Musings Archive May 2004
Monday, May 31, 2004 THE BIGGEST FAILING OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION: (Via Brothers Judd Blog) Is their apparent inability to get their message out. A good example of that is what's happening in Fallujah. As Robert Kaplan points out in today's Wall Street Journal, the city is reasonably calm and the decision not to pound the city into rubble is probably the right one.
But none of the above matters if it is not competently explained to the American public--for the home front is more critical in a counterinsurgency than in any other kind of war. Yet the meticulous planning process undertaken by the Marines at the tactical level for assaulting Fallujah was not augmented with a similarly meticulous process by the Bush administration at the strategic level for counteracting the easily foreseen media fallout from fighting in civilian areas near Muslim religious sites. The public was never made to feel just how much of a military threat the mosques in Fallujah represented, just how far Marines went to avoid damage to them and to civilians, and just how much those same Marine battalions accomplished after departing Fallujah. [...]
[I]...found that there are many different Iraqs and different levels of reality to each of them. Presently, the administration lacks the public relations talent and the organizational structure for conveying even the positive elements of the Iraqi panorama in all their drama and texture.
I'm not blaming the administration alone, I think the media is also playing a role. Stung by the failure to find WMDs in Iraq after they reported their existence, the media is probably now not giving the administration the benefit of the doubt...or for that matter ignoring the administration's point of view unless the evidence is overwhelming that its right. That said, Kaplan is right, the administration is doing a very poor job of telling the world what's going on.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:09 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY IS TOAST: At least in this election. The LP had a real opportunity this year given the number of conservatives frustrated with the Bush administration's record on spending and government growth. They also had the potential to appeal to the growing number of non-liberal/non-socialist opponents of the Iraq war.
But instead of Aaron Russo or Gary Nolan, the Libertarians decided to nominate the most obscure candidate running. With the exception of 1980, the LP seems to top out at around 400,000 votes even when they run reputable candidates like Ron Paul or Harry Browne, so the odds were always somewhat against them influencing the outcome of the election. Maybe there is something about this guy I don't know, but it seems to me that the odds are longer now.
Note in the story the nominee's observation that if he would win the nomination (by prevailing among the convention's 800 delegates) he could win the election (in which there will probably be something like 100-110 million voters). This is the lack of seriousness that keeps a lot of small-l libertarians out of the Libertarian Party.
Posted by antle @ 12:33 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ THE REPERCUSSIONS OVER IRAQ CONTINUE: The rapid victory the coalition enjoyed in Iraq is forcing a lot of countries to reevaluate how they would fight a war, particularly against an American military force. One of those countries is China.
The report said China is rethinking the concept that U.S. airpower alone is sufficient to prevail in a conflict -- a concept it inferred from the 1999 air war over Kosovo, which involved no U.S. ground forces.
"The speed of coalition ground force advances and the role of special forces in [Iraq] have caused the People's Liberation Army theorists to rethink their assumptions about the value of long-range precision strikes, independent of ground forces, in any Taiwan conflict scenario," the report said.
Other aspects of the Iraq war have reinforced the Chinese belief that the United States' long-range strategy is to dominate Asia by containing the growth of Chinese power, the report said. These include recent Pentagon decisions to base long-range bombers, cruise missiles and nuclear attack submarines to the Pacific island of Guam -- moves related in part to the Iraq conflict.
"China's leaders appear to have concluded that the net effect of the U.S.-led campaign [against terrorism] has been further encirclement of China," specifically by placing U.S. military forces in Uzbekistan and other Central Asian nations, and strengthening relations with Pakistan and India, concluded the Pentagon analysis.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 12:40 AM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
Sunday, May 30, 2004 JEREMIADS BLOG ENTRY SIGHTING: Speaking of the goings-on of Fairfax, VA, Jeremy Lott has posted an interview with the scholar and writer Philip Jenkins.
Posted by antle @ 11:04 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ DISTURBING OBSERVATION FOR THE EVENING: Roughly 50 percent of the movies located in the "family" section of my local Blockbusters are straight-to-video releases starring Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen.
Posted by antle @ 10:26 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ A LOVELY BIT OF NEWS: Various sources are reporting that the Iranian government has established "what could be the first training center for Islamic suicide attackers."
Iranian sources and media asserted that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps has established a center to train suicide attackers throughout the world. The sources identified the center as the World Islamic Martyrs and Fighters Staff Headquarters.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 09:35 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
Saturday, May 29, 2004 THAT'S WHAT I LOVE ABOUT THE NDP: Always head of the curve. Today NDP leader Jack Layton announced that the party no longer was interested in pulling Canada out of NATO. Instead, Layton would like to see it transformed into some 'human defence' oriented organization.
Wow. Years after NATO has essentially become irrelevant, the NDP have finally got around to accepting Canada's membership in it. I predict in 2034 the party will finally accept the free market as a valid way for human beings to organize economies.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:15 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ AL GORE - DIDN'T HE USED TO BE FAMOUS?: I'm not really sure why the news media made such a big deal out of Al Gore's eye-popping, vein-bulging speech before MoveOn.org.
Was it a secret that Gore loathed Dubya? Are we supposed to be surprised that Gore isn't impressed with the administration of the guy he ran against four years ago? Is it shocking that Gore disapproves of Condi Rice or Donald Rumsfeld?
It seems to me that, given Bush's falling approval ratings, the media could have found a critic of the administration with less personal involvement than Al Gore.
Posted by antle @ 04:41 PM EST [Link] [Karma: -1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ ANOTHER STORY NO ONE TOLD YOU ABOUT: George W. Bush scored a massive victory this week. Did you hear about it? No, it wasn't in Iraq. This week the Bush administration helped both sides in the Sudanese war come to a peace accord, ending a conflict that's last for two decades.
Yeah, I didn't hear about it either.
Nicholas Kristof states:
If the peace holds, hundreds of thousands of lives will be saved, millions of refugees will return home, and a region of Africa may be revived.
But there's a larger lesson here as well: messy African wars are not insoluble, and Western pressure can help save the day. So it's all the more shameful that the world is failing to exert pressure on Sudan to halt genocide in its Darfur region. Darfur is unaffected by the new peace accords.
Read on. (NYT, Free registration required)
Posted by steve @ 04:05 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ WHO DOESN'T LOVE TOM SELLECK?: Well, outside of Rosie O'Donnell everyone does. John J. Miller interviews Tom Selleck over at NRO in regards to his Ike biopic that's on A&E on Memorial Day.
Read on.
The day I win the lottery I buy a 1981 Ferrari 308 GTSi, one of the three Ferrari's Thomas Magnum drove during Magnum P.I.'s run.
Posted by steve @ 03:55 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ IT ISN'T A MYTH: Stephen Hayes in an essay for the June 7 issue of The Weekly Standard says there is plenty of evidence of a link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida.
Posted by steve @ 03:45 PM EST [Link] [Karma: -1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ WHAT HAPPENED TO PAT TILLMAN: The U.S. Army Special Operations Command will release today information surrounding the circumstances surrounding the death of Pat Tillman.
Lt. Gen. Philip R. Kensinger, USASOC's commanding general, was to issue a statement about a completed military investigation into the circumstances of Tillman's death, the Army said in a statement released late Friday.
Tillman, 27, died in a firefight near the Pakistan border as he was leading his team to help comrades caught in an ambush. Until now, the Army has given few details about his death, saying he was fatally shot while fighting "without regard for his personal safety."
Something makes me think that coward Ted Rall won't be reading that report.
Read on.
[Update - 3:38pm] The U.S. Army says that Tillman was likely killed by friendly fire.
Posted by steve @ 04:40 AM EST [Link] [Karma: 0 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ SOMEONE HAS TO DEFEND HIM: I missed this one it first appeared on Thursday but Christopher Hitchens takes up the unlikely task of defending Ahmad Chalabi.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:32 AM EST [Link] [Karma: -1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
Friday, May 28, 2004 I'M NOT HAPPY: Canadian conservatives across the blogosphere are crowing today over the release of a new poll that shows Liberal support has dropped considerably.
The Liberals have 38 per cent support among decided voters — a three percentage point drop since last month — while the Conservatives and New Democrats are climbing, especially in Ontario.
The poll conducted for the Star and La Presse, shows Liberal support bleeding to the Conservatives, at 30.4 per cent, and the NDP, at 18 per cent. The Bloc Québécois is at 10.7 per cent and support for other parties is at 2.8 per cent. The Tory and NDP numbers nationally represent two percentage point climbs for each of them since April.
If the trend continue -- and if you know me you know I don't believe in trends -- we can expect a minority Liberal government; or as I like to phrase it: the worst of all possible worlds.
Let's be realistic, if the Liberals do end up with a minority government they won't be looking to the Tories for their support. They'll either call the NDP or the Bloc Quebecois. Both are rather left of center and both would pull the Liberals over to the political left. You know what means: tax and spend! I'll be honest, I'd sooner have a majority Liberal government over a minority Liberal government nearly every day of the week.
So who may be responsible for this shift away from the Liberals? The provincial Liberals. A budget in Ontario which broke every single promise made by Dalton McGuinty during last year's provincial election has pretty well angered Ontarians, meaning the province may be in play for the first time since the 1980s. Will it be enough though?
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 08:03 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ NICE TIMING: The managers of an Omaha, Neb. apartment building are trying to force 89-year old World War II veteran Donald Lamp from flying an American flag from his balcony. Lamp has been flying the flag every day since September 11, 2001.
It's almost ironic that this is occuring days before Memorial Day and that the city this is happening in lent its name to the beach saw the bloodiest combat on D-Day. Another interesting fact: Lamp is the father-in-law of none other than Clarence Thomas.
I realize building rules prohibit flying flags but come on, lighten the hell up. Your nation is at war.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:40 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 2 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ ABU GRHAIB IS THE LATEST IN A LONG SERIES OF THESE TYPES OF EVENTS: Peter Worthington, a former soldier in the Canadian Armed Forces, discusses Abu Ghraib in relation to what used to be allowed by Canadian military prisons.
Abu Ghraib brought to mind the Canadian military justice system of WWII and Korea, before King's Rules and Regulations were replaced by the National Defence Act.
A friend from army days and Korea, Vince Courtenay, recalls the system better than I.
It sounds primitive now, but sentences of three to seven days on nothing but bread and water were routine for minor offenses. The commanding officer could dish out 28-day sentences.
Bread and water consisted of eight slices of white bread and a canteen of water, which Vince recalls troops calling "piss and punk."
A full meal was required every third day on this diet, and "heavy fellows lost weight rapidly," says Vince, who insists he's not talking from personal experience.
I had a friend who was sent to a military jail after a fight with another soldier and he never got into trouble again. I have to confess I nearly landed there myself after a brawl between the infantry and the engineers outside of an on-base bar one night. For some reason the engineers refused to accept the superiority of the infantry and felt compelled to argue the fact. Fortunately most of us disappeared before the MPs showed up. I didn't want to discover the joys of military jail myself.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 05:41 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ THE BOY MAKES HOWARD DEAN LOOK NORMAL: When the Boston Herald jumps over a Democrat you know that boy has done something stupid. Today they postively hammer Al Gore for his insane speech on Wednesday at a Moveon.org conference (You can read the speech by clicking on the "More" link below).
He never mentioned Nicholas Berg. Or Daniel Pearl. Or a single person killed in the World Trade Center. Nor did former Vice President Al Gore talk of any soldier by name who has given his life in Iraq. And he has the audacity to condemn the Bush administration for having "twisted values?"
Gore spent the bulk of a speech before the liberal group MoveOn.org Wednesday bemoaning Abu Ghraib and denouncing President Bush's departure from the "long successful strategy of containment."
Yes, the very same strategy that, under Gore's leadership, allowed al-Qaeda operatives to plan the horror of Sept. 11 for years, while moving freely within our borders.
Read the Herald's response here.
[more]
Posted by steve @ 05:35 PM EST [Link] [Karma: -1 (+/-)] [2 comments]
~ IRAQ IS ALREADY A SUCCESS STORY: Though the media doesn't bother to tell you, democracy is Iraq is blooming. As Charles Rousseaux points out in a story on TechCentralStation, democratically elected councils have sprung up everywhere in the country and the Iraqis are beginning to take control of their own futures.
Notwithstanding an awful start last year, when Coalition commanders cancelled elections shortly after announcing them, Iraqis have gained experience in self-government. President Bush noted that, "many of Iraq's cities and towns have elected town councils or city governments." Under the oversight of Paul Bremer, a group of local government representatives, including members of the Baghdad City Council, elected engineer Mahmood al Tamimi as city mayor last month.
The Baghdad City Council, largely a mix of previously apolitical technocrats, ranging from sheiks to secularists and from lawyers to engineers, has become a power in its own right. Council members were selected by their neighbors almost a year ago, and after first focusing on their neighborhoods, have since started to speak out on national issues. A February Washington Post profile of the group said, "They are the closest thing Iraq has to a democratically elected representative body with real clout." For instance, council member Ali Hadary pushed hard for the reassembly of classrooms, and received almost $500,000 to repair 20 schools in his area.
The entire Iraqi educational establishment is being rebuilt. Mr. Bush said, "Under the direction of Dr. Ala'din al-Alwan, the Ministry [of Education] has trained more than 30,000 teachers and supervisors for the schools of a new Iraq." According to the White House, over a third of the 15,000 teachers fired by Saddam have been rehired and more than 5.5 million Iraqi students are back at school. Earlier this month, the World Bank issued a $40 million grant to the Ministry of Education.
Schools aren't the only things going up. Spending on reconstruction is finally surging, according to retired admiral David Nash, who is overseeing construction. Earlier this week he said at a briefing, "Things are going very well." $75 million in new construction being set up each week. Over the last two months, $4 billion has been put towards specific projects. That is twice the amount two months ago, and the pace is still increasing. Over 8,000 Iraqis hammer away at those projects each day, bringing electricity and water to their fellow citizens. According to the Los Angeles Times, soldiers in Kut are even hiring away suspected followers of radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr to work on reassembling an amusement park.
Mark my words, regardless of what happens in November, George W. Bush will be remembered by history as a liberator of millions -- both in Afghanistan and Iraq. He'll probably be more loved by Muslims than by Americans and Arabs have a very long memory. That's why there are still people running around the Middle East named after T.E. Lawerence.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 05:26 PM EST [Link] [Karma: -1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ I'D PUNCH HIM IF HE WASN'T A LOT BIGGER THAN I WAS: Former Denver Bronco Reggie Rivers argues in a column today that America's soldiers are slaves.
Yes, our slaves signed up of their own free will, but most of them were as misled about their job as the rest of us were about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
And I don't think "slave" is too strong a word to describe someone who is not permitted to quit his job no matter how dangerous it becomes or how much he hates it. For most of us, the 13th Amendment abolished slavery and guaranteed that we have the right to withhold our labor. It doesn't protect soldiers.
At the risk of blowing our PG rating, WTF? The ironic thing is that Rivers' father served in the US Air Force. I'd rant but this essay just fisks itself.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 05:19 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ NO GRIP ON REALITY: James Lileks has a beautiful post tonight regarding the concern America's allies have over the situation in Iraq. It's so good that I won't quote a word of it.
Read on. (About half way down)
Posted by steve @ 03:28 AM EST [Link] [Karma: 1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
Thursday, May 27, 2004 ALL WELFARE IS BAD: And despite what the corporate sector will tell you, so is corporate welfare. Today, Conservative Party leader Stephen Harper promised that he would do away with it.
I agree with him but in Canada everyone is on the teat, including business. Everyone's a capitalist until they're offered 'free cash.' This will be a hard sell to a lot of people, even if you're promising lower taxes in return.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:24 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ NEWS TO EVERYBODY BUT ME: A new study reports that in divorces after the age of 40, 2/3rds of the time it is the woman who initiates the divorce proceeding. The old story of the man exchanging his 40 for a pair of twenties is largely just that, a story.
Duh.
I've long believed -- without empirical evidence to back me up, mind you -- that once a man reaches his 40s he realizes that true happiness isn't drinking, women and nights he can't remember. He knows that real happiness can only be found with a woman he loves and a couple of kids. That necessarily means that most men in this situation wouldn't divorce their wives because at that age they aren't likely to replicate this life and they are genuinely satisfied with their lives.
Ok, you're asking, why would a woman who has little chance of rebuilding her life with a new marriage (and no chance what-so-ever at having children again) divorce her husband while in her 40s? Why would she give up what most women want? According to the AARP study "most women said they filed for divorces because of physical or emotional abuse, infidelity or drug and alcohol abuse."
For men, on the other hand, "they fell out love, they had different values or lifestyles or infidelity." For the most part, a different order of problems.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:18 PM EST [Link] [Karma: -1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ GOOGLE IS YOUR FRIEND: Once it's on the World Wide Web it's out there for good. Right Side Redux proves that by Googling Adam Gadahn. He's one of the seven people wanted by the FBI that you heard about earlier this week. Turns out you could find out quite a bit about him.
Nice bit of original and exclusive reportage by Justin!
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:48 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ CAPTAIN HOOK CHARGED: Radical English cleric Abu Hamza was today charged by American authorities with 11 related terror charges.
Hamza, 47, who was arrested this morning in London, is accused of "hostage-taking" and of setting up terrorist training camps in America and Afghanistan.
US Attorney General John Ashcroft told a press conference the charges carried the death sentence.
But British law prevents suspects being extradited to countries that carry out executions.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:38 PM EST [Link] [Karma: 1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ BUT THERE AREN'T ANY WMDS IN IRAQ: Charles Duelfer says that the new threat facing coalition forces in Iraq may be bombs utilitizing chemical weapons. You know, the type of weapons that apparently don't exist.
Posted by steve @ 04:29 AM EST [Link] [Karma: -1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
~ NOTHING IS BETTER THAN KETCHUP ON A BURGER: And since it's Memorial Day pretty soon, Sean Hackbarth has a special Kerry's House of Ketchup up.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:10 AM EST [Link] [Karma: -1 (+/-)] [No Comments]
Wednesday, May 26, 2004 I'M ALMOST LAUGHING: Today the NY Times called itself out and declared that its reporting on Iraq has been abysmal. Are they apologizing for their relentless stream of biased reporting about the situation after the war? Nope. They're apologizing for reporting what we all knew, that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
But we have found a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been. In some cases, information that was controversial then, and seems questionable now, was insufficiently qualified or allowed to stand unchallenged. Looking back, we wish we had been more aggressive in re-examining the claims as new evidence emerged — or failed to emerge.
The problematic articles varied in authorship and subject matter, but many shared a common feature. They depended at least in part on information from a circle of Iraqi informants, defectors and exiles bent on "regime change" in Iraq, people whose credibility has come under increasing public debate in recent weeks. (The most prominent of the anti-Saddam campaigners, Ahmad Chalabi, has been named as an occasional source in Times articles since at least 1991, and has introduced reporters to other exiles. He became a favorite of hard-liners within the Bush administration and a paid broker of information from Iraqi exiles, until his payments were cut off last week.) Complicating matters for journalists, the accounts of these exiles were often eagerly confirmed by United States officials convinced of the need to intervene in Iraq. Administration officials now acknowledge that they sometimes fell for misinformation from these exile sources. So did many news organizations — in particular, this one.
Some critics of our coverage during that time have focused blame on individual reporters. Our examination, however, indicates that the problem was more complicated. Editors at several levels who should have been challenging reporters and pressing for more skepticism were perhaps too intent on rushing scoops into the paper. Accounts of Iraqi defectors were not always weighed against their strong desire to have Saddam Hussein ousted. Articles based on dire claims about Iraq tended to get prominent display, while follow-up articles that called the original ones into question were sometimes buried. In some cases, there was no follow-up at all.
See, they're real sorry for reporting that Iraq had WMDs but not real sorry for reporting that everything in Iraq is going to hell in a handbasket. The scuttlebutt is that although they didn't name her, Judith Miller is the one whose articles are under review.
I wonder also if the Times isn't doing this to put pressure on the Bush administration. See, they were big enough to admit they were wrong, so why won't the president?
Read on. (Free registration required)
Posted by steve @ 08:06 PM EST [Link]
~ I'VE GOT THE SALT: David Janes goes off on a rant and declares that the "Ontario Children's Aid Society should be folded, all it's members forbidden to have jobs that bring them into contact with children again in their lives, and their buildings should be razed and the ground sown with salt."
What's the reason for this anger? The CAS is attempting to take two children away from their foster parents -- whom they have been raised by since babies -- essentially because they're white. The children, however, are aboriginals.
But David Feliciant, the lawyer for the Hamilton CAS, said the case is not about any unfair treatment accorded the foster families, or about the band flexing any political muscle. Nor, Mr. Feliciant added, is the case about love.
"It is naïve to suggest that love conquers all," he snapped. "It doesn't."
To which David responds: "Yes, and certainly not the mighty power of the goon and the bureaucrat."
I like seeing David angry.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:12 PM EST [Link]
~ NOW HE'S FLIP FLOPPING OVER HIS OWN NOMINATION!: John Kerry floated the trial balloon of not accepting his party's nomination at the convention -- he wanted to do it a month later so he could continue raising money -- and was promptly hammered for it. Roger Simon called the idea "too dumb even for politics."
If Kerry does not accept the nomination at his convention, how will he get anybody to watch it? The damn things are dull enough, but a convention without the presidential candidate accepting? Who would tune in to watch such a thing? And by giving up their audience, the Democrats will give up tons of free publicity.
And even among Democratic party stalwarts, how many will want to go to Boston in late July to experience traffic jams and security delays without the pay-off of an acceptance speech to boost their spirits and rally them for the fall campaign to come?
And where does this leave the vice presidential candidate? Does he or she also delay accepting the nomination? And give up one of the biggest viewing audiences he or she may ever get?
Mickey Kaus, on the other hand, thinks it's a "brilliant scheme."
I was initially skeptical of the delayed-acceptance idea myself, thinking it too clever by half. But that was before I realized its diabolical tactical brilliance. You see, Kerry's handlers have clearly been busy analyzing reams of scientific opinion research--and they've reached the same conclusion that pollster Scott Rasmussen reached a couple of weeks ago:
Senator Kerry loses a few points every time the spotlight focuses on him. Kerry's numbers bounce back when the focus returns to the President.
Indeed, Kerry has been virtually invisible on the national radar screen lately--and he's been slowly climbing in the polls.
Well, according to a report on Bloomberg News, Kerry has changed his mind and will now accept the nomination in Boston. Can this guy ever actually make up his mind? Do Democrats really want him as president?
Posted by steve @ 06:11 PM EST [Link]
Tuesday, May 25, 2004 IT'S ALWAYS THE JEWS: Richard Baehr has a great piece over at The American Thinker about retired General Anthony Zinni, a man who has made bigger news after his retirement than he did before it. In case you missed his appearance on 60 Minutes on Sunday, Zinni is completely against the Iraqi campaign.
He makes that very clear in a new book -- one that coincidently arrived in the mail at Fort Sinatra earlier today -- he co-authored with Tom Clancy. Who is responsible for the war? Neoconservatives. And judging by who he names: Jewish neoconservatives. Why? For Israel.
But Zinni is not comfortable just with criticism of how the war or post war effort was run. He needs to blame people, and he wants heads to fall. And he names names -- in particular the group he calls the “neocons”, naming five men: Doug Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis Libby, Richard Perle, and Ellot Abrams, as the key ideologues who caused this war to occur. And their real justification for pushing the US to war, we learn from Zinni, were not the three stated by the Administration -- weapons of mass destruction, terror links, or gross human rights violations.
Rather, it was to secure Israel, and to remake the Middle East in our image, a noble but unrealistic vision, according to the General. The fact that the named neocons are all Jewish, Zinni says, is accidental. He says this is irrelevant to him. But if it is irrelevant, why does he only provide the names of Jewish neocons? Are there no others? How Jewish is Jeanne Kirkpatrick or Bill Bennett? And what evidence does he have for his charge that the war was fought for Israel? Zinni never even touches on the three justifications the Administration offered for the war in the 60 Minutes segment. But Steve Kroft repeats the neocon slander, and the link to Israel, and names the Jewish names. This after all is the important part of the story.
It's always the Jews isn't it?
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 09:48 PM EST [Link]
~ FILE THIS UNDER 'BAD IDEA': That transfer of power in Iraq that we're all expecting in June is more than simply political power. British PM Tony Blair today said that the interim Iraqi government will have veto power over any coalition military operations. That has yet to be confirmed by George W. Bush.
Look, I believe that the coalition is a liberating force, not an occupation force, but that doesn't mean you cede military control until the situation is stable. That isn't going to happen in months as Iraqi defence minister Ali Alawi seems to believe.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:03 PM EST [Link]
~ THEIR WAR WILL TAKE MUCH LONGER: Sorry (again) for the lack of blogging today. It was a nice cool day here at Fort Sinatra so I took the opportunity to play the manor lord and I went outside into the backyard with a Romeo y Julieta cigar -- courtesy of my sister's visit to the Caymen Islands last week -- and a book of poems.
At any rate, a good story over at NRO about the problems that women are facing in Iraqi society. Iraq may be liberated but the war for women's rights in an Islamic society is just beginning.
Even though I know schwayya Arabic, I sensed the Iraqi truckers squatting in the shade of an 18-wheeler weren't happy. After all, seated on the sidewalk opposite them, a foreigner was chatting with a beautiful Iraqi woman whose beige scarf, worn with a maroon blouse and tan-colored slacks, indicated she was Muslim. As they waited to drive their vehicles through the British checkpoint, the truckers' stares burned holes through us. My friend, Nour Al-Khal, a 20-something press liaison for an American NGO, felt it too, but advised me to do what she did when confronted by what she called her country's "ignorant men" — ignore them. "Believe me, Steve," she said, stretching out her legs and crossing them at the ankles. "There's nothing you can do."
We were sitting outside the British military base at Basra International Airport, waiting for soldiers to open the gate. The afternoon was hot, a desert wind blowing dust and grit across the asphalt. As the boredom mounted, a trucker stood and crossed the roadway. Looming over Nour, he snapped something in Arabic, causing her expression to fall and her body to flinch as she curled her legs beneath her. As the trucker strode back to his companions, I asked Nour what he'd said. "He demanded that I sit more like a respectable Muslim woman," she replied in an embarrassed voice. Angered at the man's effrontery, I rose to confront him, only to be halted again by Nour's demurrals. "You'll only cause me trouble." Sadly, she was right. Convening a one-man Morals Police for the sole purpose of humiliating a woman, the trucker had acted in the name of the force we had no defense against: Islam.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 06:58 PM EST [Link]
~ IF YOU ANTICIPATE THE PAIN, DOES IT HURT LESS?: I ask because when you live through a Canadian election you know that the ruling party spends taxpayer dollars like a poet on payday. See, it's all about buying votes, though they'll tell you that they are just funding announcements that happened to coincide with the election. Later today Paul Martin is expected to announce that the Liberals are going to shovel billions of dollars into new health care programs "that would create a national home-care program, reduce waiting times, train new doctors and promise regular funding boosts."
See, the current system doesn't work regardless of how much money you spend. So what's the solution? Spend more money! Yea! And the bonus: Martin refused to say Monday whether all this new money will result in a tax hike.
At a certain point you just stop caring.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 05:13 AM EST [Link]
~ GETTING THE FACTS ABOUT THE FACTS WRONG: The Globe and Mail recently trumpeted a study that shows newspapers are reporting scientific issues correctly. And? Well, it turns out they were wrong.
But even in covering a study about media accuracy, the Globe and Mail got the story wrong -- What the CMAJ study actually showed was that more than one-third of newspaper stories about scientific studies held exaggerated claims, while nearly one-fifth held scientific and technical inaccuracies (Bubela and Caulfield, 2004).
Well done G&M, you've once again shown me why a lack of faith in journalists is justified.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 05:05 AM EST [Link]
~ REALITY CHECK: The fact that 801 Americans have died in Iraq is sad -- and my heart goes to the families of every soldier who has fallen -- but as Peter Robinson pointed out over at NRO Monday evening, it's an incredibly low number.
The number of dead we suffered in Vietnam peaked in 1968 at 538 in September and then the same number again in November. (For details, click here: http://members.aol.com/forcountry/kiamonth.htm).
The number of American dead on the Normandy beaches of D-Day is unclear—the official figures combine several kinds of casualties (dead, wounded and missing) and several forces (Americans, British, and Canadians)—but a reasonable estimate, several readers suggested, would put the figure at about 1500. A still more arresting statistic: During the Second World War the United States suffered an average of 400 dead every day for a thousand days.
Obviously cold numbers do nothing to assuage the grief that each death causes, and nor should they. That said we have to put these numbers in perspective. As the National Bureau of Economic Research pointed out a couple of years ago, "Traffic accidents claim over 40,000 lives each year in the United States, roughly the same as the total number of Americans killed during the Vietnam War." That averages out to nearly 110 Americans killed every day just driving their cars. By the time the next issue of ESR pops up on Monday, almost as many Americans will have died in their cars as have died in Iraq since April of last year.
If we can take any solace in the 801 deaths it's that they are contributing to the cause of American and international security.
Posted by steve @ 12:17 AM EST [Link]
~ GIVING IRAQ BACK TO THE IRAQIS: Sorry for the utter lack of blogging today. I spent most of Monday reading and frankly couldn't be bothered to turn on the PC for any length of time.
At any rate, Monday night saw the unveiling of Bush's five step plan to turn over the governance of Iraq to Iraqis. The plan itself was hardly revolutionary, merely a obvious list of things that needed to be accomplished: Handing off authority to an interim government, security, infrastructure, international support and national elections. I'm not a big fan of "international support" which is merely a euphemism for the United Nations. That said, nothing really surprising here since pretty well all of this has been hashed out by both the administration and the pundits who prattle continuously about things they have never done. Yes, that includes me.
What I rather liked was the emphasis that Bush placed on staying the course. It was a good signal to America's enemies -- and ostensible allies -- that "no power of the enemy will stop Iraq's progress." It's a message that should be repeated every day until it no longer has to be.
The situation in Iraq is going to play a role in Bush's election this November -- and ultimately how seriously Americans will continue taking the war on terrorism -- and it's absolutely vital that Bush and the rest of his staff are out there every single day repeating that America will not leave until the job is finished and no thugs are going to run them out of Iraq. He should be making a lot more of these speeches to signal to everyone around the world that things are getting better, will continue to do so and Iraq will one day stand above all other nations in the Arab world for being free -- and that not only helps keep America more secure but everyone everywhere.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 12:04 AM EST [Link]
Monday, May 24, 2004 FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT: Leader of Canada's socialist NDP party Jack Layton announced today that if he formed a government we could expect fiscally responsible governing with no deficits.
Oh yeah, he's do that while spending more on health care (and fighting privatized health care), post-secondary education, cut the GST on some things, pump more money into urban infrastructure, create a 'green' economy....I'm running out of breath there's so much stuff. Yeah, I believe him too...
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:26 PM EST [Link]
~ CAMPAIGN 2004: I'm not speaking of America's election but rather the Canadian federal election that was called yesterday by Paul Martin for June 28. I'll go on record right now predicting a narrow majority government for the Liberal Party.
At any rate, here's a little story of the issues that will likely be in play over the next couple of weeks. Not surprisingly, health care is the top priority for Canadians.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 12:05 AM EST [Link]
Sunday, May 23, 2004 I KNEW I HAD A COUPLE OF DRINKS LAST NIGHT: So I'm wondering if there's some Crown Royal still swirling around in my noggin as I write this. Sen. Hillary Clinton today called for a larger U.S. military. Yup, you can see why I thought maybe I over did it last night.
"A number of us have been sounding this alarm," Clinton told the TV show Fox News Sunday. "We have to face the fact we need a larger active-duty military. We cannot continue to stretch our troops, both active-duty, Guard and Reserve, to the breaking point, which is what we're doing now."
The irony, of course, is that under her husband's administration, the U.S. military shrank as part of Clinton-Gore's campaign to reduce the size of government. Rather than trim the number of civil servants, they made their largest gain by not replacing soldiers leaving the ranks. Ms. Clinton didn't bother to point that out.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 05:23 PM EST [Link]
Saturday, May 22, 2004 CHILDREN! CHILDREN! FUTURE! FUTURE! THE CHILDREN ARE OUR FUTURE, HEY, HEY HEY!: Fans of a certain show will get that musical reference. Shahla Samii argues in a new essay that the youth of Iran are key to overthrowing the theocratic regime.
My sincere belief is that if we give the youth in Iran the necessary tools to overthrow the IRI from within, and give them a chance to advance their agenda, they would. As in all struggles for freedom, the spark that ignites the fire begins inside the core of the system. The students and other courageous protestors have through their actions, words, and demonstrations started a movement. They yearn and seek support from their compatriots outside Iran. As in all struggles for freedom, the spark inside is easily extinguished by the suffocating system in which it tries to burn. In order for it to thrive and succeed, those outside the country whose voices are not stifled, whose passions can drive and energize those within, must raise the banner. The Prague Spring of 1968 is an example of a spark extinguished, a hope suffocated. The world learned a vital lesson then, hoping never to be repeated again. On the other hand, the South African and Polish struggles are beacons of success. South Africans and Poles around the world, inspired by their compatriots back 'home', raised their voices and helped lead their nations to freedom. Iranians abroad must recall the successes of the Polish and South African struggles, that through solidarity Iran can once again be free as well.
It would be pretty sweet to screw over the Islamists by helping their key demographic overthrow a radical regime.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 08:04 PM EST [Link]
~ THIS WAS SO PREDICTABLE I SHOULD HAVE PUT MONEY ON IT: Michael Moore's documentary "Fahrenheit 9/11" today won the Cannes Palme d'Or.
While "Fahrenheit 9/11" was well-received by Cannes audiences, many critics felt it was inferior to Moore's Academy Award-winning documentary "Bowling for Columbine," which earned him a special prize at Cannes in 2002. Some critics had speculated that if "Fahrenheit 9/11" won the top prize, it would be more for the film's politics than its cinematic value.
With Moore's customary blend of humor and horror, "Fahrenheit 9/11" accuses the Bush camp of stealing the 2000 election, overlooking terrorism warnings before September 11 and fanning fears of more attacks to secure Americans' support for the Iraq war.
If it was inferior to "Bowling for Columbine," which had so many factual errors -- deliberate or otherwise -- that attaching the term 'documentary' to it was an act of chuztpah, than it's obvious that "Fahrenheit 9/11" won simply because of its politics. And wow, Bush stole the election! I never heard that one before.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:34 PM EST [Link]
~ IS THE GUN CONTROL MOVEMENT DYING?: Probably not but John Lott Jr. argues that it isn't exactly looking very strong these days.
This month, the Million Mom March in Washington drew an anemic showing of only 2,000 people, while this year, all of the Democratic presidential candidates— however unenthusiastically— spoke of Americans’ Second Amendment right to own guns. These are just a few of the signs that the facts finally seem to be catching up to the movement. The future for the movement looks even worse.
Whether the subject is concealed handgun laws or bans on semi-automatic so-called “assault weapons,” gun control debates have been filled with apocalyptic claims about what will happen if gun control is not adopted. One common prediction is that laws allowing the carrying of a concealed weapon will result in crime waves, or permit holders shooting others. However, with 37 states now having right-to-carry laws, and another nine states letting some citizens carry, permit holders have continually shown themselves to be extremely law-abiding. It is becoming more and more difficult to attack those laws.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 01:05 AM EST [Link]
Friday, May 21, 2004 THAT EXPLAINS THAT: One of the Ahmad Chalabi's home was raided this week is because Ameircan officials believe his intelligence chief is an Iranian spy.
Intelligence chief Aras Karim Habib, 47, is a Shia Kurd who ran a program for Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress which the Pentagon funded to gather Saddam Hussein-era documents and provide informants until it abruptly dropped its support this month. The Information Collection Program had received $340,000 a month since October 2002.
A U.S. intelligence source said that information about Karim's activities came in part from a detainee at the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where hundreds of Taliban and al-Qaida fighters are being held.
Another source with access to sensitive intelligence and who was interviewed separately confirmed that the United States had developed information leading the government to believe that "this guy is an agent of the Iranians."
Read on.
[Update - 2:34pm] Ummm, okay, according to Fox News Chalabi himself is suspected of spying for the Iranians.
U.S. officials believe they have "rock solid" evidence that Iraqi Governing Council member Ahmad Chalabi, once a darling of the American government, passed secrets to Iran, Fox News has learned.
"There is no need for an investigation because we're quite certain he did it," one senior Bush administration official said.The official first described the evidence against Chalabi as "pretty solid" and then characterized it as "rock solid."
Posted by steve @ 02:28 PM EST [Link]
~ ARE THE BRITISH REALLY AMERICA'S ALLIES?: I don't know if we need this kind of talk right now but Dariush Shirazi raises some good points in an essay over at Project: Free Iran.
Several weeks ago, Michael Rubin returned from the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad, and upon his return resigned from the Pentagon. In recent weeks Mr. Rubin has expressed his views regarding the region, most notably illustrating the many links between the Islamic clerical regime in Iran and much of the violence that has broken out across Iraq, evident in the actions of Al Sadr and his fanatical brigade who have reportedly received millions of dollars in funding from the mullahs in Iran.
An article published in the Telegraph of London yesterday quoted Mr. Rubin's sentiments that "British officials clearly had little interest in pursuing the White House vision of a democratic Iraq, a keystone of its foreign policy, and were too 'soft' in confronting dissent." The article goes on to say that "many US officials had been startled at their British counterparts' attempts to capitalize on their presence in southern Iraq for a 'freelance' fostering of ties with Iran, one of Washington's most implacable enemies." The article also discusses the tension between Paul Bremer and his British counterpart, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, by quoting a provisional authority insider who said, "There was an understanding in the CPA that Bremer and Greenstock didn't like each other. It personified the differences between the two views. Greenstock thought Bremer was naive; Bremer thought Greenstock was pursuing the wrong policies."
Read the whole thing here.
Posted by steve @ 12:25 AM EST [Link]
Thursday, May 20, 2004 HOW MANY TIMES CAN YOU BE WRONG BEFORE EVERYONE STOPS LISTENING?: When you're a member of the environmentalist movement, your credibility never suffers no matter how many times you're wrong. A case in point is Paul Ehrlich. He has a new book out arguing that -- wait for it! -- humanity is standing at the edge of an environmental disaster.
Environmentalist Paul Ehrlich has proved himself to be a stupendously bad prophet. In 1968 he declared: "The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s, the world will undergo famines--hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death." They didn't. Indeed, a "green revolution" nearly tripled the world's food supply. In 1975, he predicted that, by the mid-1980s, "mankind will enter a genuine age of scarcity," in which "accessible supplies of many key minerals will be facing depletion." Far from it. Between 1975 and 2000 the World Bank's commodity price index for minerals and metals fell by nearly 50%. In other words, we abound in "key minerals." Naturally, Mr. Ehrlich has won a MacArthur Foundation genius award--and a Heinz Award for the environment. (Yes, that Heinz: Teresa Heinz Kerry is chairman of the award's sponsoring philanthropy.)
So why pay him any notice? Because he is a reverse Cassandra. In "The Illiad," the prophetess Cassandra makes true predictions and no one believes her; Mr. Ehrlich makes false predictions and they are widely believed. The gloomier he is and the faultier he proves to be as a prophet, the more honored he becomes, even in his own country.
I still remember back in the mid-1980s watching a movie in a high school geography class that warned of the impending collapse of the world. Ehrlich was one of the 'experts' in the movie who warned that everything was going to go to hell in just a few short years. When were his predictions to have come to pass? Why the late 1970s. Mr. Stewart unintentionally taught me the value of the environmentalist creed that day, probably the best thing he ever did for me.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:36 PM EST [Link]
~ THE WEDDING PARTY STORY: The Belmont Club, who are rapidly becoming a must-read blog has a very interesting take on the alleged American bombing of an Iraqi wedding party.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:24 PM EST [Link]
~ IMAGINE HAD LIMBAUGH SAID THE SAME THING ABOUT CLINTON: Talon News reports that a Seattle talk show hosted fronted by liberal Mike Webb featured some interesting comments about George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld.
A listener to The Mike Webb Show, which airs from 10:00 p.m.-1 a.m. on 710 AM KIRO in Seattle, Washington, informed Talon News that Webb had "called for the death of President Bush and Secretary Rumsfeld for 'war crimes.'" The listener said that he was "very upset at this."
And people say Republicans had a pathological hatred of Bill Clinton? Even among the more outlandish statements and claims conservative pundits and talk show hosts made about the Man from Hope, death threats were never among them. I guess the left is more tolerant.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:13 PM EST [Link]
~ IRAN IS THE SOVIET UNION, CIRCA 1989: An interesting series has been running on the National Review Online, particularly today where Lt. General Thomas McInerney (Ret.) & Maj. General Paul Vallely (Ret.) discuss Iran. The two describe Iran as being similar to the Soviet Union in 1989, a comparison that rings true in my mind.
Iran reminds us of the Soviet Union circa 1989. It is a large country with a huge population (more than sixty-eight million), and it should be a rich country, sitting as it does on huge reserves of oil. The country's wealth, however, does not make it down to the majority of Iranians. Instead, approximately 40 percent of Iranians live in poverty, because the clerics who control Iranian political and economic life siphon off much of the national income for their own uses.
The Constitution of the Soviet Union promised numerous rights to its citizens. Likewise, the Iranian constitution presents a façade of political freedom. It has an elected parliament and a democratically elected president. The catch, however, is that the constitution also vests all ultimate power in an nonelected body of six clerics and six religious lawyers, the Guardian Council, and the post of Supreme Ruler, a cleric chosen by another nonelected body, the House of Experts.
For many years, the Islamic Republic apparently was popular within Iran. However, over time, many Iranians have come to oppose the theocratic nature of the Iranian state and resent the concentration of political and economic power in the hands of the mullahs, their families, and their cronies. Among the youth of Iran there are many who find Western political forms and even elements of Western culture more attractive than the political and cultural construct offered by the mullahs. In fact, judging from recent political developments in Iran, it appears that the rule of the mullahs survives only because they manipulate Iran's political process. Democratic reform won't happen naturally in Iran — because the mullahs probably will block it, using their constitutional power and, if that fails to stem the tide of democratization, the quasi-official paramilitary forces at their command, their own versions of the militias and "fedayeen" of Ba'athist Iraq. It cannot be denied, however, that the people of Iran are ready and eager for it. The broadly popular Iranian movement in favor of democracy deserves our support for three simple reasons: the Iranian people want to be free, they deserve to be free, and the Web of Terror will greatly diminish when they are free.
They also discuss North Korea and Syria.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:09 PM EST [Link]
~ SELF-PROMO ALERT: On Tuesday the Canadian Supreme Court upheld government restrictions on how much third party groups can spend during federal elections, essentially limiting free speech during campaigns. If you live in Kitchener-Waterloo I wrote a piece that appeared today on the Insight page of The Record. You can also read it by clicking "More".
[more]
Posted by steve @ 03:02 PM EST [Link]
~ KERRY'S HOUSE OF KETCHUP: Another week, another collection of Kerry-isms
Posted by steve @ 03:01 AM EST [Link]
Wednesday, May 19, 2004 IF I WAS A JERK: I'd tell journalists to go find a Bible and read Galatians, chapter 6 verse 7. Oh alright, I know journos are too lazy to actually research stories so here's a link for them.
Glenn Reynolds has an interesting post from a journalist who is whining that his profession's credibility has fallen so far that the implications are 'seismic'.
Boo hoo.
I feel no sympathy for the profession -- which at one time in my life I wanted to pursue -- because they created the situation for the slide in credibility. They are the ones who pursue agendas, who spin their stories, who tell only one side of the story, and for whom the truth is merely that which reinforces their worldviews. If the vast heartland of America despises you, it's only your fault. Your master used to be the truth...now it's just the New York Times.
And the best thing? We no longer need you as badly as we did before.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 06:44 PM EST [Link]
~ SELF-RULE IN IRAQ ALREADY UNDERWAY: Good story in today's Christian Science Monitor about the increasing amount of self-rule in Iraq's government. The paper's story focuses on the Ministry of Health.
On March 28, this Iraqi ministry became the first to be granted full control by US authorities, who celebrated its turnaround after "more than 30 years of neglect and isolation." Ministers now have control of eight of Iraq's 25 ministries, with more being transferred each week as officials gear up for the June 30 handover of sovereignty.
Health officials like to weigh their spending today against that of Saddam Hussein, whose 2002 health budget of $16 million for 25 million Iraqis amounted to just 64 cents per person. The 2004 budget is $948 million, with an additional $793 million coming directly from the US - all told, a 100-fold increase.
The influx is making a difference at the Al Kadhimiya Teaching Hospital in northwest Baghdad, where large projects are focused on revamping a steam-pipe system critical to sterilization, improving sewer networks, and installing new boilers.
Some $3.5 million has been set aside for the projects, due to begin in a couple of months. The health ministry is spending more than $30,000 per month for maintenance at this facility alone. Monthly salaries have shot from $5 to between $200 and $500.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 02:17 AM EST [Link]
~ MEDALS FOR ALL OF THEM: Every soldier who joins the army learns how to use their bayonet but few actually use them in combat. Well, the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders showed why no training is ever wasted.
British soldiers killed 35 Iraqi attackers in the Army’s first bayonet charge since the Falklands War 22 years ago.
The fearless Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders stormed rebel positions after being ambushed and pinned down.Despite being outnumbered five to one, they suffered only three minor wounds in the hand-to-hand fighting near the city of Amara.
The battle erupted after Land Rovers carrying 20 Argylls came under attack on a highway.
After radioing for back-up, they fixed bayonets and charged at 100 rebels using tactics learned in drills.
That is so cool and brave that I have nothing clever to say.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 02:11 AM EST [Link]
~ NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT: Kelly Jane Torrance on the death of the short story.
Read on.
Posted by antle @ 12:02 AM EST [Link]
Tuesday, May 18, 2004 ALL GAY MARRIAGE, ALL THE TIME: Some Freepers thought my recent American Spectator article was too easy on Gov. Mitt Romney and gave him more credit than he deserved for his opposition to gay marriage in MA. For a tougher stance, read Hadley Arkes' piece in NRO.
Arkes makes some good points, but at the end of the day Romney went further in his opposition to Goodridge than most of the rest of the state political establishment. Is he obligated to become a political martyr on gay marriage when so few other politicians and voters are willing to take more aggressive action with him? Especially given the fact that a lot of his voters simply want the whole issue to go away? I don't know if I have a good answewr for that.
One of the most eloquent supporters of gay marriage, Jonathan Rauch of the National Journal, has a piece posted over at Reason making the case for taking a chance on same-sex nuptials. He has published a new book on the subject that is guaranteed to get a lot of attention among people interested in this debate.
Finally, my report in the May 24 issue of The American Conservative on gays in the U.S. diplomatic mission to Bucharest and how the taxpayers are already underwriting the de facto civil unions of government employees abroad is now online.
Posted by antle @ 11:45 PM EST [Link]
~ THE DAY IS OVER: And civilization has yet to ground to a standstill. I'm sure you're wondering why this blog didn't see fit to post anything about the first day of gay marriage in Massachusetts. We did post an article by Jim Antle this week but outside of that we've been quiet.
Well, I can't speak for anyone else but I have to admit that I can see the merits of both sides of the debate. I think that conservatives are right that we haven't properly debated the full ramifications of what gay marriage represents to society. I also understand why those with what we euphamistically refer to as 'alternative lifestyles' feel so strongly about having the ability to be married and aren't satisfied by the stop gap notion of civil unions.
I guess like Jim said in his essay we'll only really be able see how this transforms society in the decades to come. Either the institution of marriage will be further eroded or not much will change.
It's a bit hard to talk about an issue in any authorative way when you can't really make up your mind. At any rate, Brian Tiemann has an interesting post looking at both sides of the issue.
Posted by steve @ 03:08 AM EST [Link]
Monday, May 17, 2004 STICK TO GOSSIPING ABOUT TELEVISION: I know I have no shot of ever placing a freelance piece with the Toronto Star because of my politics so I feel free to basically say anything I want about that rag. Oh wait, I just said it. If you want to know why that newspaper isn't worth reading, a good indication is when they take a second rate gossip/TV columnist named Antonia Zerbisias and let her write third-rate op-ed pieces.
The latest example came Sunday with a piece mocking warbloggers for being so quiet as the situation in Iraq supposedly deteriorates into chaos...you know, like it's been doing for the past year or so.
The warblog drums are growing silent.
They're either running out of time, or money, or steam — or the conviction that Operation Iraqi Freedom was going to be a cakewalk in the sand.
If the above makes no sense to you, then you have not been paying attention to the chest-thumping chaterati of the cybersphere, a post 9/11 class of might-is-right and right-is-might wordsmiths who rode the "War on terror" wave with their warmongering web logs.
But now, with the news getting more dire, the quag more mired and the cost of war ever higher, the warbloggers find themselves on the wrong side of history. And so some of them are putting down their mice and putting up a white flag.
Well, it's true, some bloggers have felt themselves chastened after the problems in Fallujah and Najaf, the controversy at Abu Ghraib and the continuing attacks on coalition forces in the Sunni triangle. Hell, some days Andrew Sullivan sounds like he's about to drop his chad for John Kerry in November. Prominent pundits like David Brookes have publicly announced that they were wrong when they argued that Iraq would be a glorious first (and easy) step in bringing democracy to the Middle East. The media thinks it was right when it was predicting quagmire (insert obligatory Vietnam reference here).
Well, they're all wrong. Zerbisias is wrong. Those chastened bloggers are wrong. People like Brookes are wrong. The media is wrong. Who is right? Well, I still think it's the warbloggers. David Janes says it best (In his comments section):
Well fair enough. We're advocates for a position. The opposite position we get to hear every day, just turn on the TV or listen to the radio. That position that you're hearing is, IMHO, 90% XXXXXXXX. Everything's a diaster, blah blah blah. The funny thing is the definition of "diaster" is "whatever the situation is today". 14 months ago we were hearing about Stalingrads and millions of Mogidishus (however the hell you spell that), millions of refugees, 100000s of civilian deaths; 2.5 years ago I was hearing about how Afghanistan was the crucible that western armies have been crushed within for countless millenia.
It's also fair to critisize the "circle of re-enforcement" of the warblogosphere -- some might call that community though -- but there's a lot more to it than that. If it wasn't for the warblogosphere, you would never hear these failures of media analysis _ever_ be critisized, except perhaps in some minor technical journal a decade hence.
Remember 4 weeks ago? The "general insurrection" in Iraq where the Americans have finally united the Sunnis and Shi'as, blah blah blah blah blah? The guy on Global TV was practically ready to XXXX in his pants, he was so excited that the Yanks were about to get their commupance. Then one day they stopped talking about it. Tonight you can turn to Channel 3 (or whatever it is in Kingston) at 6:30 and they'll tell you about the "worsening situation in Iraq".
Despite what Zerbisias 'writes', the warbloggers are still right and the media is still wrong. Is the situation in Iraq to our liking? Of course not, but anyone who expected an easy post-war ride was a fool to begin with. Iraq is not post-war Germany or Japan and the dynamics of the Middle East are different from those in post-war Europe. The coalition is going to take casualities, reverses will occasionally occur and people on all sides will continue to die. I'm not happy about that but I only have to look at the history of reporting after WWII (have you ever seen the 1945 headline that announced the Allies won the war but were losing the peace in Germany?) to know that the media is simply incapable of looking at a situation over the long-term.
When it comes to accurate reporting on what's going on in Iraq, I don't look at the mainstream media for guidance. They have consistently spun the war and the aftermath for their own purposes and people like Zerbisias are merely their barely talented pundit foot soldiers. It's the warblogger community which has repeatedly fact checked the media and corrected many of their most egregious examples of slanted reporting.
In essence, however, what seems to bug Zerbisias the most is that she and her heroes, people like Paul Krugman, Robert Fisk, Maureen Dowd and Heather Mallick are being taken to the mat by people who realize them for what they are: wrong. They are wrong so often that it simply becomes tiresome to correct them. Maybe that's why the 'guns have fallen silent' Antonia.
Posted by steve @ 05:26 PM EST [Link]
~ OTHER CANADIANS INVOLVED IN THE OIL FOR FOOD SCANDAL?: We all know that one Canadian, Arthur Millholland, president of Oilexco Ltd., appeared on a list of people who allegedly received oil vouchers/allocations from the Hussein regieme in exchange for kickbacks. According to Canada Free Press, the list of canucks could be longer.
Canadians are also said to have made oil deals with Saddam, and ties with the Canadian Company involved go all the way up to Prime Minister Paul Martin’s office.
A man called Benon Sevan may be the UN kingpin in the oil-for-food program.
In the Canadian connection, it’s a man called Paul Desmaris. Desmaris is the largest shareholder and director of TotalFinaElf, the largest corporation in France, which held tens of billions of dollars in contracts with the deposed regime of Saddam Hussein.
And who is Desmaris' son married to? Why none other than Jean Chretien's daughter!
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:42 PM EST [Link]
~ BIG NEWS OUT OF IRAQ: That's what you get when you take care of your niece for the day...you miss two big stories out of Iraq. The first is the tragic murder of Izzedine Salim, head of the Iraqi interim council, and the second is the discovery of an artillery shell with sarin nerve gas.
If it is sarin, and we've all heard about the false-positives before, I'm sure people will brush it off as a lone artillery shell. But who manufactures nerve gas for just one shell?
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:19 PM EST [Link]
Sunday, May 16, 2004 BOY, WAS I WRONG ABOUT ENSIGN: One of the professional harzards of political commentary is that sometimes events prove you wrong in a pretty spectacular fashion.
In 2000, I predicted that the newly elected Sen. John Ensign (R-Nevada) might emerge as a leading constitutional conservative in the Senate. Looks like I was wrong.
Instead of exercising leadership on behalf of restoring constitutional government, Ensign is leading the charge to use the power of the federal government to get Hollywood to show less smoking in movies.
I'd like someone to show me where in the Constitution this power is enumerated. Via The Agitator.
Posted by antle @ 03:02 PM EST [Link]
~ THIS IS WHAT I GET FOR SLEEPING IN: Not only did I sleep through church, I missed this exchange on "Meet the Press" where one of Secretary of State Colin Powell's press aides attempted to cut off the interview under tough questioning. According to the portion of the transcript posted on Drudge, Powell interceded and overruled the aide.
Read on.
Posted by antle @ 02:42 PM EST [Link]
Saturday, May 15, 2004 MORE PHOTOS AND FILM FROM ABU GRHAIB: Except it isn't what you think it is. Roger Simon reports that al-Hurra has obtained pictures and film from the days of Saddam Hussein's reign and they are truly horrific.
These are all acts performed by Saddam's soldiers and police in uniform. I am not sure what Al Ahurra will broadcast, but they will be culled from among the following. I am told that when their people saw these tapes, they were unable to watch them.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 06:47 PM EST [Link]
~ IT WOULD MAKE FOR AN INTERESTING ELECTION: (via Brothers Judd Blog) The NY Times reports that several prominent Democrats are continuing in their campaign to recruit Sen. John McCain to be John Kerry's running mate.
The enthusiasm of Democrats for Mr. McCain, an Arizona Republican, is so high that even some who have been mentioned as possible Kerry running mates — including Senator Bill Nelson of Florida and Bob Kerrey, the former Nebraska senator — are spinning scenarios about a "unity government," effectively giving Mr. Kerry a green light to reach across the political aisle and extend an offer.
"Senator McCain would not have to leave his party," Mr. Kerrey said. "He could remain a Republican, would be given some authority over selection of cabinet people. The only thing he would have to do is say, `I'm not going to appoint any judges who would overturn Roe v. Wade,' " the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion, which Mr. McCain has said he opposes.
I don't think these Democrats (and a lot of Republicans for that matter) realize how conservative John McCain is. Sure, he was responsible for the most recent campaign finance reform but on other issues he's solidly right, whether it's abortion, gun control, military or spending. How exactly would a liberal like Kerry co-exist with a conservative like McCain on the campaign trail? In other words, how do you get these guys to read off the same page when they're reading different books? They may be really good friends but I really don't see that being enough to paper over some big differences.
Unless, of course, McCain is simply interested in being vice president and will sell himself out ideologically to do it.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 06:39 PM EST [Link]
~ HOW QUICKLY THEY GROW: It's been a while since I posted a picture of my niece so here goes with one that I took just a few minutes ago:
Who says only Lileks can do stuff like this?
Posted by steve @ 04:42 PM EST [Link]
~ MUSLIMS ANGERED BY GENE SIMMONS: Boy, there's an intro I never thought I'd write. Gene Simmons got Australian Muslims angry earlier this week when he refered to their culture as 'vile' and blasted the treatment of women in Islam.
"This is a vile culture and if you think for a second that it's willing to just live in the sands of God's armpit, you've got another thing coming," Simmons said during an interview on Melbourne's 3AW radio Thursday. "They want to come and live right where you live and they think that you're evil."
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:34 PM EST [Link]
Friday, May 14, 2004 YOU HOPE AND YOU DREAM: But you don't let yourself believe that it can actually happen. Today, it finally did. Liberal MP Sheila Copps has announced that she is leaving politics and will not run in the next federal election.
Unfortunately Copps did raise the spectre of running sometime in the future.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 02:58 PM EST [Link]
~ HELP RUMMY OUT: From The Federalist (04-19):
In his latest election-year stunt to undermine the Bush administration -- and our national resolve to finish the job in Iraq -- John Kerry launched a petition calling for the resignation of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Kerry claims that Secretary Rumsfeld should be held personally responsible for the actions of a few soldiers in Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, who humiliated a group of the captive terrorists in their search for "actionable intelligence." Kerry claims his petition received about 250,000 signatures.
By way of reply, PatriotPetitions.US, the nation's leading public opinion advocate for U.S. national security and sovereignty, released its petition in support of Secretary Rumsfeld, who has proven to be a very capable leader of DoD. This petition received more than 75,000 signatures in its first day, but we have a long way to go to catch up to Kerry's campaign.
If you have not already done so, please act now to support Secretary Rumsfeld.
Sign the petition here.
Posted by steve @ 01:46 AM EST [
