Saturday, November 25, 2006
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
Hugo suffers
Ir's good to wake up to a story like this -- and from the NYT... Venezuelan’s Diatribe at U.N. May Have Backfired
Sunday, October 22, 2006
If you're in DC
And a history of religion fan, go to see this impressive collection of the earliest Christian texts that exist (not for the fundies among us). It's the definitive proof of the evolution of the Bible, as pieced together from the earliest fragments of stories that later went into the Bible.
In the Beginning
It's at the Sackler Gallery.
In the Beginning
It's at the Sackler Gallery.
Friday, September 22, 2006
Squandered Goodwill?
There is a persistant belief that Bush has single-handedly squandered the world's collective post 9-11 goodwill.
Yesterday Iowa Senator Tom Harkin said just that.
"Harkin says, "We tend to forget that a few days after 9-1-1 thousands, thousands of Iranians marched in a candlelight procession in Teheran in support of the United States. Every Muslim country was basically on our side. Just think, in five years, President Bush has squandered all that." Harkin says the U.S. has put billions of dollars into the Iraq war, when it could be helping poor countries with things like clean water, medical aid and education."
This attitude is wrong for two reasons:
1) The immediate reaction to 9-11 is not the baseline on which to understand post 9-11 feelings. Any president (even his highness Clinton) who began bombing to retaliate for the terrorist attack would have earned the ire of the world's lefties and the visceral hatred of many of the world's muslims. This ire, over time, would be increased by repeated media attention on the anti-war minority (majority in most European countries), the repeated condemnation by muslim religious leaders who view the war as an assault on their religion, by the governments of muslim countries who fear that their regime might be next, and by the typical boredom Americans have towards a war that grinds away without spectacular video footage of success.
2) Helping countries with things like clean water is fine, but does nothing to immediately reduce the threat of another al-Qaeda type attack. If anything, this strategy is philosophically closely aligned with the Bush doctrine of bringing democracy to the Middle East. In each case the effects are structural and will bring benefits at some indeterminate point in the future -- not now.
Even without the Iraq war to keep lefties and muslims agitated, the Afghanistan war would have been enough to cause similar feelings, albeit at a slower pace. If Americans are to face reality, then the cold, harsh light of truth would show that the anti-war crowd will hate war no matter the cause, and many muslims will perceive any war against a nation of muslims as a war against their religion.
For these groups the unspoken resolution to each of these grievances is that we should never have attacked the Taliban, much less Saddam.
Rational people should recognize that any attempt to defend ourselves would result in more or less the same state of affairs that exists now: goodwill squandered.
This pernicious myth about sqandered goodwill should be put to bed.
Yesterday Iowa Senator Tom Harkin said just that.
"Harkin says, "We tend to forget that a few days after 9-1-1 thousands, thousands of Iranians marched in a candlelight procession in Teheran in support of the United States. Every Muslim country was basically on our side. Just think, in five years, President Bush has squandered all that." Harkin says the U.S. has put billions of dollars into the Iraq war, when it could be helping poor countries with things like clean water, medical aid and education."
This attitude is wrong for two reasons:
1) The immediate reaction to 9-11 is not the baseline on which to understand post 9-11 feelings. Any president (even his highness Clinton) who began bombing to retaliate for the terrorist attack would have earned the ire of the world's lefties and the visceral hatred of many of the world's muslims. This ire, over time, would be increased by repeated media attention on the anti-war minority (majority in most European countries), the repeated condemnation by muslim religious leaders who view the war as an assault on their religion, by the governments of muslim countries who fear that their regime might be next, and by the typical boredom Americans have towards a war that grinds away without spectacular video footage of success.
2) Helping countries with things like clean water is fine, but does nothing to immediately reduce the threat of another al-Qaeda type attack. If anything, this strategy is philosophically closely aligned with the Bush doctrine of bringing democracy to the Middle East. In each case the effects are structural and will bring benefits at some indeterminate point in the future -- not now.
Even without the Iraq war to keep lefties and muslims agitated, the Afghanistan war would have been enough to cause similar feelings, albeit at a slower pace. If Americans are to face reality, then the cold, harsh light of truth would show that the anti-war crowd will hate war no matter the cause, and many muslims will perceive any war against a nation of muslims as a war against their religion.
For these groups the unspoken resolution to each of these grievances is that we should never have attacked the Taliban, much less Saddam.
Rational people should recognize that any attempt to defend ourselves would result in more or less the same state of affairs that exists now: goodwill squandered.
This pernicious myth about sqandered goodwill should be put to bed.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Reagan alive in Warsaw
Reagan lives...
In Warsaw among admirers of his committment to bring down Communism, that is.
Think Arabs will give Bush a statue in 20 years thanking him for his committment to bring democracy to the Middle East?
My money is on no.
In Warsaw among admirers of his committment to bring down Communism, that is.
Think Arabs will give Bush a statue in 20 years thanking him for his committment to bring democracy to the Middle East?
My money is on no.
Diabolo
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called President Bush "the devil" in a fiery speech to the United Nations...
Venezuelans should be ashamed more than amused at Chavez's rant. Besides becoming a front page entry in the world's press and getting some laughs from (presumably) anti-US and anti-Bush UN delegates, what is such a speech expected to accomplish?
It's embarassing that the president of any country is childish enough to label another president the devil and then comment on how the place still reeks of sulphur.
If lefties around the country were on the fence about Chavez's intentions with respect to the US, this speech should be a wake-up call.
Venezuelans should be ashamed more than amused at Chavez's rant. Besides becoming a front page entry in the world's press and getting some laughs from (presumably) anti-US and anti-Bush UN delegates, what is such a speech expected to accomplish?
It's embarassing that the president of any country is childish enough to label another president the devil and then comment on how the place still reeks of sulphur.
If lefties around the country were on the fence about Chavez's intentions with respect to the US, this speech should be a wake-up call.
Sunday, July 30, 2006
Sitting in Cairo
Israel's new war might make some hawks in DC happy, but as I sit here in Cairo, it looks increasingly like a bad idea.
Alright, alright, Hizbullah needed to be shown who was numero uno in those parts. Fine. And then?
Since the primary group providing services on the ground in Southern Lebanon was Hizbullah, and since generally the whole area was Shi'i, how does Israel intend to win the battle? They've lost hearts and minds. Because everyone is Shi'i, the military solution looks winnable only if they are willing to kill every man and teenager in every village south of the Litani.
Short of outright slaughter on a massive scale, they are likely making matters worse.
Getting out will be tough. Like we did in Baghdad, but next door...
I am not naive enought to think that political solutions will solve the underlying problems, and not just push them to another day.
But until we have the stomach for a much bigger war, that's about all that we have available.
Alright, alright, Hizbullah needed to be shown who was numero uno in those parts. Fine. And then?
Since the primary group providing services on the ground in Southern Lebanon was Hizbullah, and since generally the whole area was Shi'i, how does Israel intend to win the battle? They've lost hearts and minds. Because everyone is Shi'i, the military solution looks winnable only if they are willing to kill every man and teenager in every village south of the Litani.
Short of outright slaughter on a massive scale, they are likely making matters worse.
Getting out will be tough. Like we did in Baghdad, but next door...
I am not naive enought to think that political solutions will solve the underlying problems, and not just push them to another day.
But until we have the stomach for a much bigger war, that's about all that we have available.
Friday, April 28, 2006
A Really Stupid Idea
Unless their goal is to tick off as many people as possible, the pro(?) illegal immigration crowd should not release a the US national anthem in Spanish. It just has all the trappings of an argument that didn't have to be. In fact, rather than showing that many Spanish-speaking immigrants are welcome members of the society (as I believe), this song serves only to bolster the casuse of those who believe that the Spanish speaking immigrants are unassimilatable wretches.
It's a stupid, stupid way to make a political point about wanting illegals to remain in this country.
An Anthem's Discordant Notes
It's a stupid, stupid way to make a political point about wanting illegals to remain in this country.
An Anthem's Discordant Notes
Monday, April 10, 2006
Reasons for scepticism
From the Telegraph's opinion section.
Two simple graphs provide needed context, and exemplify the dynamic, fluctuating nature of climate change. The first is a temperature curve for the last six million years, which shows a three-million year period when it was several degrees warmer than today, followed by a three-million year cooling trend which was accompanied by an increase in the magnitude of the pervasive, higher frequency, cold and warm climate cycles. During the last three such warm (interglacial) periods, temperatures at high latitudes were as much as 5 degrees warmer than today's. The second graph shows the average global temperature over the last eight years, which has proved to be a period of stasis.
Two simple graphs provide needed context, and exemplify the dynamic, fluctuating nature of climate change. The first is a temperature curve for the last six million years, which shows a three-million year period when it was several degrees warmer than today, followed by a three-million year cooling trend which was accompanied by an increase in the magnitude of the pervasive, higher frequency, cold and warm climate cycles. During the last three such warm (interglacial) periods, temperatures at high latitudes were as much as 5 degrees warmer than today's. The second graph shows the average global temperature over the last eight years, which has proved to be a period of stasis.
Thursday, April 06, 2006
Interesting Statistic
Reuters is reporting that
Some 146 people die each week in the northern region where rebels of the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) have waged war against the Uganda government for two decades. War-related deaths in the region are three times higher than the number of killings in Iraq since the US-led invasion that toppled the regime of Saddam Hussein in 2003 -- a death rate that represents 0.17 deaths per 10,000 people, compared with 0.052 per 10,000 in Iraq, according to the report, entitled "Counting the Cost: 20 years of war in northern Uganda."
We don't hear much about this issue, while the media concentrates on making Iraq look like Dante's lowest circle of Hell.
Some 146 people die each week in the northern region where rebels of the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) have waged war against the Uganda government for two decades. War-related deaths in the region are three times higher than the number of killings in Iraq since the US-led invasion that toppled the regime of Saddam Hussein in 2003 -- a death rate that represents 0.17 deaths per 10,000 people, compared with 0.052 per 10,000 in Iraq, according to the report, entitled "Counting the Cost: 20 years of war in northern Uganda."
We don't hear much about this issue, while the media concentrates on making Iraq look like Dante's lowest circle of Hell.
Hard to Keep a Good Operation Secret Anymore
This BBC story says a lot about the difficulty of conducting operations using modern tradecraft. The operations hardly ever remain secret for long.
A former US Diplomat believes that the current spying scandal in Greece is a case of our own intelligence agencies not trusting others. While his argument might have some truth to it (namely, that some people within the intelligence community might believe that some foreigners are not trustworthy), I doubt that an operation of this size would be conducted solely because of xenophobia and sensitivity to terrorism. I imagine that nearly every intelligence agency in the world had its ears to the ground during the Olympics, listening for impending plots.
But, as with many things overseas, when you don't know whom to blame, blame the CIA.
He [former US Diplomat] argues American intelligence agencies would not have trusted the Greeks with the massive security operation surrounding the Athens Olympics in August 2004 set up to counter any potential terrorist threat.
"They believe you cannot trust foreigners, that foreigners are incompetent and of dubious trustworthiness," he says. "You owe it to yourself if you have the capability, to have an independent ear listening to them and I think that is what this was."
A former US Diplomat believes that the current spying scandal in Greece is a case of our own intelligence agencies not trusting others. While his argument might have some truth to it (namely, that some people within the intelligence community might believe that some foreigners are not trustworthy), I doubt that an operation of this size would be conducted solely because of xenophobia and sensitivity to terrorism. I imagine that nearly every intelligence agency in the world had its ears to the ground during the Olympics, listening for impending plots.
But, as with many things overseas, when you don't know whom to blame, blame the CIA.
He [former US Diplomat] argues American intelligence agencies would not have trusted the Greeks with the massive security operation surrounding the Athens Olympics in August 2004 set up to counter any potential terrorist threat.
"They believe you cannot trust foreigners, that foreigners are incompetent and of dubious trustworthiness," he says. "You owe it to yourself if you have the capability, to have an independent ear listening to them and I think that is what this was."
Tuesday, March 21, 2006
Venezuela
This post will be my 5,634th post about the People's Republic of Chavez.
According to the NYT today it is a place for lefties of all stripes to go on pilgrimage -- and possibly decide to stay for good. After all, who needs democracy when you have free universities? And freedom of the press is worthless when that lunatic Bush is trying to kill you using harsh, harsh words. They made me cry a little.
Even Harry Belafonte and Cornel West agree that Caracas kicks a whole lotta ass! And if those two giants of political insight are wrong, then dear reader, I don't wanna be right! You with me? Whoooooooooo-hoooooooooooo!
Stay tuned for next week's Sunday Styles section where cute little communist bandanas are contrasted with No Blood for Oil organic tees in a range of colors. Also, we'll feature an interview with a graduate student in comparative literature who compares Venezuela favourably with "a rich cornucopia of life that, like, is isn't trying to be an imperial overlord for the rest of the world."
Be there.
According to the NYT today it is a place for lefties of all stripes to go on pilgrimage -- and possibly decide to stay for good. After all, who needs democracy when you have free universities? And freedom of the press is worthless when that lunatic Bush is trying to kill you using harsh, harsh words. They made me cry a little.
Even Harry Belafonte and Cornel West agree that Caracas kicks a whole lotta ass! And if those two giants of political insight are wrong, then dear reader, I don't wanna be right! You with me? Whoooooooooo-hoooooooooooo!
Stay tuned for next week's Sunday Styles section where cute little communist bandanas are contrasted with No Blood for Oil organic tees in a range of colors. Also, we'll feature an interview with a graduate student in comparative literature who compares Venezuela favourably with "a rich cornucopia of life that, like, is isn't trying to be an imperial overlord for the rest of the world."
Be there.
Monday, March 20, 2006
Plight Deepens for Black Men, Studies Warn
An article today in the NYT cites the following research conclusions:
¶The share of young black men without jobs has climbed relentlessly, with only a slight pause during the economic peak of the late 1990's. In 2000, 65 percent of black male high school dropouts in their 20's were jobless — that is, unable to find work, not seeking it or incarcerated. By 2004, the share had grown to 72 percent, compared with 34 percent of white and 19 percent of Hispanic dropouts. Even when high school graduates were included, half of black men in their 20's were jobless in 2004, up from 46 percent in 2000.
¶Incarceration rates climbed in the 1990's and reached historic highs in the past few years. In 1995, 16 percent of black men in their 20's who did not attend college were in jail or prison; by 2004, 21 percent were incarcerated. By their mid-30's, 6 in 10 black men who had dropped out of school had spent time in prison.
How did this state of affairs occur, given that "Dropout rates for Hispanic youths are as bad or worse but are not associated with nearly as much unemployment or crime, the data show"?
Well, that's an easy answer: put blame on everyone except the people themselves.
Terrible schools, absent parents, racism, the decline in blue collar jobs and a subculture that glorifies swagger over work have all been cited as causes of the deepening ruin of black youths. Scholars — and the young men themselves — agree that all of these issues must be addressed.
Note the use of the passive voice here. The author can imply his conclusion without actually saying it. Then he asserts the correctness of this oblique assertion with agreements from the two groups who should know more than everyone else about this subject, scholars and the men themselves. [Dear reader, are you one of these two groups? No? Then you aren't qualified to render enlightened opinion. --Ed]
Nice balance.
The final funny element of this story is an attempt to explain how so many people end up incarcerated. Expressed with a degree of shock and possibly disgust, the author's comment strikes me as laugh out loud funny:
Improved collection of money from absent fathers has been a pillar of welfare overhaul. But the system can leave young men feeling overwhelmed with debt and deter them from seeking legal work, since a large share of any earnings could be seized.
About half of all black men in their late 20's and early 30's who did not go to college are noncustodial fathers, according to Mr. Holzer. From the fathers' viewpoint, support obligations "amount to a tax on earnings," he said.
Welcome to responsibility, gentlemen.
This article is a great illustration of the gulf in understanding that exists between me and most NYT contributors.
¶The share of young black men without jobs has climbed relentlessly, with only a slight pause during the economic peak of the late 1990's. In 2000, 65 percent of black male high school dropouts in their 20's were jobless — that is, unable to find work, not seeking it or incarcerated. By 2004, the share had grown to 72 percent, compared with 34 percent of white and 19 percent of Hispanic dropouts. Even when high school graduates were included, half of black men in their 20's were jobless in 2004, up from 46 percent in 2000.
¶Incarceration rates climbed in the 1990's and reached historic highs in the past few years. In 1995, 16 percent of black men in their 20's who did not attend college were in jail or prison; by 2004, 21 percent were incarcerated. By their mid-30's, 6 in 10 black men who had dropped out of school had spent time in prison.
How did this state of affairs occur, given that "Dropout rates for Hispanic youths are as bad or worse but are not associated with nearly as much unemployment or crime, the data show"?
Well, that's an easy answer: put blame on everyone except the people themselves.
Terrible schools, absent parents, racism, the decline in blue collar jobs and a subculture that glorifies swagger over work have all been cited as causes of the deepening ruin of black youths. Scholars — and the young men themselves — agree that all of these issues must be addressed.
Note the use of the passive voice here. The author can imply his conclusion without actually saying it. Then he asserts the correctness of this oblique assertion with agreements from the two groups who should know more than everyone else about this subject, scholars and the men themselves. [Dear reader, are you one of these two groups? No? Then you aren't qualified to render enlightened opinion. --Ed]
Nice balance.
The final funny element of this story is an attempt to explain how so many people end up incarcerated. Expressed with a degree of shock and possibly disgust, the author's comment strikes me as laugh out loud funny:
Improved collection of money from absent fathers has been a pillar of welfare overhaul. But the system can leave young men feeling overwhelmed with debt and deter them from seeking legal work, since a large share of any earnings could be seized.
About half of all black men in their late 20's and early 30's who did not go to college are noncustodial fathers, according to Mr. Holzer. From the fathers' viewpoint, support obligations "amount to a tax on earnings," he said.
Welcome to responsibility, gentlemen.
This article is a great illustration of the gulf in understanding that exists between me and most NYT contributors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
