us in Iraq. All we have to do is stay and we win. Iran is over-playing its hand and will see just as much trouble on their side of the border as they instigate in Iraq. All we have to do is stay and we win.
On the down side, of course, is our inability to play in the information war. I think this is part of the reason that the terrorists and the Democrats are natural allies - they are willing to say the most outrageous things and no one holds them to account. The truth may be on our side but it is not enough - it needs to be marketed. Unfortunately that is easier said than done and we, as a government, are not set up to do it. In fact, we are not set up to win wars efficiently. The very structure of our government prevents us from prosecuting wars efficiently and I doubt a change would be politically feasible. Aside from DoD, no one prepares for their part of the war fight and they don't train for or fund any activities that contribute to war time success. For now we will have to settle for less efficient war fighting.
When the history of the Iraq conflict is finally written, I think it will be interesting to see what role the State Department played, and how that department's performance is assessed."
As I see it, things are turning out better than we expected from a GWOT point of view. Al Qaeda's decision to make a stand in Iraq has provided us with an opportunity to deal them a significant blow. They have invested many resources - there aren't that many suicide bombers out there - and much of their reputation counts on defeating us in Iraq. All we have to do is stay and we win. Iran is over-playing its hand and will see just as much trouble on their side of the border as they instigate in Iraq. All we have to do is stay and we win.
On the down side, of course, is our inability to play in the information war. I think this is part of the reason that the terrorists and the Democrats are natural allies - they are willing to say the most outrageous things and no one holds them to account. The truth may be on our side but it is not enough - it needs to be marketed. Unfortunately that is easier said than done and we, as a government, are not set up to do it. In fact, we are not set up to win wars efficiently. The very structure of our government prevents us from prosecuting wars efficiently and I doubt a change would be politically feasible. Aside from DoD, no one prepares for their part of the war fight and they don't train for or fund any activities that contribute to war time success. For now we will have to settle for less efficient war fighting.
When the history of the Iraq conflict is finally written, I think it will be interesting to see what role the State Department played, and how that department's performance is assessed."
Raymond Redux: Suicidalism
"These ideas travel under many labels: postmodernism, nihilism, multiculturalism, Third-World-ism, pacifism, “political correctness” to name just a few. It is time to recognize them for what they are, and call them by their right name: suicidalism.
Trace any of these back far enough (e.g. to the period between 1930 and 1950 when Department V was at its most effective) and you’ll find a Stalinist at the bottom. Among the more notorious examples ware: Paul de Man — racist and Nazi propagandist turned Stalinist, and fonder of postmodernism; Jean-Paul Sarte, who described the effects of Stalinism as “humane terror” and helped invent existentialism; and Paul Baran, who developed the thesis that capitalism depended on the immiseration of the Third World after Marx’s immiseration of the proletariat failed to materialize.
Al-Qaeda didn’t launch any of these memes into the noosphere, but it relies on them for political cover. They have another effect as well: when Islamists characterize the West as “decadent”, and aver that it is waiting to collapse in on itself at the touch of jihad, they are describing quite correctly and accurately the effects of Western suicidalism."
Trace any of these back far enough (e.g. to the period between 1930 and 1950 when Department V was at its most effective) and you’ll find a Stalinist at the bottom. Among the more notorious examples ware: Paul de Man — racist and Nazi propagandist turned Stalinist, and fonder of postmodernism; Jean-Paul Sarte, who described the effects of Stalinism as “humane terror” and helped invent existentialism; and Paul Baran, who developed the thesis that capitalism depended on the immiseration of the Third World after Marx’s immiseration of the proletariat failed to materialize.
Al-Qaeda didn’t launch any of these memes into the noosphere, but it relies on them for political cover. They have another effect as well: when Islamists characterize the West as “decadent”, and aver that it is waiting to collapse in on itself at the touch of jihad, they are describing quite correctly and accurately the effects of Western suicidalism."
Hitch Redux: Against Rationalization
"Now is as good a time as ever to revisit the history of the Crusades, or the sorry history of partition in Kashmir, or the woes of the Chechens and Kosovars. But the bombers of Manhattan represent fascism with an Islamic face, and there's no point in any euphemism about it. What they abominate about "the West," to put it in a phrase, is not what Western liberals don't like and can't defend about their own system, but what they do like about it and must defend: its emancipated women, its scientific inquiry, its separation of religion from the state. Loose talk about chickens coming home to roost is the moral equivalent of the hateful garbage emitted by Falwell and Robertson, and exhibits about the same intellectual content. Indiscriminate murder is not a judgment, even obliquely, on the victims or their way of life, or ours. Any decent and concerned reader of this magazine could have been on one of those planes, or in one of those buildings--yes, even in the Pentagon."
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Why U.S. Immigration Quotas Will Need To Be Massively Raised...
"Daniel Johnson, writing in the Weekly Standard from London, notes with sadness and alarm that the European elite have now admitted their failure to negotiate an end to the Iranian nuclear program. Not only that, but they let out of the diplomatic bag the dirty little secret that it’s always been about nuclear weapons.
So the Europeans know—in all likelihood they’ve always known—that the Iranians are building atomic bombs, and intend to use them against Israel. Against the Jews. Johnson says that if that happens, he’ll pack up and leave Europe, as well he might. I’m tempted to ask him why he needs to wait. British Jews now constitute the largest single group of immigrants to Israel, having seen the graffiti on the walls and in the newspapers of their finlandized country." [ There are a lot of good folks in Europe that will finally snap to their senses when horror like this can no longer be denied. And they'll be screaming for us to take them in. And we'll need to take them in for our sake as well as theirs. North America will need all the help we can get in the (currently to most) unimaginable battle for survival that will ensue... -ed. ]
So the Europeans know—in all likelihood they’ve always known—that the Iranians are building atomic bombs, and intend to use them against Israel. Against the Jews. Johnson says that if that happens, he’ll pack up and leave Europe, as well he might. I’m tempted to ask him why he needs to wait. British Jews now constitute the largest single group of immigrants to Israel, having seen the graffiti on the walls and in the newspapers of their finlandized country." [ There are a lot of good folks in Europe that will finally snap to their senses when horror like this can no longer be denied. And they'll be screaming for us to take them in. And we'll need to take them in for our sake as well as theirs. North America will need all the help we can get in the (currently to most) unimaginable battle for survival that will ensue... -ed. ]
What East Timor?
"First there was East Timor
Then there was the Bali bombing
And then there was the war in Iraq
Why do the blowback believers keep ignoring East Timor? It's as though the liberation of that country never happened."
Then there was the Bali bombing
And then there was the war in Iraq
Why do the blowback believers keep ignoring East Timor? It's as though the liberation of that country never happened."
Monday, February 19, 2007
The Two Faces Of Fundamentalism (Less Is More Edition)
"But Judaism and Christianity are temporal revelations which cannot be understood outside their historical manifestations. It is the difference between a painting -- which depicts everything at once within the frames -- and a symphony, which can only unfold through time, which will in turn illuminate the meaning of what has gone before. As such, it is also the difference between the eye and the ear, which is why it is no coincidence that the West regards God fundamentally as word rather than vision. In fact, is it not written that no one sees the face of God and lives? Curiously, one can hear the voice but not see the face. (Of course, it is a matter of emphasis, for any theology limits things at the front door which it allows entry at the back door; thus, for example, the three who were privileged to witness the transfiguration atop mount Tabor.)
One of the main reasons the West leapt ahead of the East so dramatically is that the former regarded time -- and therefore history -- as fundamentally real, whereas the latter considered it a part of maya, and therefore unworthy of our attention. The Jews adopted a "middle position," in the sense that they lived and toiled within time for six days but returned to the timeless on the seventh (which is the ultimate purpose of the other six). Each week represents in miniature the full cycle of creation repeated endlessly. As such, it combined the temporal with the atemporal, as history awaits the ingression of the messiah.
Christianity obviously widened out that cycle to include all of history, past, present, and future. Instead of repeating the cycle endlessly, it sees us in the middle of one big cycle -- somewhat like a cosmic symphony -- with a beginning, middle, and end -- or the ages of the Father (the Jews), Son (Christ), and Holy Spirit (apocalypse and revelation, as history is brought to its denoument, or the eschaton).
Van correctly noted that scripture is traditionally understood to have four levels, the literal (or historical), the allegorical or symbolic, the moral, and the mystical or esoteric. The latter mode also has to do with the vertical -- with “leading upward” and with “final things," both on an individual and historical basis. And in fact, this is where the pure metaphysics of the Upanishads converges with Western scripture, as we ascend from the logos as deployed in historical time to the pure logos at the tip-toppermost of the vertical, as in Dante's vision of the paradiso.
Thus, as also noted by Van, "To stop at the literal level of the text as a Rev. Jerry Falwell or Sam Harris would, is to leave most of the meaning out, and [to] deify the Bible itself for their purposes (either pro or con) and to miss out completely on the doing of its meaning being actively threaded through the reader's soul." Exactly, for the modern deviation of "fundamentalism" is no less a form of debased materialism than materialism proper. In fact, it represents the reaction of a weak soul to the abnormal conditions of modernity -- an attempt to combat materialism by fully conceding its assumptions.
***
By the way, people sure are disinterested in this stuff. As I've begun focussing more on spirituality and less on politics, my readership has plummeted, as has interest in the book. Oh well. I must keep our motto in mind: the few, the humble, the Raccoons, "an army of the One." But sometimes I do appreciate a little encouragement, because there are times I can't help feeling that I am essentially speaking into a rapidly shrinking void, as we stand surrounded by coonibalistic Swedes who have the disgusting taste for coon pie." [ Careful, I resemble that remark. I'm not a Swede, I'm aNorwegian Norwegian-American American. (My dear departed Dad insisted that there were two things I needn't be exposed to: eating lutefisk and washing dishes. The former kept me from being totally unmarriageable and the latter nearly gets me divorced on a daily basis. But I digress.) Anyway, I nearly ended up a Swede until the miracle of becoming a father made me look "up". Don't be swayed by the "polls" -- that's about the only thing that could make me stop reading you ;) -ed. ]
One of the main reasons the West leapt ahead of the East so dramatically is that the former regarded time -- and therefore history -- as fundamentally real, whereas the latter considered it a part of maya, and therefore unworthy of our attention. The Jews adopted a "middle position," in the sense that they lived and toiled within time for six days but returned to the timeless on the seventh (which is the ultimate purpose of the other six). Each week represents in miniature the full cycle of creation repeated endlessly. As such, it combined the temporal with the atemporal, as history awaits the ingression of the messiah.
Christianity obviously widened out that cycle to include all of history, past, present, and future. Instead of repeating the cycle endlessly, it sees us in the middle of one big cycle -- somewhat like a cosmic symphony -- with a beginning, middle, and end -- or the ages of the Father (the Jews), Son (Christ), and Holy Spirit (apocalypse and revelation, as history is brought to its denoument, or the eschaton).
Van correctly noted that scripture is traditionally understood to have four levels, the literal (or historical), the allegorical or symbolic, the moral, and the mystical or esoteric. The latter mode also has to do with the vertical -- with “leading upward” and with “final things," both on an individual and historical basis. And in fact, this is where the pure metaphysics of the Upanishads converges with Western scripture, as we ascend from the logos as deployed in historical time to the pure logos at the tip-toppermost of the vertical, as in Dante's vision of the paradiso.
Thus, as also noted by Van, "To stop at the literal level of the text as a Rev. Jerry Falwell or Sam Harris would, is to leave most of the meaning out, and [to] deify the Bible itself for their purposes (either pro or con) and to miss out completely on the doing of its meaning being actively threaded through the reader's soul." Exactly, for the modern deviation of "fundamentalism" is no less a form of debased materialism than materialism proper. In fact, it represents the reaction of a weak soul to the abnormal conditions of modernity -- an attempt to combat materialism by fully conceding its assumptions.
***
By the way, people sure are disinterested in this stuff. As I've begun focussing more on spirituality and less on politics, my readership has plummeted, as has interest in the book. Oh well. I must keep our motto in mind: the few, the humble, the Raccoons, "an army of the One." But sometimes I do appreciate a little encouragement, because there are times I can't help feeling that I am essentially speaking into a rapidly shrinking void, as we stand surrounded by coonibalistic Swedes who have the disgusting taste for coon pie." [ Careful, I resemble that remark. I'm not a Swede, I'm a
Waiting...
"The Iranians arrest, investigate and execute an alleged terrorist in under four days flat. I, for one, eagerly await the howls of outrage from Human Rights Watch, and the reproduction thereof by every major media organization in the world."
Loose Screws And Flying Pigs
"But on this rare occasion, I salute the BBC’s effort to expose the Truther creeps for what they are." [ And by the way, not only must this be the world's biggest and most airtight conspiracy, but Clinton was behind the 1993 WTC attack too I suspect. Didn't you know that most Texas oil is secretly pumped out from underneath Arkansas? Why, Clinton is the biggest oil baron of all! Yeah, that's the ticket! It's been going on for years. Why, almost everyone in the country must be in on it by now! Everyone except me. Yeah, that's the ticket! -ed. ]
Fake But (How I Wish It Were) Accurate
Did I forget to mention that they're fakes? Not that I don't wish they were real ...
Opposites
"And I'll offer a rather simple definition of the word "undermine": it's the opposite of "support.""
The Stink Is Back
"The immediate question should be this: how many other paid consultants are higher-profile politicians who have endorsed Hillary? How many other politicans has Hillary bought in this stage of the primaries? And perhaps the Democratic Party can explain to us once again how they represent clean government and political reform -- because from the grandstands, it looks like Democrats have put themselves up for the highest bidder, and that they're willing to bid rather high themselves." [ And it smells just the same as it did the last time. Only perhaps more so. And we're barely out of the starting gates... -ed. ]
Expanding The Walnut Brain?
"If so then the US has truly achieved a subtlety and lethality beyond anything available in the days when firing hundreds of cruise missiles at a target was the only available response; back when it had a walnut-sized brain full of options. But then the recent destruction of a Qods bus in Iran by 'representatives of al-Qaeda' may be another example of the changed "rules of engagement" made possible by new capabilities. Although this is speculative, various commentators like Bill Roggio have expressed the opinion that just maybe the US was behind the carbomb attack on the Iranian special forces. [ And don't miss the fauxtography in response. -ed. ] All of this raises the tantalizing possibility that a qualitative change in US warfighting has arrived in theater, much like the arrival of Hellcats, VT fuzes, computing sights and radar silently transformed the Pacific in 1944. To a casual observer the ships looked the same as they did in 1942 but they were radically different. Who knows?
But returning to the subject of "degrees of freedom" and walnut-sized brain responses, one wonders at how useful it is to keep seeing the world through the prism of the Vietnam War. Clearly for many of the Democrats in Congress who have just supported a nonbinding resolution aimed at "bringing the boys home", 2007 is 1967. One wonders whether for certain people every year will be always be 1967. However that may be, as much time has elapsed from 1967 till today as between the time Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band album was released and the end of the Silent Movie era. Rep. Sam Johnson. (R-Texas) responded to Murtha's "slow bleed" strategy with an argument taken from the same era but with this difference: Johnson understood the price of having his fate, as a young man, decided by old men living in their past. Now, astounded to find himself in Congress, Johnson wonders whether it isn't the job of the old to let the men in the field shape their world. "
But returning to the subject of "degrees of freedom" and walnut-sized brain responses, one wonders at how useful it is to keep seeing the world through the prism of the Vietnam War. Clearly for many of the Democrats in Congress who have just supported a nonbinding resolution aimed at "bringing the boys home", 2007 is 1967. One wonders whether for certain people every year will be always be 1967. However that may be, as much time has elapsed from 1967 till today as between the time Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band album was released and the end of the Silent Movie era. Rep. Sam Johnson. (R-Texas) responded to Murtha's "slow bleed" strategy with an argument taken from the same era but with this difference: Johnson understood the price of having his fate, as a young man, decided by old men living in their past. Now, astounded to find himself in Congress, Johnson wonders whether it isn't the job of the old to let the men in the field shape their world. "
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Wretchard Darkly Again
"Perhaps the idea of War and Peace as a binary state has passed. It would be interesting to see whether an equivalent concept exists among rival tribes in parts of the Middle East or whether they are accustomed to living in a twilight state of neither war nor peace, the condition depending on the time of day.
If, as now seems, the Tribes have imposed their way of war upon the West, then we will long for a definite peace the way Redcoats in North America hankered after the clash of orderly ranks in the open field. Long will we seek it, but seek it in vain.
Then Israel will have proved not the exception, but rather the new rule. And the landscape though apparently open, may little by little come to be divided into besieged demesnes; a new Dark Age arising on the foundation of the new tribalism. And the wonder of it all is that it will have been built in our faces. Perhaps this is the way civilizations finish; when the consensus to go on ends. If the West does not have the inner desire to continue then perhaps it has taken the subconscious decision to wind it all up."
If, as now seems, the Tribes have imposed their way of war upon the West, then we will long for a definite peace the way Redcoats in North America hankered after the clash of orderly ranks in the open field. Long will we seek it, but seek it in vain.
Then Israel will have proved not the exception, but rather the new rule. And the landscape though apparently open, may little by little come to be divided into besieged demesnes; a new Dark Age arising on the foundation of the new tribalism. And the wonder of it all is that it will have been built in our faces. Perhaps this is the way civilizations finish; when the consensus to go on ends. If the West does not have the inner desire to continue then perhaps it has taken the subconscious decision to wind it all up."
The Mysterious Exemption
"One might, for instance, contrast how the Christian Messiah and the Prophet of Islam are said to have dealt with unflattering comments. To the best of my knowledge, the New Testament does not inform believers that Jesus sanctioned the assassination of his critics or mocked their dead bodies. While Muhammad did occasionally forgive those who ridiculed him, this forgiveness was by no means a typical response, particularly in his later career. Al-Nadr bin al-Harith, Kab bin al-Ashraf and Uqbah bin Abu Muayt were killed at Muhammad’s instruction in 624 AD, and the poetess Asma bint Marwan was killed the same year for writing a disrespectful verse. Given there are those who are gripped by literalist passions and view Muhammad as exemplary in all regards and for all time, perhaps these events shouldn’t be dismissed quite so lightly.
By way of further illustration, Rosie O’Donnell was happy to assert that, "radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America." But while red-faced evangelists may say, for instance, that gay people are wicked, damned to hellfire, etc, I don’t know of any internationally renowned Christian leaders who are calling for the imprisonment and killing of gay people. Unlike the supposedly “moderate” Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who insists that gay men and lesbians should be “killed in the worst manner possible.” Not condemned, ‘corrected’, prayed for, or pitied, or any of the usual nonsense spouted by Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson et al; but murdered - as brutally as possible.
However studiously such distinctions are overlooked, this one in particular strikes me as significant. Especially considering the readiness with which some will enact Sistani’s wisdom - as illustrated by Rexhep Idrizi, a chairman of Australia’s Board of Imams who thinks beheading gay people is in order, and whose son is currently serving a four-year jail sentence for attacking a cyclist with a machete. Given the number of believers who listen very carefully to Sistani, both in Iraq and beyond, it would be unwise for gay Iraqis to treat the cleric’s fatwas as irrelevant nonsense. And while mad Methodists or Creationists can be laughed at with relative impunity, sadistic bigots like Sistani are mysteriously exempt from comparable scorn in the “progressive” left-leaning media." [ Wow again. Thompson just got added to my blogroll. -ed. ]
By way of further illustration, Rosie O’Donnell was happy to assert that, "radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America." But while red-faced evangelists may say, for instance, that gay people are wicked, damned to hellfire, etc, I don’t know of any internationally renowned Christian leaders who are calling for the imprisonment and killing of gay people. Unlike the supposedly “moderate” Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who insists that gay men and lesbians should be “killed in the worst manner possible.” Not condemned, ‘corrected’, prayed for, or pitied, or any of the usual nonsense spouted by Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson et al; but murdered - as brutally as possible.
However studiously such distinctions are overlooked, this one in particular strikes me as significant. Especially considering the readiness with which some will enact Sistani’s wisdom - as illustrated by Rexhep Idrizi, a chairman of Australia’s Board of Imams who thinks beheading gay people is in order, and whose son is currently serving a four-year jail sentence for attacking a cyclist with a machete. Given the number of believers who listen very carefully to Sistani, both in Iraq and beyond, it would be unwise for gay Iraqis to treat the cleric’s fatwas as irrelevant nonsense. And while mad Methodists or Creationists can be laughed at with relative impunity, sadistic bigots like Sistani are mysteriously exempt from comparable scorn in the “progressive” left-leaning media." [ Wow again. Thompson just got added to my blogroll. -ed. ]
The Perils Of...
"American officials and analysts said a variety of factors in Pakistan had come together to allow “core Al Qaeda” — a reference to Mr. bin Laden and his immediate circle — to regain some of its strength. The emergence of a relative haven in North Waziristan and the surrounding area has helped senior operatives communicate more effectively with the outside world via courier and the Internet.
The investigation into last summer’s failed plot to bomb airliners in London has led counterterrorism officials to what they say are “clear linkages” between the plotters and core Qaeda operatives in Pakistan. American analysts point out that the trials of terrorism suspects in Britain revealed that some of the defendants had been trained in Pakistan.
In a videotaped statement last year, Mr. Zawahri claimed responsibility for the July 2005 London suicide bombings. [ I suspect you might have ignored it? Or were perhaps just averting your eyes? -ed. ] Included in the same tape was a statement by one of the London suicide bombers, pledging allegiance to Al Qaeda. Two of the four bombers traveled to Pakistan prior to the attack." [ ... apocalyptic terrorists sheltered by a nuclear power. Next door to another soon to be nuclear power -- if not already one -- ruled by apocalyptic terrorist rulers. You hadn't noticed? Another indicator that in spite of that little voice smothered inside you might be a Septenthian perhaps? Or just very, very deep in the ostrich position? If the left were actually a loyal opposition they would have been busy for months trying to bring down W and Tony for failed leadership on the war. And I might even join them if so! But of course this would ruin their "terrorism isn't really a threat and W made it all up" meme -- so down the memory hole it prospectively goes... P.S. To cheer you up, many of Pakistan's nuclear tests were "fizzles" much like what recently happened to the NorKorComs. Pray *hard* that they don't have the formula down for either construction or maintenance. -ed. ]
UPDATE: And then there was the the "Friendship Express". And then there wasn't... [ Are you dizzy yet? -ed. ]
The investigation into last summer’s failed plot to bomb airliners in London has led counterterrorism officials to what they say are “clear linkages” between the plotters and core Qaeda operatives in Pakistan. American analysts point out that the trials of terrorism suspects in Britain revealed that some of the defendants had been trained in Pakistan.
In a videotaped statement last year, Mr. Zawahri claimed responsibility for the July 2005 London suicide bombings. [ I suspect you might have ignored it? Or were perhaps just averting your eyes? -ed. ] Included in the same tape was a statement by one of the London suicide bombers, pledging allegiance to Al Qaeda. Two of the four bombers traveled to Pakistan prior to the attack." [ ... apocalyptic terrorists sheltered by a nuclear power. Next door to another soon to be nuclear power -- if not already one -- ruled by apocalyptic terrorist rulers. You hadn't noticed? Another indicator that in spite of that little voice smothered inside you might be a Septenthian perhaps? Or just very, very deep in the ostrich position? If the left were actually a loyal opposition they would have been busy for months trying to bring down W and Tony for failed leadership on the war. And I might even join them if so! But of course this would ruin their "terrorism isn't really a threat and W made it all up" meme -- so down the memory hole it prospectively goes... P.S. To cheer you up, many of Pakistan's nuclear tests were "fizzles" much like what recently happened to the NorKorComs. Pray *hard* that they don't have the formula down for either construction or maintenance. -ed. ]
UPDATE: And then there was the the "Friendship Express". And then there wasn't... [ Are you dizzy yet? -ed. ]
Rudy 1997: No Suspected Political Linkage?
"NEW YORK -- The Palestinian teacher who went on a fatal shooting rampage atop the Empire State Building carried a note blaming the United States for using Israel as "an instrument" against his people. The note found in Ali Hassan Abu Kamal's pocket contains "rambling, angry stuff," and appears to contradict claims by the man's family that the shooting had nothing to do with politics, a high-ranking police source said last night.
At City Hall, Mayor Giuliani attempted to shift the focus toward gun control. He was accompanied by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., whose husband was killed and son wounded in the 1993 shootings on a Long Island Rail Road commuter train that killed six people and wounded 17." (HT Glenn)
At City Hall, Mayor Giuliani attempted to shift the focus toward gun control. He was accompanied by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., whose husband was killed and son wounded in the 1993 shootings on a Long Island Rail Road commuter train that killed six people and wounded 17." (HT Glenn)
The Progressive Gambit
"Regular pw readers know by now just exactly how this gambit works: sub sects within individual identity groups vie for control over the group narrative, which, once it is has been decided upon, becomes an orthodoxy, capable of acting as an arbiter of “authenticity”; from there, the cultural relativism many find in the wake of “contingency” allows only those deemed authentic to level “legitimate” criticism against the group—which is itself a cynical ploy, as those whose criticisms might challenge the kernel assumptions of the group narrative have already been bracketed, and so lack the requisite authenticity necessary to give their criticisms force.
This embrace of authenticity as a determining factor for legitimate criticism—the Orientalist critique of Edward Said stripped of all its academic pretense—then sets the stage for the kind of “tolerance” that is, from the perspective of individualism, Orwellian in its application. Which is to say, “tolerance” becomes the enforcement of adherence to the cult of authenticity, and those who don’t accept the premise and who criticize identity groups from without are labeled bigots, misogynists, racists, haters, and cultural imperialists.
And it is precisely the fear of being labeled such that gives the new “tolerance” its force—in effect, constraining individualism by turning it into a pathology and a heresy insofar as the individual either sways from his prescribed identity group, or presumes to speak to issues or concerns that “belong” to Others.
I’ve noted on many occasions that I believe the animating principal that allows this maneuvering to work occurs on the linguistic level—particularly, with the decades long movement to decouple meaning from intent. This attempt to “democratize” meaning—a populist euphemism that blinds us to what is essentially a shift in the agency priviliged in hermeneutic engagements—is what (in my opinion, at least) prepares the ground for the social revolution cultural materialism hopes to bring about from within the structures of western liberalism. That is, once we accept that meaning is a product of cultural consensus rather than of individual intent, we have accepted the very premise that allows cultural materialism to take root in social policy and then to fossilize itself in law.
Each time we cede ground in the linguistic wars, we surrender a bit more ground to those who wish to subvert individual agency to the consensus of “interpretive communities,” themselves answerable only to their own interests. Epistemology becomes an exercise in relativism and will to power disguised as critical thinking. And politically, the individual—the primary locus of agency in a constitutional democracy—is forced by social circumstance either to find power in group identity, or else accept his social and political marginalition." (HT Coyote, Glenn)
UPDATE: And more here -- spelled with a W-O-W:
"Last week, during a conversation about the ‘cartoon jihad’ uproar, I used the phrase “emotional incontinence.” This did not go down well. I was promptly told, in no uncertain terms, that I mustn’t “impose” my own cultural values. Apparently, to do so would be a form of “cultural imperialism”, an archaic colonial hangover, and therefore unspeakably evil. I was, apparently, being “arrogantly ethnocentric” in considering Western secular society broadly preferable to a culture in which rioting, murder and genocidal threats can be prompted by the publication of a cartoon.
As the conversation continued, I was emphatically informed that to regard one set of cultural values as preferable to another was “racist” and “oppressive.” Indeed, even the attempt to make any such determination was itself a heinous act. I was further assailed with a list of examples of “Western arrogance, decadence, irreverence, and downright nastiness.” And I was reminded that, above all, I “must respect deeply held beliefs.” When I asked if this respect for deeply held beliefs extended to white supremacists, cannibals and ultra-conservative Republicans, a deafening silence ensued.
After this awkward pause, the conversation rumbled on. At some point, I made reference to migration and the marked tendency of families to move from Islamic societies to secular ones, and not the other way round. “This seems rather important,” I suggested. “If you want to evaluate which society is preferred to another by any given group, migration patterns are an obvious yardstick to use. Broadly speaking, people don't relocate their families to cultures they find wholly inferior to their own.” Alas, this fairly self-evident suggestion did not meet with approval. No rebuttal was forthcoming, but the litany of Western wickedness resumed, more loudly than before.
This tendency to replace a coherent argument with lists of alleged Western wickedness and an air of self-loathing is hardly uncommon. Indeed, in certain quarters, it is difficult to avoid. In her increasingly baffling comment pieces, the Guardian’s Madeleine Bunting has made much of bemoaning "our preoccupation with things; our ever more desperate dependence on stimulants from alcohol to porn." (One instantly pictures poor Madeleine surrounded by booze, drugs and pornography – and tearfully alienated by all of those other terrible material “things” she doesn’t like having, honest.)
In one infamous recent article, Bunting - a “leading thinker”, at least according to her employers – waved the flag for cultural relativism and denounced the idea of Enlightenment sensibilities: “Muscular liberals raise their standard on Enlightenment values – their universality, the supremacy of reason and a belief in progress… It is an ideology of superiority that is profoundly old-fashioned – reminiscent of Victorian liberalism and just as imperialistic…” Bunting’s argument, such as it is, suggests no objective distinction should be made between democratic cultures in which freedom of belief and education for women are taken for granted, and theocratic societies in which those freedoms are curtailed or extinguished. As, for instance, when Islamic fundamentalists took umbrage at Western-funded school projects in Northern Pakistan and promptly destroyed the offending schools, on the basis that illiterate girls were being taught ‘un-Islamic’ values.
Nor, apparently, should we notice that restricting the education of women and their social interactions has obvious consequences for healthcare and prosperity, both of which Ms Bunting seems to disdain. Indeed, she has explicitly argued to this effect, insisting women in the developing world should reject the evils of capitalism and material advancement as this disrupts their “traditions of keeping children with them in the fields” - traditions which, of course, we must respect and, better yet, romanticise, albeit from a safe distance.
Perhaps Enlightenment values, including tolerance, education and free speech, should only apply in the nicer parts of London, but not in Iran, or Sudan, or Saudi Arabia. Presumably, Enlightenment values are fine for Guardian columnists, but wrong for poor women in rural Pakistan. And, given Ms Bunting’s recent Hello-style interview with the Islamist cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who insists that disobedient women should be beaten, albeit “lightly”, perhaps we can assume she’s prepared to accept similar chastisement, all in the name of the moral relativism she claims to hold so dear?" [ Did I forget to say "WOW"? -ed. ]
This embrace of authenticity as a determining factor for legitimate criticism—the Orientalist critique of Edward Said stripped of all its academic pretense—then sets the stage for the kind of “tolerance” that is, from the perspective of individualism, Orwellian in its application. Which is to say, “tolerance” becomes the enforcement of adherence to the cult of authenticity, and those who don’t accept the premise and who criticize identity groups from without are labeled bigots, misogynists, racists, haters, and cultural imperialists.
And it is precisely the fear of being labeled such that gives the new “tolerance” its force—in effect, constraining individualism by turning it into a pathology and a heresy insofar as the individual either sways from his prescribed identity group, or presumes to speak to issues or concerns that “belong” to Others.
I’ve noted on many occasions that I believe the animating principal that allows this maneuvering to work occurs on the linguistic level—particularly, with the decades long movement to decouple meaning from intent. This attempt to “democratize” meaning—a populist euphemism that blinds us to what is essentially a shift in the agency priviliged in hermeneutic engagements—is what (in my opinion, at least) prepares the ground for the social revolution cultural materialism hopes to bring about from within the structures of western liberalism. That is, once we accept that meaning is a product of cultural consensus rather than of individual intent, we have accepted the very premise that allows cultural materialism to take root in social policy and then to fossilize itself in law.
Each time we cede ground in the linguistic wars, we surrender a bit more ground to those who wish to subvert individual agency to the consensus of “interpretive communities,” themselves answerable only to their own interests. Epistemology becomes an exercise in relativism and will to power disguised as critical thinking. And politically, the individual—the primary locus of agency in a constitutional democracy—is forced by social circumstance either to find power in group identity, or else accept his social and political marginalition." (HT Coyote, Glenn)
UPDATE: And more here -- spelled with a W-O-W:
"Last week, during a conversation about the ‘cartoon jihad’ uproar, I used the phrase “emotional incontinence.” This did not go down well. I was promptly told, in no uncertain terms, that I mustn’t “impose” my own cultural values. Apparently, to do so would be a form of “cultural imperialism”, an archaic colonial hangover, and therefore unspeakably evil. I was, apparently, being “arrogantly ethnocentric” in considering Western secular society broadly preferable to a culture in which rioting, murder and genocidal threats can be prompted by the publication of a cartoon.
As the conversation continued, I was emphatically informed that to regard one set of cultural values as preferable to another was “racist” and “oppressive.” Indeed, even the attempt to make any such determination was itself a heinous act. I was further assailed with a list of examples of “Western arrogance, decadence, irreverence, and downright nastiness.” And I was reminded that, above all, I “must respect deeply held beliefs.” When I asked if this respect for deeply held beliefs extended to white supremacists, cannibals and ultra-conservative Republicans, a deafening silence ensued.
After this awkward pause, the conversation rumbled on. At some point, I made reference to migration and the marked tendency of families to move from Islamic societies to secular ones, and not the other way round. “This seems rather important,” I suggested. “If you want to evaluate which society is preferred to another by any given group, migration patterns are an obvious yardstick to use. Broadly speaking, people don't relocate their families to cultures they find wholly inferior to their own.” Alas, this fairly self-evident suggestion did not meet with approval. No rebuttal was forthcoming, but the litany of Western wickedness resumed, more loudly than before.
This tendency to replace a coherent argument with lists of alleged Western wickedness and an air of self-loathing is hardly uncommon. Indeed, in certain quarters, it is difficult to avoid. In her increasingly baffling comment pieces, the Guardian’s Madeleine Bunting has made much of bemoaning "our preoccupation with things; our ever more desperate dependence on stimulants from alcohol to porn." (One instantly pictures poor Madeleine surrounded by booze, drugs and pornography – and tearfully alienated by all of those other terrible material “things” she doesn’t like having, honest.)
In one infamous recent article, Bunting - a “leading thinker”, at least according to her employers – waved the flag for cultural relativism and denounced the idea of Enlightenment sensibilities: “Muscular liberals raise their standard on Enlightenment values – their universality, the supremacy of reason and a belief in progress… It is an ideology of superiority that is profoundly old-fashioned – reminiscent of Victorian liberalism and just as imperialistic…” Bunting’s argument, such as it is, suggests no objective distinction should be made between democratic cultures in which freedom of belief and education for women are taken for granted, and theocratic societies in which those freedoms are curtailed or extinguished. As, for instance, when Islamic fundamentalists took umbrage at Western-funded school projects in Northern Pakistan and promptly destroyed the offending schools, on the basis that illiterate girls were being taught ‘un-Islamic’ values.
Nor, apparently, should we notice that restricting the education of women and their social interactions has obvious consequences for healthcare and prosperity, both of which Ms Bunting seems to disdain. Indeed, she has explicitly argued to this effect, insisting women in the developing world should reject the evils of capitalism and material advancement as this disrupts their “traditions of keeping children with them in the fields” - traditions which, of course, we must respect and, better yet, romanticise, albeit from a safe distance.
Perhaps Enlightenment values, including tolerance, education and free speech, should only apply in the nicer parts of London, but not in Iran, or Sudan, or Saudi Arabia. Presumably, Enlightenment values are fine for Guardian columnists, but wrong for poor women in rural Pakistan. And, given Ms Bunting’s recent Hello-style interview with the Islamist cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who insists that disobedient women should be beaten, albeit “lightly”, perhaps we can assume she’s prepared to accept similar chastisement, all in the name of the moral relativism she claims to hold so dear?" [ Did I forget to say "WOW"? -ed. ]
Saturday, February 17, 2007
Baztab and Ledeen
"The answer is simple enough. We can’t work this out because the Islamic Republic has declared war on us, not the other way around. Iranian agents and Iranian weapons are killing Americans. Until a few weeks ago, American soldiers were not even authorized to kill Iranian military personnel in Iraq, let alone cross the border to attack Iranian terrorist training camps or industrial facilities where shaped explosives are put together.
The good folks at Baztab surely know what every Iranian knows: that if there were free elections in Iran, the entire regime would be replaced with a free government, and the new leaders would terminate support for terrorism, redirect the oil revenues to national reconstruction, and join the civilized world. I oppose military action against Iran, as well as sanctions—aside from those specifically aimed at the kleptocrats who have ruined the country and pauperized the people. I support freedom for Iran.
In addition to its sweet reasonableness to me—which reflects the views of many regime leaders that they’d better stop provoking Bush, lest the United States finally develops a serious Iran policy. Ergo, they’re launching a charm offensive—Baztab has been critical of some of Ahmadi-Nezhad’s policies, and has now joined the ranks of hundreds of other publications to be censored by the regime. It is now an officially banned website.
Pity. But that’s what happens when you pretend to be free in the tyrannical Islamic Republic. Many of their countrymen and women have given their limbs and lives for freedom, and the guys at Baztab have fallen into the crossfire that characterizes the War of the Persian Succession.
They’re welcome to come to the American Enterprise Institute and have a wide open debate. Assuming they’re free to travel, of course."
The good folks at Baztab surely know what every Iranian knows: that if there were free elections in Iran, the entire regime would be replaced with a free government, and the new leaders would terminate support for terrorism, redirect the oil revenues to national reconstruction, and join the civilized world. I oppose military action against Iran, as well as sanctions—aside from those specifically aimed at the kleptocrats who have ruined the country and pauperized the people. I support freedom for Iran.
In addition to its sweet reasonableness to me—which reflects the views of many regime leaders that they’d better stop provoking Bush, lest the United States finally develops a serious Iran policy. Ergo, they’re launching a charm offensive—Baztab has been critical of some of Ahmadi-Nezhad’s policies, and has now joined the ranks of hundreds of other publications to be censored by the regime. It is now an officially banned website.
Pity. But that’s what happens when you pretend to be free in the tyrannical Islamic Republic. Many of their countrymen and women have given their limbs and lives for freedom, and the guys at Baztab have fallen into the crossfire that characterizes the War of the Persian Succession.
They’re welcome to come to the American Enterprise Institute and have a wide open debate. Assuming they’re free to travel, of course."
Worms
""Our enemies are little worms. I saw them at Munich. "
That was Hitler’s appraisal of the leaders of Britain and France he hosted in the Bavarian capital in 1938. British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain had requested the meeting “to find a peaceful solution” to growing tension over Nazi Germany’s grievances and demands.
The outcome: an attempt to appease Hitler through the betrayal of Czechoslovakia. “Britain and France had to choose between war and dishonor,” Winston Churchill remarked at the time. “They chose dishonor. They will have war.”
In 1972, Munich again was linked to appeasement: Palestinian terrorists massacred 11 Israeli Olympic athletes. The group responsible was guided by Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Yasser Arafat. Nevertheless, Arafat received more encouragement than condemnation: He was invited to address the U.N. where “the question of Palestine” rose to the top of the agenda; it has remained there ever since with no resolution in sight.
Against this backdrop, last weekend I attended the 43rd annual Munich Conference on Security Policy, a gathering of the international political elite: presidents and prime ministers, defense and foreign secretaries, ambassadors, scholars, and journalists from more than 40 countries.
***
As for Iran’s nuclear program, he [ Iranian Minister Larijani -ed. ] insisted it is intended only to generate electricity. “We have no intention of aggression against any country,'' he said, sounding offended by the very thought. He added that, on the contrary, “We are a victim of terrorism.” At whose hands, he did not specify.
Larijani sternly set down the rules for those wishing to question him: He was not to be asked about “suspension of uranium enrichment, the Holocaust or Israel.”
Perhaps the sharpest rejoinder came from Sen. Lindsey Graham. “It must have been difficult for you to say what you said,” he told the Iranian official. “Because it was difficult for me to listen.”
Graham observed: “No one who denies the Holocaust can be trusted with nuclear materials.” And he advised Larijani to “Go visit Dachau,” the Nazi concentration camp preserved as a memorial in Munich’s bucolic suburbs; an unintended consequence of the policy of appeasement.
In contrast with Graham and other members of the American delegation — which included also Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl — few European leaders seemed distressed by Larijani. If anything, they congratulated themselves for having invited him to Munich to begin a process of “peace though dialogue.”
As for what Larijani and his fellow Islamist revolutionaries think of their European hosts, one can only surmise. But I suspect it is not too far from the Führer’s appraisal of those he humiliated in Munich nearly 70 years ago."
That was Hitler’s appraisal of the leaders of Britain and France he hosted in the Bavarian capital in 1938. British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain had requested the meeting “to find a peaceful solution” to growing tension over Nazi Germany’s grievances and demands.
The outcome: an attempt to appease Hitler through the betrayal of Czechoslovakia. “Britain and France had to choose between war and dishonor,” Winston Churchill remarked at the time. “They chose dishonor. They will have war.”
In 1972, Munich again was linked to appeasement: Palestinian terrorists massacred 11 Israeli Olympic athletes. The group responsible was guided by Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Yasser Arafat. Nevertheless, Arafat received more encouragement than condemnation: He was invited to address the U.N. where “the question of Palestine” rose to the top of the agenda; it has remained there ever since with no resolution in sight.
Against this backdrop, last weekend I attended the 43rd annual Munich Conference on Security Policy, a gathering of the international political elite: presidents and prime ministers, defense and foreign secretaries, ambassadors, scholars, and journalists from more than 40 countries.
***
As for Iran’s nuclear program, he [ Iranian Minister Larijani -ed. ] insisted it is intended only to generate electricity. “We have no intention of aggression against any country,'' he said, sounding offended by the very thought. He added that, on the contrary, “We are a victim of terrorism.” At whose hands, he did not specify.
Larijani sternly set down the rules for those wishing to question him: He was not to be asked about “suspension of uranium enrichment, the Holocaust or Israel.”
Perhaps the sharpest rejoinder came from Sen. Lindsey Graham. “It must have been difficult for you to say what you said,” he told the Iranian official. “Because it was difficult for me to listen.”
Graham observed: “No one who denies the Holocaust can be trusted with nuclear materials.” And he advised Larijani to “Go visit Dachau,” the Nazi concentration camp preserved as a memorial in Munich’s bucolic suburbs; an unintended consequence of the policy of appeasement.
In contrast with Graham and other members of the American delegation — which included also Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl — few European leaders seemed distressed by Larijani. If anything, they congratulated themselves for having invited him to Munich to begin a process of “peace though dialogue.”
As for what Larijani and his fellow Islamist revolutionaries think of their European hosts, one can only surmise. But I suspect it is not too far from the Führer’s appraisal of those he humiliated in Munich nearly 70 years ago."
Inside Out
"Anyway, as to the cosmic significance of all this, I cannot think of a greater gift that a parent could bestow upon a child than the firm and secure presence of a calm center through which life may be lived from the inside out. Most people live their lives from the outside in, which is what causes the frantic, lifelong search for something that will finally bring peace and tranquility. But as all religious traditions teach, this calm center cannot be found in the horizontal. Rather, you will only become further lost and entangled. The prodigal son, and all that.
It is the difference between the dispersal and the centration of consciousness. For example, when one thinks of Jesus, or Buddha, or Lao Tsu, it is unthinkable that they were possessed of a restless, externalized, and dispersed consciousness. In fact, I imagine that to have looked into the eyes of Jesus would have been literally -- for how could it not be so? -- to have looked into the very depthless center of creation."
It is the difference between the dispersal and the centration of consciousness. For example, when one thinks of Jesus, or Buddha, or Lao Tsu, it is unthinkable that they were possessed of a restless, externalized, and dispersed consciousness. In fact, I imagine that to have looked into the eyes of Jesus would have been literally -- for how could it not be so? -- to have looked into the very depthless center of creation."
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Read. Him. Now.
"The photography is gorgeous; it makes you feel guilty to enjoy it. This really is war reportage at its best, written by one who was there first as a soldier. If you want to know what's really happening on the ground in Iraq, Michael Yon and a handful of others are the go-to guys."
Smokin Part 93653
"US forces have captured over a hundred of the HS50s from the Iranian police shipment. That amounts to over 12% of the total number of rifles imported by Iran to fight drug dealers, a dodge that has grown more threadbare ever since the invasion of Iraq. The Iranians have not claimed -- yet -- that they managed to lose one-eighth of all the new rifles intended for their police, and the Iranian government was clearly the recipient of the arms. In fact, Austria defended the sale on that very point.
Pardon the pun, but this is literally the smoking gun. We can trace these weapons from its manufacturer directly to the Iranian government. The quantity in which they have been found in insurgent bases precludes any explanation that a few just got mislaid; they obviously have been transferred from an Iranian state organization to the terrorists in Iraq. It's the clearest evidence of Iranian involvement in attacks on Americans. The involvement of the mullahcracy is undeniable, and it is a direct retort to those who keep claiming that Iran has no stake in Iraqi instability."
Pardon the pun, but this is literally the smoking gun. We can trace these weapons from its manufacturer directly to the Iranian government. The quantity in which they have been found in insurgent bases precludes any explanation that a few just got mislaid; they obviously have been transferred from an Iranian state organization to the terrorists in Iraq. It's the clearest evidence of Iranian involvement in attacks on Americans. The involvement of the mullahcracy is undeniable, and it is a direct retort to those who keep claiming that Iran has no stake in Iraqi instability."
The Fiercest Liberal In Lebanon
"“If the US loses the war in Iraq,” I said, “do you think it will be bad for Lebanon?”
Walid Jumblatt thought for a very long time before he answered that question. I could see his mind working cautiously, calibrating his response as he always does. The fiercest liberal in Lebanon said the following very carefully:
“It would be bad for Lebanon and for the Middle East if the US withdraws from the Middle East. Because we will face a different Arab and Muslim world. It is very strange and ironic that even the pro-Iranians in Iraq are asking the Americans to stay. You could write a theater about it. Making the Americans totally withdraw from the Arab world would be a mistake, would be a disaster for the moderates in the Arab world. The radicals and the Iranians would win.”"
Walid Jumblatt thought for a very long time before he answered that question. I could see his mind working cautiously, calibrating his response as he always does. The fiercest liberal in Lebanon said the following very carefully:
“It would be bad for Lebanon and for the Middle East if the US withdraws from the Middle East. Because we will face a different Arab and Muslim world. It is very strange and ironic that even the pro-Iranians in Iraq are asking the Americans to stay. You could write a theater about it. Making the Americans totally withdraw from the Arab world would be a mistake, would be a disaster for the moderates in the Arab world. The radicals and the Iranians would win.”"
"It is possible to have a civilized, sensible discussion about the issue of global climate change. However, doing so requires speaking in the language of uncertainty, rather than moral righteousness."
The Gore Effect
GLENN: "THE "GORE EFFECT" HAS STRUCK AGAIN: "HOUSE HEARING ON 'WARMING OF THE PLANET' CANCELED AFTER SNOW/ICE STORM" And I'm not even sure Al was scheduled to be there. How does he do it?"
Monday, February 12, 2007
Ho-Hum: Get Used To No Israel Soon
"Iran will be able to develop enough weapons-grade material for a nuclear bomb and there is little that can be done to prevent it, an internal European Union document has concluded. [ I'm guessing that this will be turned into another Bush "lie" within a few months. I don't know how they'll do it but I find myself continually gobsmacked by what the netroots manage to believe. -ed. ]
In an admission of the international community’s failure to hold back Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the document – compiled by the staff of Javier Solana, EU foreign policy chief – says the atomic programme has been delayed only by technical limitations rather than diplomatic pressure. “Attempts to engage the Iranian administration in a negotiating process have not so far succeeded,” it states." [ D'oh. By the way, I'm always struck by how little Middle-East history folks know. There is good evidence that Israel had a couple of nukes available during the 1967 war and probably about 13 during the 1973 war. The Arabs had a good suspicion that the Israelis had nukes during the 1967 war and certainly believed it during the 1973 war. Yet to war they went anyway. Lunatics. (The other option of course is that they don't believe their own rhetoric about how evil the Nazi-Israelis are.) -ed. ]
In an admission of the international community’s failure to hold back Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the document – compiled by the staff of Javier Solana, EU foreign policy chief – says the atomic programme has been delayed only by technical limitations rather than diplomatic pressure. “Attempts to engage the Iranian administration in a negotiating process have not so far succeeded,” it states." [ D'oh. By the way, I'm always struck by how little Middle-East history folks know. There is good evidence that Israel had a couple of nukes available during the 1967 war and probably about 13 during the 1973 war. The Arabs had a good suspicion that the Israelis had nukes during the 1967 war and certainly believed it during the 1973 war. Yet to war they went anyway. Lunatics. (The other option of course is that they don't believe their own rhetoric about how evil the Nazi-Israelis are.) -ed. ]
Pouvons-nous négocier cela pour satisfaire?
"Meanwhile the French are not unhappy with the result. According to the Jerusalem Post.
If the West is brought under Sharia law it will have no excuses. It will hardly be possible to argue that its leaders were deceived. That, like Neville Chamberlain, they let their idealism get the better of them. No excuse except plain illiteracy can explain the inability to comprehend this blatant statement of intent. "We have agreed with the Saudis to market this agreement internationally. ... We will never recognize Israel. There is nothing called Israel," he told Reuters. "We, in the Hamas movement, will not abide by anything."
Western weakness has little to do with Jihad, or Hamas or Fatah. It arises from the monomanaical belief that negotiations can solve everything; and that consequently, resistance will never be necessary. Hamas understands that Western Pacifism must rule out coercion at all costs; that all it has to do is wait, and all, even Israel's extinction, will be delivered, abjectly, to its doorstep. "
In Paris, French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said inclusion of the term "respect" in reference to Israel "is a step in the right direction toward full adherence to the demands of the international community that we hold dear, including in particular the recognition of Israel."Commentary
If the West is brought under Sharia law it will have no excuses. It will hardly be possible to argue that its leaders were deceived. That, like Neville Chamberlain, they let their idealism get the better of them. No excuse except plain illiteracy can explain the inability to comprehend this blatant statement of intent. "We have agreed with the Saudis to market this agreement internationally. ... We will never recognize Israel. There is nothing called Israel," he told Reuters. "We, in the Hamas movement, will not abide by anything."
Western weakness has little to do with Jihad, or Hamas or Fatah. It arises from the monomanaical belief that negotiations can solve everything; and that consequently, resistance will never be necessary. Hamas understands that Western Pacifism must rule out coercion at all costs; that all it has to do is wait, and all, even Israel's extinction, will be delivered, abjectly, to its doorstep. "
Remorseless Mockery Today
"Well, that was back at the tail end of an era that still believed in archaic concepts as evil and punishment. The point of five life sentences was not just to keep society safe, but also to exact justice for the nine lives she took in her murderous spree. As the son of their most prominent victim testified to the court that granted her five years' probation -- five years! -- none of the Red Army faction terrorists ever expressed remorse for their killings.
One suspects that the reason Mohnhaupt and her twisted colleagues receive such mercy is that the German establishment has sympathy for their original aims. The radical Leftists had plenty of fellow travelers in the 1970s, when many of them agitated for the kind of socialism exemplified in East Germany. Some of those went into politics, others into academia, and still more into the legal system. Baader-Meinhof was just a more violent expression of a movement that many supported, and that many still do.
However, one had hoped that the advent of Islamist terrorism would have stripped the romance from the Baader-Meinhof thugs. They slaughtered civilians to make themselves important, giving it a patina of Marxist revolution by spouting political manifestos that had grown tired even at that time. They're no different than al-Qaeda suicide bombers in London, Morocco, Turkey, Madrid, or at the World Trade Center; they just used a different ideology as an excuse for the same mass and serial murders. Not only has Germany made a mockery of life sentences, they have shown that they do not understand the message that this sends to terrorists -- the kind that used Hamburg as a base to kill almost 3,000 Americans on 9/11." [ The next time you need a definition of the concept "mockery of justice", just refer to this post. -ed. ]
One suspects that the reason Mohnhaupt and her twisted colleagues receive such mercy is that the German establishment has sympathy for their original aims. The radical Leftists had plenty of fellow travelers in the 1970s, when many of them agitated for the kind of socialism exemplified in East Germany. Some of those went into politics, others into academia, and still more into the legal system. Baader-Meinhof was just a more violent expression of a movement that many supported, and that many still do.
However, one had hoped that the advent of Islamist terrorism would have stripped the romance from the Baader-Meinhof thugs. They slaughtered civilians to make themselves important, giving it a patina of Marxist revolution by spouting political manifestos that had grown tired even at that time. They're no different than al-Qaeda suicide bombers in London, Morocco, Turkey, Madrid, or at the World Trade Center; they just used a different ideology as an excuse for the same mass and serial murders. Not only has Germany made a mockery of life sentences, they have shown that they do not understand the message that this sends to terrorists -- the kind that used Hamburg as a base to kill almost 3,000 Americans on 9/11." [ The next time you need a definition of the concept "mockery of justice", just refer to this post. -ed. ]
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Integrating Nauseation
"In other words, most of the new age blathering that goes by the name "integralism" is nothing more than a co-opting of half-understood spiritual ideas for the purposes of narcissistic inflation (i.e., the lower seizing the higher instead of being transformed by it). These various approaches are spiritually vacuous to Coons because they are generally detached from any timeless revelation and any true source of grace, without which one can only turn around in circles and exalt the self in compensation. "Followers" are required in order to create a space in which infantile omnipotence is projected onto the master, which then creates a blowback of pseudo-grace. This is the trick of the new age careerists. A normal person would be nauseated by such adulation."
Speaking Of Intentions ... Ho-Hum
"On December 12, 2006, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad personally brought to a close the infamous Holocaust deniers' conference in Tehran. A strange parade of speakers had passed across the podium: former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, the nutty followers of the anti-Zionist Jewish sect Neturei Karta, and officials of the neo-Nazi German National party, along with the familiar handful of professional Holocaust deniers. Frederick Töben had delivered a lecture entitled "The Holocaust--A Murder Weapon." Frenchman Robert Faurisson had called the Holocaust a "fairy tale," while his American colleague Veronica Clark had explained that "the Jews made money in Auschwitz." A professor named McNally had declared that to regard the Holocaust as a fact is as ludicrous as believing in "magicians and witches." Finally, the Belgian Leonardo Clerici had offered the following explanation in his capacity as a Muslim: "I believe that the value of metaphysics is greater than the value of history."
If this motley crew had assembled in a pub in Melbourne, nobody would have paid the slightest attention. What gave the event historical significance was that it was held by invitation, at the Iranian foreign ministry: on government premises, in a country that disposes of the world's second-largest oil reserves (after Saudi Arabia) and second-largest natural gas reserves (after Russia). And in this setting, the remarks quoted above provoked not dismissive laughter, but applause and attentive nods. On the walls hung photographs of corpses with the inscription "Myth," and others of laughing concentration camp survivors with the inscription "Truth."
The Tehran deniers' conference marks a turning point not only because of its state sponsorship, but also because of its purpose. Up until now, Holocaust deniers have wanted to revise the past. Today, they want to shape the future: to prepare the way for the next Holocaust. "
If this motley crew had assembled in a pub in Melbourne, nobody would have paid the slightest attention. What gave the event historical significance was that it was held by invitation, at the Iranian foreign ministry: on government premises, in a country that disposes of the world's second-largest oil reserves (after Saudi Arabia) and second-largest natural gas reserves (after Russia). And in this setting, the remarks quoted above provoked not dismissive laughter, but applause and attentive nods. On the walls hung photographs of corpses with the inscription "Myth," and others of laughing concentration camp survivors with the inscription "Truth."
The Tehran deniers' conference marks a turning point not only because of its state sponsorship, but also because of its purpose. Up until now, Holocaust deniers have wanted to revise the past. Today, they want to shape the future: to prepare the way for the next Holocaust. "
Welcome To The (Unintended) Singularity
"A team of world-leading neuroscientists has developed a powerful technique that allows them to look deep inside a person's brain and read their intentions before they act.
The research breaks controversial new ground in scientists' ability to probe people's minds and eavesdrop on their thoughts, and raises serious ethical issues over how brain-reading technology may be used in the future.
The team used high-resolution brain scans to identify patterns of activity before translating them into meaningful thoughts, revealing what a person planned to do in the near future. It is the first time scientists have succeeded in reading intentions in this way."
The research breaks controversial new ground in scientists' ability to probe people's minds and eavesdrop on their thoughts, and raises serious ethical issues over how brain-reading technology may be used in the future.
The team used high-resolution brain scans to identify patterns of activity before translating them into meaningful thoughts, revealing what a person planned to do in the near future. It is the first time scientists have succeeded in reading intentions in this way."
Well Of Course Water Vapor Is A Greenhouse Gas...
"Climate history and related archeology give solid support to the solar hypothesis. The 20th-century episode, or Modern Warming, was just the latest in a long string of similar events produced by a hyperactive sun, of which the last was the Medieval Warming.
The Chinese population doubled then, while in Europe the Vikings and cathedral-builders prospered. Fascinating relics of earlier episodes come from the Swiss Alps, with the rediscovery in 2003 of a long-forgotten pass used intermittently whenever the world was warm.
What does the Intergovernmental Panel do with such emphatic evidence for an alternation of warm and cold periods, linked to solar activity and going on long before human industry was a possible factor? Less than nothing. The 2007 Summary for Policymakers boasts of cutting in half a very small contribution by the sun to climate change conceded in a 2001 report.
Disdain for the sun goes with a failure by the self-appointed greenhouse experts to keep up with inconvenient discoveries about how the solar variations control the climate. The sun’s brightness may change too little to account for the big swings in the climate. But more than 10 years have passed since Henrik Svensmark in Copenhagen first pointed out a much more powerful mechanism.
He saw from compilations of weather satellite data that cloudiness varies according to how many atomic particles are coming in from exploded stars. More cosmic rays, more clouds. The sun’s magnetic field bats away many of the cosmic rays, and its intensification during the 20th century meant fewer cosmic rays, fewer clouds, and a warmer world. On the other hand the Little Ice Age was chilly because the lazy sun let in more cosmic rays, leaving the world cloudier and gloomier.
The only trouble with Svensmark’s idea — apart from its being politically incorrect — was that meteorologists denied that cosmic rays could be involved in cloud formation. After long delays in scraping together the funds for an experiment, Svensmark and his small team at the Danish National Space Center hit the jackpot in the summer of 2005." [ The issue isn't whether the earth goes through climate cycles. It does. How else did the Vikings call it Greenland? The question is whether we're going to do more stupid things like we're doing with Ethanol -- never mind the hysteria in the 70s about a new ice age -- or be a little more careful. And I'm a big supporter of conservation technologies. I think the GM Volt and the Zap could be really cool. And I nearly bought a hybrid in my last vehicle purchase and fully expect to next time around. But I'll believe that the Gore-bots are serious when they put nuclear power back on the table in a serious way. Because that together with batteries (or a similar breakthrough in clean and light mobile power storage) is about the only way we're going to make a big difference in man-made greenhouse gases without disatrous economic impacts -- on not just us but the entire world economy. -ed. ]
UPDATED ALREADY: "A team of more than 60 scientists from around the world are preparing to conduct a large-scale experiment using a particle accelerator in Geneva, Switzerland, to replicate the effect of cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere.
They hope this will prove whether this deep space radiation is responsible for changing cloud cover. If so, it could force climate scientists to re-evaluate their ideas about how global warming occurs.
Mr Svensmark's results show that the rays produce electrically charged particles when they hit the atmosphere. He said: "These particles attract water molecules from the air and cause them to clump together until they condense into clouds."
Mr Svensmark claims that the number of cosmic rays hitting the Earth changes with the magnetic activity around the Sun. During high periods of activity, fewer cosmic rays hit the Earth and so there are less clouds formed, resulting in warming.
Low activity causes more clouds and cools the Earth."
The Chinese population doubled then, while in Europe the Vikings and cathedral-builders prospered. Fascinating relics of earlier episodes come from the Swiss Alps, with the rediscovery in 2003 of a long-forgotten pass used intermittently whenever the world was warm.
What does the Intergovernmental Panel do with such emphatic evidence for an alternation of warm and cold periods, linked to solar activity and going on long before human industry was a possible factor? Less than nothing. The 2007 Summary for Policymakers boasts of cutting in half a very small contribution by the sun to climate change conceded in a 2001 report.
Disdain for the sun goes with a failure by the self-appointed greenhouse experts to keep up with inconvenient discoveries about how the solar variations control the climate. The sun’s brightness may change too little to account for the big swings in the climate. But more than 10 years have passed since Henrik Svensmark in Copenhagen first pointed out a much more powerful mechanism.
He saw from compilations of weather satellite data that cloudiness varies according to how many atomic particles are coming in from exploded stars. More cosmic rays, more clouds. The sun’s magnetic field bats away many of the cosmic rays, and its intensification during the 20th century meant fewer cosmic rays, fewer clouds, and a warmer world. On the other hand the Little Ice Age was chilly because the lazy sun let in more cosmic rays, leaving the world cloudier and gloomier.
The only trouble with Svensmark’s idea — apart from its being politically incorrect — was that meteorologists denied that cosmic rays could be involved in cloud formation. After long delays in scraping together the funds for an experiment, Svensmark and his small team at the Danish National Space Center hit the jackpot in the summer of 2005." [ The issue isn't whether the earth goes through climate cycles. It does. How else did the Vikings call it Greenland? The question is whether we're going to do more stupid things like we're doing with Ethanol -- never mind the hysteria in the 70s about a new ice age -- or be a little more careful. And I'm a big supporter of conservation technologies. I think the GM Volt and the Zap could be really cool. And I nearly bought a hybrid in my last vehicle purchase and fully expect to next time around. But I'll believe that the Gore-bots are serious when they put nuclear power back on the table in a serious way. Because that together with batteries (or a similar breakthrough in clean and light mobile power storage) is about the only way we're going to make a big difference in man-made greenhouse gases without disatrous economic impacts -- on not just us but the entire world economy. -ed. ]
UPDATED ALREADY: "A team of more than 60 scientists from around the world are preparing to conduct a large-scale experiment using a particle accelerator in Geneva, Switzerland, to replicate the effect of cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere.
They hope this will prove whether this deep space radiation is responsible for changing cloud cover. If so, it could force climate scientists to re-evaluate their ideas about how global warming occurs.
Mr Svensmark's results show that the rays produce electrically charged particles when they hit the atmosphere. He said: "These particles attract water molecules from the air and cause them to clump together until they condense into clouds."
Mr Svensmark claims that the number of cosmic rays hitting the Earth changes with the magnetic activity around the Sun. During high periods of activity, fewer cosmic rays hit the Earth and so there are less clouds formed, resulting in warming.
Low activity causes more clouds and cools the Earth."
The Latest Update From Omar...
"In other encouraging news, I saw on the local Baghdad news that US and Iraqi soldiers have discovered about 60 weapon caches since the beginning of this month, and detained more than 140 suspects during the same period.
Other incidents that indicate a positive change in Maliki’s policy are the arrest of deputy minister of health Hakim al-Zamili, and the deployment of IA soldiers to provide security for hospitals in Baghdad instead of the FPS.
The FPS, or the “Facility Protection Service,” is widely accused of being affiliated with death squads. Members of the FPS were recruited directly by ministries through contracts not overseen by the interior or defense ministries. The loyalty of FPS personnel is believed to be toward the political faction controlling any given ministry instead of the country as a whole.
The arrest of al-Zamili indicates that the new plan will not hesitate to target leaders of militant groups no matter what their position in the government was. The Sadr movement responded to the arrest only by saying that it was an insult to all Iraqis. One of their spokesmen said, in a clear sign of helplessness, “If one from our movement is to be arrested, then others from other factions should be arrested as well”.
I don’t know whether this current attitude of submission is going to last when more senior members are arrested. Still, I like the idea of arresting senior bad guys from both sects. This both satisfies public opinion, and gives credibility to the announced plans of the government to deal equally with all regardless of sect or background."
Other incidents that indicate a positive change in Maliki’s policy are the arrest of deputy minister of health Hakim al-Zamili, and the deployment of IA soldiers to provide security for hospitals in Baghdad instead of the FPS.
The FPS, or the “Facility Protection Service,” is widely accused of being affiliated with death squads. Members of the FPS were recruited directly by ministries through contracts not overseen by the interior or defense ministries. The loyalty of FPS personnel is believed to be toward the political faction controlling any given ministry instead of the country as a whole.
The arrest of al-Zamili indicates that the new plan will not hesitate to target leaders of militant groups no matter what their position in the government was. The Sadr movement responded to the arrest only by saying that it was an insult to all Iraqis. One of their spokesmen said, in a clear sign of helplessness, “If one from our movement is to be arrested, then others from other factions should be arrested as well”.
I don’t know whether this current attitude of submission is going to last when more senior members are arrested. Still, I like the idea of arresting senior bad guys from both sects. This both satisfies public opinion, and gives credibility to the announced plans of the government to deal equally with all regardless of sect or background."
That We May Know
"This is one of the reasons I am attracted to ancient Christianity as opposed to so many of its modern and postmodern versions, such as fundamentalism. If you read the accounts of the original practitioners of the "Christian way" (as it was then called), it is obvious that they were drawn to its transformative aspect. In other words, it is hardly as if they merely heard a nice story about a man who rose from the dead, and said to themselves, "I like that. I think I'll become a Christian." Rather, there was something far more dramatic and experiential going on, and this is vividly reflected in the writings of the first 500 years of Christianity, right through Augustine -- who is hardly comparable to a dry and dusty academic theologian.
For example, in his Confessions, Augustine recounts several mystical experiences of direct contact with God. Of the most famous one, he writes of how "we did gradually pass through all corporeal things, and even the heaven itself, whence sun, and moon and stars shine upon the earth. Yes, we soared higher yet by inward musing, and discoursing, and admiring your works; and we came to our own minds, and went beyond them, that we might advance as high as that region of unfailing plenty.... There life is that Wisdom by whom all these things are made, both which have been, and which are to come..."
He concludes with an observation and a speculation: "If to any person the tumult of the flesh were silenced -- silenced the images of earth, waters, and air -- silenced, too, the poles of heaven; yes, the very soul be silenced to herself and go beyond herself by not thinking of herself -- silenced be dreams and imaginary revelations, every tongue, and every sign, and whatsoever exists by passing away," then "life might be eternally like that one moment of knowledge that we now sighed after..."
So while religion obviously involves "faith" and "belief," these are not intended to be merely static and saturated "containers." Rather, properly understood, they should be fungible into a different sort of experiential knowledge and should facilitate a real transformation. In other words, it seems that dogma is not the end of religious knowledge, but only the beginning. Truly, we believe in order that we may know."
For example, in his Confessions, Augustine recounts several mystical experiences of direct contact with God. Of the most famous one, he writes of how "we did gradually pass through all corporeal things, and even the heaven itself, whence sun, and moon and stars shine upon the earth. Yes, we soared higher yet by inward musing, and discoursing, and admiring your works; and we came to our own minds, and went beyond them, that we might advance as high as that region of unfailing plenty.... There life is that Wisdom by whom all these things are made, both which have been, and which are to come..."
He concludes with an observation and a speculation: "If to any person the tumult of the flesh were silenced -- silenced the images of earth, waters, and air -- silenced, too, the poles of heaven; yes, the very soul be silenced to herself and go beyond herself by not thinking of herself -- silenced be dreams and imaginary revelations, every tongue, and every sign, and whatsoever exists by passing away," then "life might be eternally like that one moment of knowledge that we now sighed after..."
So while religion obviously involves "faith" and "belief," these are not intended to be merely static and saturated "containers." Rather, properly understood, they should be fungible into a different sort of experiential knowledge and should facilitate a real transformation. In other words, it seems that dogma is not the end of religious knowledge, but only the beginning. Truly, we believe in order that we may know."
Saturday, February 10, 2007
Something Stinks At Google
"Christians who want similar consideration from Google will presumably have to start blowing things up and beheading people. As I've noted before, it's quite unwise to create this kind of incentive structure. I thought the Google people were supposed to be smart."
That Inconvenient Mobility
"The rich are indeed getting richer (the bastards). As Steven Lagerfeld points out in the Winter 2007 issue of The Wilson Quarterly (not yet online), those 130,000 households at the very top of the earnings pyramid have increased their share of pretax wage and salary income from 2 percent in 1973 to just under 7 percent in 2004. Folks in the top 5 percent of households--those making more than $166,000--have seen their inflation-adjusted annual income jack up by a hefty two-thirds since 1970.
But everyone is getting richer. In real dollars, every quintile has posted significant annual increases over the past 35 years, ranging from $3,000 for the lowest quintile to $13,000 for the middle quintile to over $25,000 for next-to-highest one. And the individuals in those quintiles change all the time, something even The New York Times, which wrings its hands on class matters like an obsessive-compulsive, admits. Urban Institute economists Daniel P. McMurrer and Isabel V. Sawhill estimate that between 25 percent to 40 percent of individuals switch quintiles in a given year and that "rates of mobility have not changed over time." Research tracking individuals in the lowest income quintile in 1968 found that 23 years later, 53 percent were in a higher quintile and that half had spent at least a year in the top income quintile."
But everyone is getting richer. In real dollars, every quintile has posted significant annual increases over the past 35 years, ranging from $3,000 for the lowest quintile to $13,000 for the middle quintile to over $25,000 for next-to-highest one. And the individuals in those quintiles change all the time, something even The New York Times, which wrings its hands on class matters like an obsessive-compulsive, admits. Urban Institute economists Daniel P. McMurrer and Isabel V. Sawhill estimate that between 25 percent to 40 percent of individuals switch quintiles in a given year and that "rates of mobility have not changed over time." Research tracking individuals in the lowest income quintile in 1968 found that 23 years later, 53 percent were in a higher quintile and that half had spent at least a year in the top income quintile."
Londonistan Part 99236
"The second courageous Muslim to speak out this week is Gina Khan, a Birmingham woman who was so sickened by the response of her fellow Muslims in the city to the ‘soldier kidnap plot’ terror raids that she has used an interview with the Times to deliver a few absolutely crucial home truths (that were totally absent from the Question Time ‘debate’):
Welcome once again to Londonistan." [ By the way, I favor not decreased but increased immigration to the U.S. And largely because the few Eurabians that don't want to submit to the knife will need someplace to flee. But even those proportionate few will probably ramp up to millions a year at some point in the next decade when you consider Greater Eurabia is home to 500,000,000... -ed. ]
Over the past 15 years, she says, there has been an influx of jihadist thinking into her part of Birmingham. Bookshops sell radical literature and the mosques preach separatism and hatred. The Government and the white Establishment have allowed it to happen. And she is outraged about it. ‘It’s all happening on your doorstep,’ she says, ‘and Britain is still blind to the real threat that is embedded here now. I truly believe that all these mosques here are importing jihad. The radical teaching is filtering through, and these mosques are not regulated. They are supporting everything that is wrong about Islam. We within the community knew this. People are lying. They are in denial. They knew they were bringing in radicals. But there are still more English and British people, no matter what, and if they got together and wanted to stamp out this radicalism, they could. I am wasting my time talking to my own people; that is why I am sitting here talking to you, to open your eyes…’What would Ms Khan do to combate such a threat? Ban polygamy, forced teenage marriages and the veil. What do the British do? Produce programmes like Question Time, which present Islamist aggression as victimisation; or refuse to support the defence of western values, as Tory-run Buckinghamshire County Council is doing (to the horror of Wycombe’s Tory MP Paul Goodman) by refusing to fund its school’s defence against the imposition of Saudi-style Islamism upon its school uniform code.
Khan believes that the radicals have co-opted concerns about foreign policy to suit their cause. When she began to be worried about what the mosques were teaching her children, she decided instead to ask a female student to instruct them at home. Khan picks up the story: ‘She was in the kitchen making the tea and it was after the London bombings. She said, “What do you think about what’s happening in Palestine?” I got angry. I didn’t realise how patriotic I was getting. I turned round and said, “I do not care what is happening in Palestine or Israel. I give a damn about what is happening on my doorstep. I have family in London. Look at what is going to happen because of these few people. Look at the people who have died or had limbs amputated. Where were the Muslims then? Why did not anyone care? Because they were mostly white Christians’. And now they’ve turned the bombers’ graves into shrines! They’re just killers.”’
…I had too much rubbish fed in me that I would be too Westernised. I was told to keep my distance from you because I am a Muslim. It is still really hard to explain to you how you are conditioned. From a young age those thoughts are put in your head: “I am a Muslim. I do not mix with those people”. I would honestly say that we are more racist and more prejudiced than the English.’
Welcome once again to Londonistan." [ By the way, I favor not decreased but increased immigration to the U.S. And largely because the few Eurabians that don't want to submit to the knife will need someplace to flee. But even those proportionate few will probably ramp up to millions a year at some point in the next decade when you consider Greater Eurabia is home to 500,000,000... -ed. ]
Friday, February 09, 2007
More Peaceful Holocaust Denial
"SAN FRANCISCO - In a bizarre attack, a well-known author and Holocaust scholar was dragged out of a San Francisco hotel elevator by an apparent Holocaust denier who reportedly had been trailing him for weeks.
Police escorted Elie Wiesel to San Francisco International Airport on Feb. 1 after a man accosted Wiesel in the elevator at the Argent Hotel, at 50 Third St., after Wiesel participated in a panel discussion at a peace conference and before Wiesel was scheduled to catch a flight back to New York.
Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor and author of more than 40 books, including the memoir “Night,” about his experiences at Auschwitz, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1986." [ Why would someone who was there know anything about the Holocaust anyway? Sigh. -ed. ]
Police escorted Elie Wiesel to San Francisco International Airport on Feb. 1 after a man accosted Wiesel in the elevator at the Argent Hotel, at 50 Third St., after Wiesel participated in a panel discussion at a peace conference and before Wiesel was scheduled to catch a flight back to New York.
Wiesel, a Holocaust survivor and author of more than 40 books, including the memoir “Night,” about his experiences at Auschwitz, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1986." [ Why would someone who was there know anything about the Holocaust anyway? Sigh. -ed. ]
Because It Wasn't The Memetic Answer Of Course...
"It's difficult to understand the objection of the IG. If the activity broke no laws and violated no policies, what is inappropriate about having competing sets of analysts looking at intelligence to get alternative viewpoints? One of the criticisms made by Bush administration critics is that the White House relied on stovepiped intel analysis for the WMD question -- which came from the official CIA analysts and directed by George Tenet.
In this case, the Secretary and Undersecretary of Defense wanted an investigation of intel to determine whether Iraq had operational ties to al-Qaeda, a reasonable question given the circumstances. The CIA -- which the Democrats believe got it wrong on WMD -- didn't believe that radical Islamists would cooperate with the supposedly secular Saddam Hussein. Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz authorized Feith to review the intelligence to see if evidence existed for a different conclusion, and Feith found enough contacts between Saddam and AQ to at least challenge the notion that they would have never considered a partnership.
Instead, the IG scolded Feith for not following the consensus, and then not following the procedures for "rare" disagreement. That differs rather dramatically from the scolding given to the intel communities by the 9/11 Commission and enthusiastically supported by the same elements in Congress that now want a piece of Douglas Feith for daring to disagree and to do so publicly. Back then, dissenters got celebrated as visionaries who had the courage to try to wake up the decisionmakers. Now Congress wants to punish someone who essentially did what Congress demanded during those reviews." [ Did I forget to mention that Al Qaeda actually admitted a while ago that they have lost 4,000 fighting in Iraq? -ed. ]
In this case, the Secretary and Undersecretary of Defense wanted an investigation of intel to determine whether Iraq had operational ties to al-Qaeda, a reasonable question given the circumstances. The CIA -- which the Democrats believe got it wrong on WMD -- didn't believe that radical Islamists would cooperate with the supposedly secular Saddam Hussein. Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz authorized Feith to review the intelligence to see if evidence existed for a different conclusion, and Feith found enough contacts between Saddam and AQ to at least challenge the notion that they would have never considered a partnership.
Instead, the IG scolded Feith for not following the consensus, and then not following the procedures for "rare" disagreement. That differs rather dramatically from the scolding given to the intel communities by the 9/11 Commission and enthusiastically supported by the same elements in Congress that now want a piece of Douglas Feith for daring to disagree and to do so publicly. Back then, dissenters got celebrated as visionaries who had the courage to try to wake up the decisionmakers. Now Congress wants to punish someone who essentially did what Congress demanded during those reviews." [ Did I forget to mention that Al Qaeda actually admitted a while ago that they have lost 4,000 fighting in Iraq? -ed. ]
The Secret Place Corruption
"This budget week, there was one thing on which Democrats and Republicans agreed: It's time to do something about earmarks. And in a nod to voter disapproval with these special-interest projects, this year Congress will do its pork spending in secret.
Welcome to Congress's new and dirtier earmark game, in which the big spenders are setting all the rules. In front of the cameras, both parties claim to have found earmark religion, and are talking up a bill that would reform the way Congress asks for billions in goodies for lawmakers' home districts. Behind the scenes, they're working feverishly to keep the earmarks rolling, this time using a technique outside of the legislative process and hidden from public view."
Welcome to Congress's new and dirtier earmark game, in which the big spenders are setting all the rules. In front of the cameras, both parties claim to have found earmark religion, and are talking up a bill that would reform the way Congress asks for billions in goodies for lawmakers' home districts. Behind the scenes, they're working feverishly to keep the earmarks rolling, this time using a technique outside of the legislative process and hidden from public view."
The NetrootSens
"Every member of AEI's board of directors was graciously copied on the missive. We're told the Senators never bothered to contact AEI about the veracity of the reports, and by repeating the distortions, these four Democratic senators, wittingly or not, gave credence to falsehood.
For its part, Exxon appears unwilling to take this smear campaign lying down. Bribery can be a crime, and falsely accusing someone of a crime may well be defamation. A company spokesman says Exxon has written a letter to the Independent demanding a retraction.
One can only conclude from this episode that the environmental left and their political and media supporters now believe it is legitimate to quash debate on climate change and its consequences. This is known as orthodoxy, and, until now, science accepted the legitimacy of challenging it."
For its part, Exxon appears unwilling to take this smear campaign lying down. Bribery can be a crime, and falsely accusing someone of a crime may well be defamation. A company spokesman says Exxon has written a letter to the Independent demanding a retraction.
One can only conclude from this episode that the environmental left and their political and media supporters now believe it is legitimate to quash debate on climate change and its consequences. This is known as orthodoxy, and, until now, science accepted the legitimacy of challenging it."
Mencken Finally Hits His Sell By Date? Pray For It -- But Don't Bet On It...
"Those shows' producers may be the first ever to go broke by underestimating the intelligence of the American public. Also, the tv news folks have been going beyond their usual negativity and sensationalism by playing up the bad news even more to make Bush look bad, but judging from this story by doing that they're also chasing away their audience, which now finds their programs too depressing. Oops."
In A Nutshell
"Thus, for example, all truth is relative, free will is attenuated through the cult of victimology, envy (perhaps the greatest enemy of spiritual fulfillment) is promoted as a defining virtue, and transcendent moral obligations are reduced to an arbitrary cultural agreement. Leftism is defined by an externalizing consciousness that locates the reason for unhappiness or failure outside the self. On the other hand, one of the greatest gifts of a proper spiritual education is that it forces one to locate the reasons for one's unhappiness within. Every leftist politician arrives with the perverse gospel that, "it's not your fault! You are a victim! Don't be responsible for your life! Liberty is a pernicious illusion anyway! Transfer your power to me, and I will rescue you!" "
Thursday, February 08, 2007
Questions Of The Golden Hour
"But it comes down to this. It's no secret how the dynamics of social conflict works in the Arab world. There's a pattern to it that has been operating for centuries, and it's all about factions running out of steam (as expressed in terms of money and fighters). Iraqis understand this, which is why the Shia want the Sunni Arabs run out of the country. The United States understands this, and wants to avoid the ugly photo-opportunities that would accompany the flight of the Sunni Arabs. Many Iraqis believe the upcoming "Baghdad Pacification" campaign will only delay the Sunni expulsion. Pro-Iran groups in Iraq, and around the world, believe that disarming Shia death squads will only make Shia Arabs more vulnerable to Sunni Arab terrorism. About the only thing everyone can agree on is that peace will come when the Sunni Arabs are gone. Well, maybe.
The American belief is, that enough factions (there are several dozen factions) on all sides (there are over a dozen different wars going on) are beaten down sufficiently, they will accept a ceasefire and peace. That's not an end to the war, just as the 1990 Lebanese peace deal (ending fifteen years of violence) is about to be revoked. The Israelis and Palestinians have been going at it for decades. The Yemeni civil war is almost as old. Most Iraqis want peace, and the belief is that killing a few more of those who don't will make it happen, at least for a while." [ I continue to be pessimistic about our success during the Golden Hour -- even if we did a stellar job which we're nowhere near with the partial exception of the military. But I continue to support it. I don't have the taste for truly large scale wars -- surely you remember WWII? -- that the left does... -ed. ]
The American belief is, that enough factions (there are several dozen factions) on all sides (there are over a dozen different wars going on) are beaten down sufficiently, they will accept a ceasefire and peace. That's not an end to the war, just as the 1990 Lebanese peace deal (ending fifteen years of violence) is about to be revoked. The Israelis and Palestinians have been going at it for decades. The Yemeni civil war is almost as old. Most Iraqis want peace, and the belief is that killing a few more of those who don't will make it happen, at least for a while." [ I continue to be pessimistic about our success during the Golden Hour -- even if we did a stellar job which we're nowhere near with the partial exception of the military. But I continue to support it. I don't have the taste for truly large scale wars -- surely you remember WWII? -- that the left does... -ed. ]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
