Common Sense Conspirator

Long Delay

2008-12-03T18:41:00.000-08:00

There has been a long delay in posting... apologies. Work transitions have made my life a little hectic.

I'll be going to Central America in January, which--barring violent relief of my digital camera by hooligans--should provide some excellent photography for my blog.

On another note, my plans for the first half of next year have changed. 14 days ago I was told I was going to Afghanistan next August for work. 10 days ago I was told I was going in April. 5 days ago I was told I was going ASAP. Today, the deployment office got confused and told me I was going to Iraq. With everything settled, I'll be heading to Afghanistan in January and will return for months later. Again, great opportunity for anecdotes and photographs.

Georgians, the Ruskies and My Job

2008-08-21T16:59:00.000-07:00

Not a usual post... I digress and talk about my interest.

I told a friend of mine the other day, "You know I have best job ever? My job is to follow, understand, and analyze conflict. News is old to me--or I helped create it. Revelations in the media are pretty "duh". You should switch careers."

I work in the defense/foreign policy world. I made the above statement because I spent the majority of my workweek following and assessing the war in the Caucasus (normally, I would pounce on a layperson and ask, "Which one?" However, I am referring to the thrashing of Georgia by the Ruskies.) I think this cartoon sums it up nicely:

I will not recount the conflict here; I also can't be bothered to type out in depth analysis. Suffices to say that the Bear has come out of hibernation. Not to say that the Russians haven't been flexing their muscles, reasserting their influence along their periphery, beefing up their military, or provoking Georgia and planning this operation for a long time. They have. At the same time, Georgia acted foolishly in a vacuum: did they believe that the US and NATO would fight open war with Russia over a handful of separatists, despite economic, political, and military considerations and investments? Remember that whole nuclear deterrence thing between Russia and NATO?

Josh Foust at Registan has been covering this particular buildup for over a year now. Russia was waiting to pounce and Georgia grossly miscalculated (i.e. was dumb)--see above cartoon. Nothing new. However, some huge observations can be drawn from the conflict.

1. Russia is testing the US and NATO. By invading and staying put--in some cases, digging in--she is trying to see how far she can press her luck.

2. Russia is proving that Europe can do nothing against her--Russia supplies Europe with over one third of its oil and nearly 40% of its gas. Europe is helpless.

3. I am a recovering idealist and say this with regret. Half of me wants to stand by the Georgians, however badly they screwed this up. However, the realist side admits that war with Russia--given security concerns, energy pressures, and economic issues--over tiny Georgia will not happen. Realpolitik, people. The US and UK could posture and put a couple of Carrier Groups in the Black Sea; Russia would call our bluff, we would not risk open war, and we would look even weaker.

4. Saakishvili has learned that putting a European Union flag behind you does not mean you are a member.

5. From an 'academic study of war' aspect, this war has shown us the blurred lines between conventional and non-conventional wars. Russia invaded with troops, tanks, and jets--yes. However, she deployed irregulars and paramilitaries and relied on local Ossetian fighters as well, who often carried out the nasty bit of warfare we'll call The Spoils. Moreover, the Russian have revised their claims of Georgian ethnic cleansing and civilian deaths--from 1,600 civilian Ossetian dead to 130. Hmmm. Information warfare attempt that didn't take?

6. Speaking of information warfare (IO), the kinetic assault on Georgia was coupled with an IT assault--the first time this has happened. Georgia government and military websites and servers were bombarded with DOS attacks that attempt to flood, overwhelm, and shut down servers, restricting access, information dissemination, and communications. We're talking Cyberdyne and SkyNet.

7. The Russians have pumped holes through international law. To be fair, this who area (the Caucasus) is dodgy to begin with. However, if you weren't paying attention, you wouldn't have noticed that Russia issued Russian passports/citizenship to most Ossetians and Abkhaz in Georgia. Legality? When violence erupted, they asserted, "We will protect our citizens." Legality? Uh... Why doesn't the EU issue passports to all Chechens and then "defend her citizens"? Why doesn't the US issue passports and citizenship to all Tibetans and then defend her "people" from China?

8. The whole episode will make NATO and the EU review their invitation to Georgia. If there is a chance of this happening again, there is no way that continental Europe--and less chance the US and UK--will enter a defensive treaty with Georgia that potentially put NATO into likely confrontation with Russia over 30,000 separatists in the Caucasus. See Observation #3.

Sad, fascinating, and exciting all at the same time. My boss asked me the other day where I would like to be stationed or work during my career. I said the Caucasus. Call me crazy, but I doubt I'll be bored there.

Sandeela vs. Caylee OR Ratings vs Real News

2008-07-23T16:48:00.000-07:00

I have long been disgusted by media bias in reporting on abused, missing, or kidnapped girls. Soccer moms, young women, and the West at large thirst and beg for news stories when cute, white, photogenic, or socio-economically-matched girls are affected. Natalie Holloway is an excellent example. Caylee Anthony is another. Madeleine McCann is unfortunately another.

As far as I'm concerned, Natalie Holloway was a stupid partier who got drunk and agreed to "take a ride" with strangers. Social Darwinism and natural selection at work. Caylee and Madeleine are different cases--their situations are an unfortunate result of bad parenting and a dangerous world. And despite how this article may read, I do hope and pray that Madeleine and Caylee are found safely.

However, why do we hear about these particular stories? Women and girls go missing by the millions. 113-200 million women and girls are "missing" as I am typing this. Over 1.5 million lose their lives through violence or neglect every year. Why are these three special?

Moreover, given the recent premiere of Honor Killings in the US through the murder of an equally unique and important American girl, Sandeela Kanwal, why is Caylee dominating news coverage? If anything, the advent of this violent epidemic on American shores should dominate the news. Yet we hear very little to nothing about it in favor of another story of bad parenting and unfortunate mishap.

800,000 kids go missing in the country every year. How often do you hear stories of little Puerto Rican girls in New York, black girls in Birmingham, or Mexican-American girls in California being kidnapped or going missing? Ever? Can you recall one? I can't. Why is this? Are all the missing kids white and middle class?

Is it ratings versus real news? This is my argument. When America sees a non-white child go missing, they dismiss it as crime from the inner city or some other social evil that we don't want to talk about. When a poor kid goes missing, it's probably some white trash father or podunk redneck to blame. More than this, most people in this country are white and middle class--when a story hits close to home or seems like it could affect them (or their kids in this case), they watch. The need. The yearn for every detail. It becomes a soap opera that penetrates America's heart; deep down inside we want the Lost to be found so we can rest assured at night that our kids are safe.

Thus, the media ignores real news--Sandeela's demise at the behest of her "dis-honored" father--for the Soap Opera this-can-happen-to-you news--Caylee, Madeleine, and Natalie--so that we watch...and watch...and wait for news. To quote a graduate professor of mine: "The Press are whores to sensationalism and ratings." I hold this truth to be self-evident.

America's First Honor Killing

2008-07-23T16:38:00.000-07:00

I remember reading about America's first honor killing in the news and almost wrote an op-ed on it. I never got around to it and instead am posting here.

For those that don't follow this, an honor killing is usually perpetrated against a women by her family because she has "shamed" them, either by wearing makeup, taking off her headscarf, have a non-Muslim boyfriend, drinking, or escaping from arranged marriages. It occurs almost entirely among Turks, Kurds, Afghans, Pakistanis, and Indians of Islamic faith, although some cases have involved Arabs and other ethnicities from the Near East, as well as Christians, Sikhs, and Hindus throughout.

Most people on this continent are probably oblivious to the proliferation of honor killings in Europe--so numerous now (in the multiples of hundreds) that Scotland Yard set up the Honor Crimes Unit and EU leaders have set up a pan-European anti-Honor killing squad.

What was shocking is that the US case didn't occur in L.A., New York, the Washington area, or any of the major population centers for Central/South Asians, Arabs, Kurds, and Turks. It happened, instead, in small town Jonesboro, GA, just down the road from where I grew up.

Thinking of some prominent examples of the 5,000 (UN estimate) annual honor killings... I remember reading a story about a young 16 year old Turkish girl in Germany. She wore some makeup. Her youngest brother--perhaps 13--shot her in the face in the schoolyard. He had been ordered to by his father and older brothers. Why? Because she was living a western life and he, as a minor, would have his record wiped clean at 18.

In 2003 in Britain, a Kurdish man, Abdalla Yones, stabbed his 16 year old daughter 11 times and then slit her throat because she had a Christian boyfriend.

One Turkish-German women, Hatin Surucu, had been married off to a cousin in Turkey at 16. She escaped at 22 with her son and fled to Berlin, where she took up residence at a single mothers home. She finished school and began specialist training as an electrician. Her family tracked her down and her 3 brothers shot her as she waited for a bus in 2005.

Horrible, shocking, disgusting. I hope this archaic and inhumane practice is wiped out before more occur in our country (although the murder of two sisters in Texas is suspect). Paramount is the message that while we enjoy a multicultural open society with freedom of worship, this does not trump the secular, individual, and humans rights laws that we hold dear and which enable this country to prosper.

Update: Here is a well written op-ed by Fipp Avlon on the subject. Avlon is a big proponent of centrist independent politics and is a professor at Stanford University. He was formerly Rudy Guiliani's top speechwriter.

4:86PM: Time has shifted to the metric system in the UK

2008-07-16T16:24:00.000-07:00

UK civil servants use calculators to tell time.

This is sad. A meter maid in the UK wrote a guy a ticket despite the fact that the gentleman has plenty of time left on the meter. Why? Because the meter maid thought that time operated in the metric system. Didn't you know there were 100 minutes per hour?

When the victim of the stupidity protested that he had paid for 75 minutes of parking:

"The warden disagreed and tried to prove his point with a calculator.

He tapped in 14.49 and added 0.75 to produce a total of 15.24, claiming this meant Mr Alsop's ticket had expired at 3.24pm, some 17 minutes before he returned to his car."

The victim tried to explain, but the traffic warden ignored him and kept on ticketing. Coupled with my recent post on the failure of education standards, this story is not surprising.

Lunacy: 4 Common Sense: 2

Car Thieves Are Covered by Our Insurance

2008-07-16T16:01:00.000-07:00

Read the absurdity here.

Seriously. A young guy in the West Midlands (UK) had his car stolen. The thief rammed a police officer trying to evade arrest. Following standard police procedures, the Police charged the victim's insurance for thief-induced damage to the patrol car. The insurance company, in turn, charged the victim £1,000 ($2000US)!!

Two things: 1) Let's explore the outer limits of this line of thinking and 2) let's talk about personal responsibility.

I can understand if a child's guardians or parents are held accountable or a vicious dog's owner is responsible for his misbehavior. I can also understand some instances of negligence (i.e. you place a loaded pistol on a desk next to a deranged suicidal maniac or otherwise enable a delinquent act).

So, when is one responsible for inanimate objects? Perhaps when they are in your possession?

I would not sue McDonalds because I spilled hot coffee on me--it's my dumbass fault.

You shouldn't--and have thus far been unable to--sue gun manufacturers for crimes committed with their products.

Specific to cars--If I lend my car to a friend, I understand--by law--that I am also lending out my insurance. However, if he steals it, I have no control and am thus absolved. I was neither negligent nor enabling.

Secondly, what happened to personal responsibility? If this criminal did it, he should have to answer for it. Bottom line. That's it. The idea that the government is specifically dispensing blame to those that a) they know can pay and b) had no part in the accident is disgusting.

Hopefully the citizens of the UK will take notice and lobby their MPs to end this nonsense.

Perfect Caption

2008-07-14T16:22:00.000-07:00

I found this image online yesterday in the Post's Day in Pictures.

I was a bit traumatized, yet not surprised. These gentlemen are celebrating the Tour de France. Can you guess their nationality? I'm sure all you Brits can. Keep in mind that these grown Frenchmen are celebrating a national sporting event by dressing up like characters on one of the most popular French TV shows... so there is no excuse!

I could unleash a multitude of France jokes, but these are available at the link below. I will, however, offer a perfect caption and a timeless quote of relevance.

The perfect caption: The Tour de France is so popular with the French because it's the one sport where you don't need balls.

Brilliant. What would Napoleon say about his compatriots? Oh...wait, Bony was Corsican. Nevermind.

Secondly, literary genius and iconic American Mark Twain had this to say about our Francophone brethren:

"France has neither winter nor summer nor morals. Apart from these drawbacks it is a fine country. France has usually been governed by prostitutes."

Truer words have never been spoken.

For further comic relief at the expense of the Fifth Republic, go to google, type in "French Military Victories" and click "I'm Feeling Lucky".

"Black Holes", "White Lies", "Yellow Journalism", and "Brown Noses"

2008-07-10T10:46:00.000-07:00

Dallas County commissioner John Wiley Price and Judge Thomas Jones insist that the term “Black Hole” is racist. During a County Commission meeting, white Commissioner Kenneth Mayfield called the traffic ticket processing office a “black hole” in reference to its lack of organization and accounting. Antagonists Jones and Price immediately protested this “racist” comment and demanded an apology. Fortunately, Mayfield stood his ground. Aren’t we past this, people?

Find the article here.

Do the phrases “White Lie”, “Yellow Journalism”, and “Brown Nose” equally offend the multitude of ethnicities and races that this country encompasses?

Did Judge Jones and Mr. Price fail high school science? Did they even go to high school? Are they entirely removed from educated discourse? How can one possible imply that the term is racist?

Black is defined as: “the color of objects that do not emit or reflect light in any part of the visible spectrum.” (FYI: We “see” things through light reflecting off of them.)

As we all know, Black Holes are places in space where the gravitational field is so strong that light cannot escape from them. Therefore, because light cannot escape—hence reflect for our eyes to process—they appear as black voids.

I wonder what Stephen Hawking would say to such idiocy. I, for one, believe we should ostracize the people of Dallas for electing such fine public servants.

According to their logic, almost any word can be racist. I am offended by the equally fascinating stellar phenomenon of “White Dwarfs." “White Dwarfs” are defined as “degenerate Dwarfs” given the fact that they are in the latter stages of a star’s decay.

I can’t imagine what a Matt Roloff of Little People, Big World fame would say, given the fact that he is a Caucasian Little Person (implying through the Jones-Price equation that he is a degenerate).

Let’s get back to reality, folks—or at least start electing public servants who can compete in Who's Smarter Than a Fifth Grader. Fortunately, Commissioner Mayfield and bloggers are standing their ground, chalking one up for Common Sense.

Common Sense: 2 Lunacy: 2

Offensive Puppies

2008-07-01T12:33:00.000-07:00

Read this.

The Tayside Police in Scotland sent out postcards informing the populace that a new non-emergency number was being set up. On the postcard was the Force's "newest recruit", a 7-month old German Shepherd puppy named Rebel who just "graduated" from initial obedience training. He's adorable.

However, local Muslims are so offended by an "unclean" dog being shown on official government postcards--regardless of his positive civic intent--that they are boycotting the postcards/numbers, refusing to display them in their shops, and have lobbied Dundee city counselors enough to have an "investigation" called for. The police are backtracking, apologizing for not consulting their "diversity" expert.

Eight hours after the Daily Mail broke the story at least 64 comments had been left by our Cousins across the Pond--every single one was outright condemnation of the absurdity, lack of common sense, and government retreat. Some enlightening comments include: "What a load of old tosh! Since when have puppies been offensive?", "When will there be an end to all this stupidity?", "We're a bullied nation.", "No wonder the police are useless today when so much of their training is devoted to this rubbish.", and, most aptly, "I am outraged that they are outraged." They've got it right.

Unfortunately, the government hasn't caught on...so it counts as a loss.

Common Sense: 1 Lunacy: 2

The Limits of Absurdity and the Failure of Education Standards

2008-07-01T08:22:00.000-07:00

I was sent an article by a Scottish friend of mine. Read The Times article here.

For non-British readers: In the English and many related educational systems, the GCSE's are a series of tests taken around the age of 16. Further schooling beyond this point (referred to as "Sixth Form", which culminates in "A-levels" testing that qualifies one for Uni entrance) is optional. Thus, GCSEs are sort of final required tests showing that one is capable of functioning in society--a terrifying concept.

The sub-title of this article reads, "Write ‘f*** off’ on a GCSE paper and you’ll get 7.5%. Add an exclamation mark and it’ll go up to 11%."

The question was: "Describe the room you are in." The student simply wrote, "F*** off". Apparently, the Head Examiner for the English GCSEs awarded the student a 7.5% because the phrase conveyed "meaning" and had proper word order. Apparently, if the student has used an exclamation point, he would have gotten a higher grade since this required a more advanced command of the English language.

Is this honestly how we prepare our young people for adulthood? What has caused our standards to drop to such appalling levels? More importantly, where is the logic in the Examiner's actions? This is where common sense should have prevailed; unfortunately for Western civilization, it failed to overcome rigid insular grading standards. Fortunately, all my friends across the pond are as appalled as I am.

Common Sense: 1 Lunacy: 1

Cultural Amnesia

2008-06-07T13:18:00.001-07:00

I recently attended a Hudson Institute symposium on the Power of Ideas. Victor Davis Hanson presented a paper on the need for civic education and dangers of cultural amnesia. You can read the paper here or download the pdf here. Essentially, he argues several points that highlight the failure of public education in this country and of society as a whole to keep our cultural development, history, and course in context.

One point he made is that my generation is the most wealthy, education, and privileged in history. We all have cars, computers, the time and money to travel, and the ability to sit back and digest the deeper questions and ideas on life. We didn't earn any of it. We see it as a given, thus we can't comprehend what our forefathers sacrificed to give it to us.

Dr. Hanson recounted a personal story where he "learned" of the "war crime" Hiroshima atomic bombing in school. He went home and told his uncle, a bomber crewman, that he was a war criminal. His uncle replied that he should also count the firebombing of Japan as a war crime. Young Victor dutifully reported this response to his teacher, who responded with disgust. Once he returned home, he told his uncle of the teacher's response. His uncle offered this:

"Victor, one day I hope your turn 21. I hope you're caught in a war, wake up at 3AM, take your caffeine pill, climb into a rickety unreliable plane, and fly 12 hours in the dark. Don't wear a parachute, because if you bail out you'll be beheaded anyway. Then dodge the flak and fighters and fly 12 hours home. Look out at the squadron. What was once 12 planes with 11 men each is now 2 planes. When the replacement 8 planes and crews show up, go and tell them that at least 7 of them won't return home. Then have your 12 year-old nephew come call you a war criminal for ending the war."

It obviously stuck. Since my generation has never had to fight for anything, we have nothing to--as Hanson put it--calibrate our decisions and times. Hanson argued that the 4,000 dead in Iraq, regardless of your politics, pales in comparison to the 80,000 killed in the several month long campaign in the hedgerows in France in 1944. What about the 22,000 casualties in a single day at the battle of Antietam in 1862. We lost 6,800 in a month on Iwo Jima with 19,800 WIA or MIA. These events are from my parents and grandparents generation. Most Americans don't know much of the battles, I'd bet.

On this note, there is also a lot of ignorance from vocal political activists. I recently came across a girl who was livid over the fact that the US has destroyed "world peace" with the invasion of Iraq. She argued that the war was the bloodiest and had more civilian casualties of any in her lifetime. I mentioned the civil war in Zaire (aka DRC) from 1998-2003, very much during her lifetime. She had no clue that over 4 million civilians had been killed. She couldn't even locate the country. I named about 25 of the 50 wars/conflicts currently ongoing and she didn't believe me. It seems that many activists like to pick and choose their histories.

Back to Hanson, another point he made was the changing of history to be more "sensitive". Essentially, all school children know of the Holocaust, the destruction of the Native American Nations, and Harriett Tubman. As they should-I'm not arguing that this should not be taught. However, these small narratives have replaced the larger, more important narratives. What about Eisenhower, Zhukov, and Montgumery? Should we not learn of Grant and Sherman? What about the daily lives and struggles of pioneers who had to choose between starvation in Ireland or Scotland and trying to scratch out a living on the frontier?

To be "sensitive", we exclude the more important history. Ike and Zhukov did more to end Nazism, create the current world order, and change history than diabolical SS doctors and sadistic death squads. While the Holocaust is an important watershed in the history of human barbarism and our uncanny ability to visit suffering on each other, it should not replace the larger war effort. Sherman burned my hometown, cut the Confederacy in half, and thus did more to end slavery (at least in the Confederate States) than Harriet Tubman. The pioneers who worried constantly about feeding their families and surviving, who essentially built this country with their blood, sweat, and tears, did not have time to contemplate multiculturalism.

I'm not saying that they were right; they simply did not have the luxury. And this brings me to Hanson's point: we can sit back and debate ideas like multiculturalism and liberality. They did not have this luxury. We sit back, having earned nothing for ourselves, and claim moral authority because we NEVER had to decide between 2 million casualties or dropping an atomic bomb; we've NEVER had to decide between shooting a Native American who is competing for a food supply or watching 4 of your 6 children starve during the Winter.

We can move on and move forward; we can debate and contemplate. We should honor those who passed us this incredible nation. We can discuss past wrongs and attempt to right them; however, since we are a privileged and spoiled generation who has never made these decisions or defended our very existence (and thus have no context by which to compare), we should never wholly condemn our past. Lest we repeat it, neither we should forget it.

The Dangers of Wikipedia

2008-05-28T20:52:00.000-07:00

In my spare time and in during my bouts of boredom at work, I find myself editing Wikipedia or at least debating the merits and weaknesses of various articles. Although I frequently lapse into Wiki-binges and spend hours navigating through its plethora of knowledge, I have to point out the inherent dangers of such a project: anyone can write or re-write history.

I was debating another editor the other day on the validity of a fringe theory that is soundly rejected by the vast majority of pundits, experts, scholars, and learned laymen. Even the main proponent of this particular theory--who is neither a subject matter expert nor anywhere near a respected commentator on the issue--has jokingly belittled his own ideas as fantastic and approaching the scholarly significance of an opinion editorial. I argued that this theory be included in the article, but not be put forward as the predominant theory for obvious reasons.

In his infinite wisdom and enlightenment, my antagonist argued that this theory should be listed as the predominant theory because--pay close attention--a movie promoting elements of the theory "...was seen by millions of people worldwide and grossed over $220 million at the box office...", the producer has "...proven popularity..." and "...a film peddling 'fringe' theories does not gross $220 million."

Based on this argument, the Star Wars saga is probably codified somewhere in stone, the love story on Titanic was absolute fact, and Harry Potter's magical universe is accessible from King's Cross Railway station in London. Does anyone else see the terrifying direction this sort of logic can take us in? As far as numbers of people who saw the film, we can make comparisons to real-world fringe theories. I guarantee that more people believe that the Holocaust is a myth and that AIDS can be cured by having sex with a virgin. Yet no one with a shred of common sense would even entertain such nonsense--save my anonymous antagonist for the day.

Fortunately, common sense prevailed and vast majority of editors agreed with me. For now. Score: Common Sense: 1 Lunacy: 0

Lost Faith

2008-05-14T19:17:00.000-07:00

I've lost faith in the next generation.

When I get off work every day, I come home and tutor a 9th grader. My county has two of the top ten public schools in the country. Keep this in mind.

I asked three questions throughout our discussion.

He's been studying the Israel/Palestine debate for two weeks in class.
Question 1:
Me: So, which political party controls the West Bank and is represented by the President?
Student: Fajita

Question 2:
Me: Jerusalem is a very important city for all the Abrahamic religions, as you know.
Student: Is that why the Christians are fighting the Jews?
Me: Excuse me?
Student: You know, Israelis are Jews and Palestinians are Christians.*
Me: How long have you been studying this?

*(I realize that about 10% of Palestinians are Christian. He, however, thought it was their defining characteristic.)

Question 3: (Not related to the Middle East)
(Listening to "O Fortuna", from Carmina Burana, by Carl Orff)
Me: Do you know where that music is from? I know you've heard it.
Student: Ya, its from Jackass the Movie. Jackass is what made it famous.

Is there a God?

These, of course, join my huge list of fantastically enlightened quotes from around the world. They'll be published in the near future; book forthcoming.

Favorite Quotes

2008-01-17T12:54:00.000-08:00

Food for thought:

"Success is the sole earthly judge of right and wrong." –Hitler

"Government's first responsibility is to protect the people, not regulate their lives." –Reagan

"If I somehow end up in heaven with 72 virgins, I would like to trade in 71 virgins for cigarettes, alcohol, Xbox and an experienced hooker. I might keep one virgin around just in case things don't work out between me and the hooker. I'm also willing to trade in some of my virgins for an occasional pass to hell to visit friends and family." -Siamack Baniameri

"The largest mass demonstrations in the history of the world were aimed at preventing the overthrow of one of the worst tyrannies in the modern age. And this, in the judgment of many people, was the proper role for anyone who boasted left-wing credentials--this, somehow, the correct stance for every true friend of the downtrodden." -Paul Berman

"The biggest argument against democracy is a five minute discussion with the average voter." -Churchill

"The secret to creativity is being able to hide your sources." -Einstein

Book

2008-01-15T23:12:00.000-08:00

I'm currently finishing up my travel journal. I must have several hundred pages of notes stained with God knows what from every landscape imaginable. I hope to turn it into a travel/political commentary some day. The topics will range from the etiquette of making "donations" to Maoists at gunpoint to procedures for negotiating between Czech prostitutes and Italian football teams to strategies for explaining to Europeans that George W. Bush did not wipe out the American Indians despite what they may have read. It should be a good read. I'm thinking of entitling it (or at least a chapter): “Politics, Misconceptions, and Identity: We’re better, you’re dumb, and my opinion really matters" If not, this is the general gist of the writing.

If you have time, check out Ezra Levant, of the Alberta-based Western Standard, testifying before a Human Rights Commission on YouTube. It is one of the best defenses, explanations, and promotions of our most sacred Western values and freedoms I've ever seen. More to come--

2006-03-01T09:49:00.000-08:00

Victor Davis Hanson has his say on the Samarra Mosque bombing and lack of civil war that so many had said was inevitable.

Danish Cartoons

2006-03-01T09:30:00.000-08:00

This a great article I came across today in The Prague Post.

Under siege

Good intentions are not enough in the uproar over cartoons of Muhammad: The mainstream Islamic mindset has proved inscrutable

February 22, 2006

By Andrew Steven Harris

The through-the-looking glass controversy over Danish editorial cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad is, of course, about much more than cartoons or Muhammad: It's a cultural Sept. 11-style strike against the values and institutions of the West.

Just as the 2001 attacks represented more than 19 criminals hijacking four airliners, this latest clash between democratic values and religious fundamentalism is an orchestrated ambush on an unsuspecting target unaware of the scope of the attack until it had already unfolded.

To many, the notion that a cartoon could provoke global riots, dozens of deaths, a $1 million assassination contract and vacillation among Western leaders seems like an abstract fantasy, a trip down the rabbit hole into a theater of the absurd.

But that perspective remains precisely what these protesters have attacked: the rejection of the idea that it's justified — or even rational — to kill people over their speech, particularly a statement as trifling as a cartoon.

The purple elephant in the middle of this crossfire is the contemporary notion — or, more accurately, the Western one — that the values of most Islamic societies have modernized along with the rest of the world.

The unraveling of the Iron Curtain revealed former enemies who, despite cultural differences, retained essentially the same values: a passion for freedom, mutual respect and at least a capacity to coexist with dissimilar viewpoints.

But the unexpected commonality between those nations could not have been brought into sharper focus than by the rise of global Islamic fundamentalism.

The West has naively greeted this scorpion with its Cold War handshake, believing that the virtues of peace and democracy appear self-evident; as if good intentions, by definition, will be good enough. But even the mainstream Islamic mindset has proven inscrutable to the West in a way that communism was mythologized to be but never truly was.

To many Islamic nations, freedom is not a tonic, but a toxin; it's regarded not just as something that permits a challenge to faith, but is a challenge to faith by itself.

To Westerners, the value of concepts like truth, life and liberty remains constant, writ in stone, whether our best efforts successfully earn that value or not. But many Westerners like myself watch events unfold in the Islamic world with the inching realization that the value it places on those concepts remains utterly fluid, seemingly shaped by convenience and circumstance.

Even reason itself appears subject to sacrifice; some of the most cognitively dissonant images to come out of the controversy are protest signs with messages like, "Behead those who say Islam is violent."

And without any trace of irony, the Muslim world has risen up against these relatively insignificant cartoons after decades of portraying Jews as one evolutionary step removed from a blood virus, with images worse than even those conceived by the Nazis.

Even the protests themselves did not ignite until four dormant months after the cartoons first appeared, when the government of Saudi Arabia unexpectedly announced a boycott of all products from Denmark over the conduct of a single Danish newspaper.

Muslim protesters suddenly overlooked the hundreds of Hajj pilgrims trampled to death in January, along with the more than 1,000 Muslims who drowned in the Red Sea returning from Mecca earlier this month, when their ship sank after leaving a Saudi port.

A westerner had depicted a graven image of Mohammad, and an apology — however undeserved — would be a shallow substitute for blood. It doesn't matter that, thus far, the blood has been all Muslim; and it doesn't matter that the same cartoons had also been published, back in October, by a newspaper in Egypt.

The Saudi government, of course, like many people, understands these contradictions perfectly; they're just not that important to it.

Western leaders, meanwhile, intimidated by the prospect of provoking fanatics, have urged an end to the violence only by offering weak-kneed solidarity with the underlying sentiment behind the protests.

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan even went so far as to say that freedom of speech does not include the right to offend religious beliefs — a statement equally distressing either in its inability to fathom the basic nature of freedom or in its craven appeasement of brutality.

But the press has also begun to reshape its principles under the persistence of a thousand cuts. When novelist Salman Rushdie authored The Satanic Verses back in 1988, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini of Iran put a $1 million bounty on his head. Time magazine, reporting the story on its cover, announced, "The Ayatollah Orders a Hit," accurately observing that Islamic fundamentalism had reduced itself to the level of a Mafia crime lord.

And yet, when a Pakistani cleric placed a $1 million contract on the life of the Danish cartoonist, Time ran a cover story on U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney's hunting accident from a week and a half ago.

We have become so inured to the transgressions of religious fundamentalism that its conduct no longer shocks our consciences. We have begun to sacrifice the delicate craftwork of our ideals to the blunt unreality that appeasing a single incident of cultural aggression will somehow pacify the underlying hostility that incited it.

On Sept. 11, 2001, I was in New York City. I personally witnessed the Twin Towers burn, breathed the smoke from the fires that blanketed Manhattan for the next three weeks and wandered among the smiling ghosts staring out from photocopy paper taped to every fence in the city by family members hopelessly searching for their loved ones.

But even then, it was clear to me that this had been an attack not on these people, or the buildings, or against New York or even America. This had been an attack against the values of modern civilization.

Nations of the West, regardless of their specific religions, all worship at the temple of democracy. An attempt to silence freedom of speech at the edge of a machete is not a misunderstanding; it is a decision to coerce Western civilization into surrendering its values to the mob of religious intolerance.

For those who cannot widen their perspective on this, consider this: Judging by how the protests have already escalated beyond anyone's imagining, where will they go from here? Do you anticipate that, having been empowered by Muslim governments and emboldened by the tremors in Western resolve, protesters' hostility toward democratic freedoms will get better, or worse?

Those who want to unmake such freedoms now stand at the temple doors, with torches in their fists; it's high time for the congregates to start defending the faith.

I found it while I was reading news about the Turkish film "Valley of the Wolves" release in Germany. The film is about the Iraq war and depicts American troops raping, pillaging, shooting at random, and massacring wedding parties. It also has a Jewish doctor removing the organs of Iraqi prisoners to sell on the black market. Several German states have banned the film, which has prompted the film's proponents to compare the movie to the Danish cartoons. German officials and many civilians were appalled to read about sold out movie theatres packed with young Turkish men yelling "Allah Akbar" (God is Great) and cheering when a building housing American troops is blown up by the Turkish hero. Scary stuff.