France Awaits Election Returns

CNN coverage here.
Too close to call in advance, says Sky News:

A new opinion poll shows centre-right candidate Nicolas Sarkozy still leading with 29%, ahead of the Socialist Segolene Royal on 25%.

The BVA poll has the centrist candidate Francois Bayrou slipping to 15%.

But at least one-third of voters are still undecided ahead of Sunday's first round.

Writing in Slate, Christopher Hitchens predicts they will vote for Jean Le Pen:

Le Pen may still be proven wrong next weekend in his overconfident assertion that people will vote for the real thing rather than a surrogate. Sarkozy, and others, may draw his fangs by stealing his voters. But some of us can remember a time when—as someone once put it—if you heard people discussing La Revolution in a French cafe, you realized that they were talking not about the last one, but the next one. I don't think it is sufficiently appreciated that France has now become the most conservative major country in Europe, where different defenses of the status quo are at war only with different forms of nostalgia and even outright reaction.

LGF: PBS's "Insane Bias"

In an episode of its multipart series on Islamism:

Here’s a very good look at the insane bias of the PBS series “America At a Crossroads,” as they go to the most notorious extremist front group in America for quotes about “moderation,” and brush aside CAIR’s many, well-documented connections to terrorist groups. With an extended section about “soaring hate crimes” against Muslims, this is nothing but a public relations presentation for CAIR. Saudi money sure can buy some PBS love...

...And just for the record, in the 2001 FBI hate crime report, they list 481 anti-Islamic incidents: in 2002, 155; in 2003, 149; and in 2004, there were 156. That’s how much they have “soared.”

Ken Burns's and PBS's New "Separate But Equal" Hispanic Veteran Deal...

That's the strong implication of Paul Farhi's Washington Post story from April 18th:

A PBS official said yesterday that filmmaker Ken Burns will not re-cut his documentary on World War II -- a statement that disappointed and angered minority-group activists who on Tuesday said they believed Burns and PBS had committed to reediting the film to address their concerns about its content.

Programming chief John Wilson, seeking to clarify PBS's earlier statements, said yesterday that Burns's 14 1/2 -hour documentary, "The War," is complete. That statement, however, leaves unresolved the complaints from some Latino and American Indian organizations, which have been pressing Burns and PBS for months to incorporate into the film material about Latino and American Indian service members.

Burns has resisted any suggestion that he is changing "The War," despite his agreement to film additional material to try to address advocates' concerns. A spokesman for Burns insisted yesterday that the filmmaker isn't "reediting" his work, as The Washington Post reported yesterday....

...Some of the disagreement over Burns's -- and PBS's -- intentions turns on small but critical semantic distinctions, particularly whether the unproduced new material will be a "part" of "The War," or instead air as a supplement.

Latino advocates are wary that the additional content that Burns has promised will appear during breaks in the film, or otherwise outside the main story arc. They insist that the new material should be part of the story itself, which focuses on the wartime experiences of four towns or cities in different regions of the country.

But that will not be the case, according to Burns's representative and Wilson.

"It does not satisfy our concerns to be an amendment or some kind of addendum" to the documentary, said Raul Tapia, a spokesman for the American G.I. Forum, a Latino veterans organization. Latinos "who contributed so much to winning the war deserve better. They are not an addendum. They stood up for their country, and we are standing up for them."

Joshua Foust on Irshad Manji

Joshua Foust writes about Irshad Manji, on his blog The Conjecturer, about an episode of the PBS series America at a Crossroads:

The first hour was the debut documentary of Irshad Manji, the self-styled Muslim Refusenik. It basically follows her as she visits Yemen, Amsterdam, and her mother in Canada, discussing her objections to modern, extremist Islam. As always, it is mesmerizing to watch a devout lesbian feminist battle the regressive, fundamentalist men destroying her faith. I can relate, though obviously not to the same degree...

In Memoriam, Liviu Librescu

A link to Liviu Librescu's Virginia Tech website.

Wall Street Journal: Wolfowitz Scandal Payback for Anti-Corruption Drive at World Bank

Robert B. Holland, III, the US representative to the World Bank, writes that there's more to the Wolfowitz scandal than an appearance of nepotism, self-dealing, and cover-up by a former defense department official--it's about entrenched corruption among World Bank permanent staff:

Those interested in the success of the World Bank should be under no illusion as to what is really motivating the staff revolt now playing out and what the consequences are likely to be. Many are opposed to Mr. Wolfowitz's anti-corruption emphasis, some on the good faith basis that he is placing disproportionate emphasis on the issue at the expense of other development priorities. Others, however, are opposed on the selfish basis that elevating anticorruption and governance considerations will result in lower lending levels and more difficult negotiations with borrowing governments. Still others may fear exposure of corruption among staff itself and possible adverse donor reaction if widespread corruption appears to plague Bank operations.

Regardless of the fates of Mr. Wolfowitz and the anticorruption initiative, the Bank faces an existential financial problem because of the combined effect of its declining relevance and attractiveness as a funding source for many middle-income countries like China, India, Mexico and Russia, and an annual administrative budget exceeding $1 billion. It's a positive development that many countries no longer are dependent on Bank lending, but the income consequences to the Bank need to be addressed because the administrative budget is a serious burden on the world's poor and donor taxpayers.

The most important cost drivers are staff salaries and headcount, and it is here where some of the most pernicious effects of the staff association's union characteristics are felt. Over the years, the Bank's legal department has constructed a complex set of rules and procedures governing employment practices, particularly terminations, designed to avoid a court of law somewhere imposing something more onerous in the name of "due process."

The unfortunate result is a system of such Dickensian complexity that virtually all bank managers have concluded that no one can be fired. This, and the tendency of many Board members to intervene in individual cases to protect or promote their nationals, has resulted in far too many employees, many of whom are widely viewed as incompetent, and costly salaries and severance packages (compared to which Ms. Riza's package is a pittance).

Other unfortunate results are an unreasonably low mandatory retirement age of 60 and the retention of an army of consultants nearly as large as the Bank's regular workforce. Many consultants are former Bank staff. The permanent nature of Bank employment also complicates needed reform of its whistleblower policies, which are frequently abused as another tool of entrenchment.

All of these and other factors have added up to a bloated budget in which an unusually honest and candid senior budget official , who met with Mr. Wolfowitz in my home pending board approval of his nomination to avoid detection by more senior Bank staff, identified specific examples of wasteful spending adding up to about $300 million annually. Mr. Wolfowitz's first steps to rein in the Bank's unsustainable cost structure are another important reason many staff and their board allies want him gone. Unless he and his successors and the board address the cost structure, the Bank will be in danger of collapse.

After reading this, it seems that the US Congress might need to conduct an in-depth investigation of what's really going on at the World Bank. Obviously Wolfowitz didn't have the management skills needed for his job. And, after all, those huge tax-free salaries at the World Bank are paid by US taxpayer dollars...

Perhaps it may be time for Congress to shut down the World Bank gravy train altogether?

Nancy Pelosi's Father Helped Peter Bergson Rescue Jews During WWII

My father sent me this link, to Rafael Medoff's Jerusalem Post article about Nancy Pelosi's father--who supported Peter Bergson (Hillel Kook)--protagonist of Bernard Weinraub's new play, "The Accomplices," as well as my documentary (just out on DVD from Kino), "Who Shall LIve and Who Shall Die?"--in Congress:

Speaker Pelosi's father, the late US congressman Thomas D'Alesandro, Jr., of Maryland, was known as a Roosevelt Democrat. What is not widely known is that D'Alesandro broke ranks with president Franklin D. Roosevelt on the issues of rescuing Jews from Hitler and creating a Jewish State.

D'Alesandro was one of the congressional supporters of the Bergson Group, a maverick Jewish political action committee that challenged the Roosevelt administration's policies on the Jewish refugee issue during the Holocaust, and later lobbied against British control of Palestine.

The Bergson activists used unconventional tactics to draw attention to the plight of Europe's Jews, including staging theatrical pageants, organizing a march by 400 rabbis to the White House, and placing more than 200 full-page advertisements in newspapers around the country. Some of those ads featured lists of celebrities, prominent intellectuals, and members of Congress who supported the group - including D'Alesandro.

D'Alesandro's involvement with the Bergson Group was remarkable because he was a Democrat who was choosing to support a group that was publicly challenging a Democratic president. And D'Alesandro was not one of the conservative Southern "Dixiecrat" Democrats who sometimes tangled with FDR over various issues; he was a staunch supporter of Roosevelt and the New Deal. He even named his first son Franklin Roosevelt D'Alesandro.

UNTIL LATE in the Holocaust, the Roosevelt administration's position was that nothing could be done to rescue Jews from the Nazis except to win the war. The Bergson Group was convinced that there were many steps the US could take to rescue refugees, without impeding the war effort.

Bergson's strategy for changing US policy was anchored in the hope that humanitarian-minded Democrats like D'Alesandro would break ranks with the White House over the plight of the Jews. Rallying Congress was a way to put pressure on the president.

The Bergson Group's Holocaust campaign culminated in the introduction of a Congressional resolution, in late 1943, urging creation of a government agency to rescue refugees. Senator Tom Connally of Texas, a loyal FDR supporter and chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, blocked the committee's consideration of the resolution. But when Connally was out sick one day, his replacement, Senator Elbert Thomas (D-Utah) quickly ushered the resolution through. In the House of Representatives, too, there was growing support for the rescue resolution.

This Congressional pressure helped influence President Roosevelt to do what the resolution urged - in early 1944, he established the War Refugee Board. Despite its small staff and meager funding, the Board played a key role in the rescue of more than 200,000 Jews from the Holocaust. Its many accomplishments included sponsoring the heroic life-saving activities of the Swedish diplomat Raoul Wallenberg in Nazi-occupied Budapest.

AFTER THE war, D'Alesandro continued supporting the Bergson Group as it campaigned for the establishment of a Jewish State in Mandatory Palestine. That sometimes meant clashing with the Truman administration, which wavered back and forth on the issue of Jewish statehood...

Virginia Tech Killer Had History of Mental Illness

From The Telegraph (UK):

The South Korean student who shot 32 people at Virginia Tech university was held in a mental health unit after two women students complained about his behaviour in autumn 2005, according to the university police chief.

Virginia Tech university officials were also warned repeatedly about Cho Seung-hui more than a year ago, a university teacher said.

Cho Seung-hui railed against ‘rich kids’and ‘debauchery’

Lucinda Roy, a former chairwoman of Virginia Tech’s English Department, told CNN she warned officials about Cho Seung-hui, 23, in 2005 after seeing how disturbing his creative writing essays were.

But she said the warnings were not taken seriously enough. The university has not yet responded to her comments.

Ms Roy said that she was so disturbed by what she found that she decided to take him out of the classroom for one-to-one tutoring.

“I was so uncomfortable that I didn’t feel that I could leave him in the classroom,” she said.

Queens College Conference on World Jewry

It's called: Is It 1938 Again?. Speakers include: Professor Irving Louis Horowitz,Hannah Arendt University Professor Emeritus of Sociology and Political Science, Rutgers University;Professor Michael Walzer,Center for Advanced Study, Princeton, Editor, Dissent;Professor Alan Dershowitz
Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Harvard Law School; and Norman Podhoretz, Editor-at-Large, Commentary Magazine . From the program:

In 1938, German Nazi totalitarianism, under the charismatic and mad leadership of Adolf Hitler, began its march toward world conquest and the destruction of the Jews. In an act of willful blindness, Western democratic leaders chose to negotiate and appease Nazism. Many Jewish leaders also downplayed the danger by convincing themselves that Nazi ideology was merely for domestic political consumption. Seven years later, over 50 million people, including six million European Jews, were dead: victims of World War II.

In 2007, extreme Islamist forces have spawned global Jihad, a state-sponsored terrorist war against the West as well as moderate Islamic states and their leaders, a war in which they openly proclaim their intention to destroy the Jewish State of Israel and its seven million inhabitants. This time, the chief peril emanates from radical Islamist Iran, whose President Ahmadinejad openly pursues nuclear weapons capability while brazenly declaring, “The accomplishment of a world without America and Israel is both possible and feasible.”

“IS IT 1938 AGAIN? A Major Conference on the State of World Jewry” presents an international array of scholars, writers, intellectuals and activists who will assess, debate and discuss today’s threat against the West and the Jewish people and identify options for meeting dangers to Jewish survival. Ample time will be allocated for Q&A.

Scotland Remembers Dunblane Massacre

From Scotland's Daily Record:

THE shootings brought back horrific memories to two fathers whose daughters were killed in the Dunblane massacre 11 years ago.

Five-year-olds Sophie North and Victoria Clydesdale were among the 16 children and a teacher murdered by gunman Thomas Hamilton at a primary school in the Perthshire town on March 13, 1996. Sophie's dad Dr Mick North said: "I am still shaken after hearing the news of more young lives lost.

"And the number of those killed is horrifying." Dr North, who campaigns for tighter gun control in Britain, revealed he had previously visited Virginia Tech on an academic trip.

He said: "To know the place brings it more in to focus for me. Thoughts of my Sophie are always with me. It would be impossible to lose a daughter in any circumstances and for that not to be the case.

"But in those horrific circumstances, to see something like this happen again, it jolts you back to where you were 11 years ago."

Victoria Clydesdale's dad, Charlie, said: "I feel angry that, after the pain we went through, these things still happen. And I feel so sad for those families who have lost sons and daughters.

E. Fuller Torrey: Not Treating Mental Illness is Dangerous & Deadly

E. Fuller Torrey's article from the October 27, 2000 Orlando Sentinel seems relevant to the Virginia Tech massacre:

...» About 16 percent of state jail and prison inmates, roughly 16,000 people, are severely mentally ill.

» People with untreated severe mental illness are nearly three times more likely to be a victim of a violent crime.

» Ten to 15 times more suicides occur among those people with untreated, severe mental illness.

» More than 1,000 homicides in the United States are committed each year by people who have untreated mental illness.

These statistics can be attributed to the insidious nature of these illnesses.

Half of those suffering from schizophrenia and bipolar disorder don't realize that they are sick and in need of treatment because of a biologically based symptom, anosognosia. These individuals don't realize that the hallucinations, delusions, paranoia and withdrawal they're experiencing are symptoms. Because they don't know that they are sick, they refuse treatment....

In other words, an individual must have a finger on the trigger of a gun before medical intervention will be permitted.

And this:

VIOLENT BEHAVIOR: ONE OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO TREAT SEVERE MENTAL ILLNESSES

SUMMARY: It is well known that the two major demographic predictors of violent behavior are male sex and younger age. It is also known that the two major clinical predictors of violent behavior are past history of violence and substance abuse (alcohol and/or drug). Recent studies have established that being severely mentally ill and not taking medication is a third major clinical predictor of violent behavior.

* * *
1. Severely mentally ill individuals who ARE taking their medication are NOT more dangerous than the general population.
The three-site MacArthur Foundation Study of violence and mental illness reported that discharged psychiatric patients without substance abuse had approximately the same incidence of violent behavior as other individuals living in the same neighborhoods. These patients were being followed closely for a year and most were taking their medications. The reported results were weakened by the fact that the patients with the most violent past histories were excluded from the study and the fact that the Pittsburgh neighborhoods used as controls were "disproportionately impoverished and had higher violent crime rates through the city as a whole."
Steadman HJ, Mulvey EP, Monahan J, et. al. Violence by people discharged from acute psychiatric impatient facilities and by others in the same neighborhoods. Archives of General Psychiatry 55:393-401, 1998.

2. Severely mentally ill individuals who are NOT taking their medication ARE more dangerous than the general population.
Several early studies in the 1970s suggested this fact but were not well controlled. For example, a 6-year follow-up of 301 patients discharged between 1972 and 1975 from a California state hospital reported that their arrest rate for "violent crimes" was 10 times the rate for the general population.

Israeli Professor Saved His Students

From the NY Daily News story on Virginia Tech University Prof. Liviu Librescu:

The students in the class dropped to the floor and started overturning desks to hide behind as about a dozen shots rang out, he said.

Then the gunfire started coming closer. Librescu, 77, fearlessly braced himself against the door, holding it shut against the gunman in the hall, while students darted to the windows of the second-floor classroom to escape the slaughter, survivors said.
Mallalieu and most of his classmates hung out of the windows and dropped about 10 feet to bushes and grass below - but Librescu stayed behind to hold off the crazed gunman.

Alec Calhoun, 20, said the last thing he saw before he jumped from the window was Librescu, blocking the door against the madman in the hallway.

He died trying to protect the students.

More here.

Where's the Outrage?

From a comment on the Chicago Sun-Times website in response to President Bush's speech at Virginia Tech:

As a Virginia Tech Alumni I am disgusted that politicians are showing their faces and speaking at this event.

I'm disgusted at the event, period. President Bush should have visited at the hospital with the wounded survivors, then fired the FBI agents responsible for the federal role in this massacre--not one policeman, sheriff, or FBI agent was wounded or attempted to stop the killing. A beserk gunman is not a hostage situation, Mr. President...

Virginia Tech Timeline

From Channel Four (UK):

Monday April 16

7.15am - Virginia Tech Police Department receives an emergency call to go to a dormitory room at West Ambler Johnston Residence Hall at the Virginia Tech University.

Officers and members of the Virginia Tech rescue squad arrive to find two people, a man and a woman, have been shot dead in a dormitory.

The hall is closed off, students are asked to remain in their rooms and police begin collecting evidence and identifying witnesses.

The university authorities believe the deaths are "an isolated incident, domestic in nature."

7.30am - Officers begin following leads about a "person of interest" regarding the double murder.

8.25am - The Virginia Tech Leadership Team, including the University president, meet to assess the situation and to decide how to notify students of what has happened.

9am - The Leadership Team is briefed by Virginia Tech police chief Wendell Flinchum on the ongoing investigation.

9.26am - All university staff and students are sent an email informing them of the murders and asking them to report any suspicious activity. An emergency recording and a telephone message are also transmitted.

9.45am - The police receive a second emergency call to go to Norris Hall, an engineering building containing faculty offices, classrooms and laboratories.

Officers arrive to find the front doors chained shut from the inside. They break down the barricades and hear gunshots as they enter the building.

They follow the sounds to the second floor. As they reach it, the gunshots stop. Officers then discover the gunman, who has taken his own life.

9.55am - Staff and students are notified by email again about the second shootings.

Virginia Tech President Was Major Bush Campaign Donor

The crime scene at Virginia Tech was so incompetently handled, the response by Steger such an outrageous CYA bureaucratic bungle, I suspected the Virginia Tech president may have been a Bushie...

So I checked it out on the FEC database and learned that indeed, in 2004, Virginia Tech president Charles Steger gave $2000 (the maximum) to the Bush-Cheney presidential campaign. In 2006, he gave $1000 to George Allen's Senate campaign.

Heck of a job, Steger...

Presented by the Federal Election Commission

Individual Contributions Arranged By Type, Giver, Then Recipient

Contributions to Political Committees

STEGER, CHARLES W DR.
BLACKSBURG, VA 24061
VIRGINIA TECH/PRESIDENT

BUSH, GEORGE W
VIA BUSH-CHENEY '04 (PRIMARY) INC
09/05/2003 2000.00 23992060756

Total Contributions: 2000.00

Joint Fundraising Contributions

These are contributions to committees who are raising funds to be distributed to other committees. The breakdown of these contributions to their final recipients may appear below

STEGER, CHARLES
BLACKSBURG, VA 24060
VIRGINIA TECH UNIVERSITY/PRESIDEN

ALLEN VICTORY COMMITTEE
10/18/2006 1000.00 26940557549

Total Joint Fundraising: 1000.00

Recipient of Joint Fundraiser Contributions

These are the Final Recipients of Joint Fundraising Contributions

STEGER, CHARLES
BLACKSBURG, VA 24060
VIRGINIA TECH

ALLEN, GEORGE
VIA FRIENDS OF GEORGE ALLEN
10/18/2006 1000.00 26020940597

Recipient Total: 1000.00

Dennis Prager: You're Dead, I'm Healing

Someone I know sent me Rabbi Dennis Prager's column on the Virginia Tech massacre:

Within hours of the massacre of more than 30 people at Virginia Tech University, the president of the university issued his first statement on the evil that had just engulfed the college campus and concluded with this:

"We're making plans for a convocation tomorrow at noon in Cassell Coliseum for the university to come together to begin the healing process from this terrible tragedy."

Other university officials also spoke about beginning the healing process and about bringing in counselors to help students heal.

I believe that this early healing talk is both foolish and immoral.

It is foolish because one does not speak about healing the same day (or week or perhaps even month) that one is traumatized -- especially by evil. One must be allowed time for anger and grief. To speak of healing and "closure" before one goes through those other emotions is to speak not of healing but of suppression.

Not to allow people time to experience their natural, and noble, instincts to feel rage and grief actually deprives them of the ability to heal in the long run. After all, if there is no rage and grief, what is there to heal from?

The Jewish tradition, still observed even by non-Orthodox Jews, is to sit "shiva" (seven) days and do nothing but mourn and receive visitors after the death of an immediate relative. One does not have to be a religious Jew or even a Jew to appreciate this ancient wisdom.

It is not good for people to feign normalcy immediately after the loss of a loved one. People who have not been allowed, or not allowed themselves, time to grieve suffer later on. Any child who loses a parent and is "protected" from grieving by a well-intentioned parent who tries to act "normal" right after the other parent's death is likely to pay a steep psychological price.

Personally, I don't want to heal now. I want to feel rage at the monster who slaughtered all those young innocent people at Virginia Tech. And I want to grieve over those innocents' deaths.

This whole notion of instant healing (like its twin, instant forgiveness) is also morally wrong.

First, it is narcissistic. It focuses on me and my pain, not on the murderer and the murdered.

Second, it is almost obscene to talk of our healing when the bodies of the murdered are still lying in their blood on the very spot they were slaughtered. Our entire focus of attention must be on them and on the unspeakable suffering of their loved ones, not on the pain of the student body and the Virginia Tech "community."

Virginia Tech Parents: Fire University President

The tragedy at Virginia Tech is horrible, and as someone I know said to me last night, the question that needs to be asked is not "Why?" but "How?".

Virginia Tech parents have suggested a first step towards fixing things:

Parents of a Virginia Tech student expressed outrage Monday at what they call an inadequate response by college brass to the worst mass-murder shooting in American history.

John and Jennifer Shourds of Lovettsville, Va. demanded the immediate firings of University President Charles Steger and Virginia Tech Campus Police Chief W.R. Flinchum who he said "screwed up" the handling of separate shooting incidents that left 33 students dead, including the shooter.

“My God, if someone shoots somebody there should be an immediate lockdown of the campus,” said John Shourds. “They totally blew it. The president blew it, campus police blew it.”

Video of Virginia Tech Press Conference

The unofficial version,in streaming video, here.

Virginia Tech Website

The university website has posted official accounts of today's tragic shootings.

Financial Times: Wolfowitz Must Go

What then do we see here? The answer is: an apparent violation of Bank rules; favouritism that borders on nepotism; and a possible cover-up. It is true Mr Wolfowitz and Ms Riza were put in a difficult position. Even so, what has come out would be bad in any institution. In an institution that spear-heads the cause of good governance in the developing world, it is lethal.

The World Bank has moved from being a self-proclaimed exemplar of best practice in corporate governance to an example of shoddiness. As long as Mr Wolfowitz stays, this can be neither repaired nor forgotten, be it outside the Bank or inside it. In the interests of the Bank itself, he should resign. If he does not, the board must ask him to go.

Investor's Business Daily: Wolfowitz Must Go

(ht worldbankpresident.org)

Wolfowitz was a visible symbol of U.S. control of the World Bank with this finger-pointing. Corrupt states have often reacted with routine anti-Americanism. Now with clear ethics violations at the top, they have a new excuse for their resentment — and their corruption.

As countries like Tajikistan, Iraq and Haiti see this spectacle unfold, they'll have new reasons to resist outside efforts to clean up.

Then there's those who fund the World Bank — mainly U.S. taxpayers who provide cash and billions in loan guarantees to fund the Bank's $23 billion annual lending.

They come from a world where bank officers, business executives, stock traders and even journalists must carefully follow complex ethics rules or be paraded off before TV cameras in handcuffs as criminals. They aren't fooled by claims of ignorance.
While the White House says it still has full confidence in Wolfowitz, staying on is unlikely to encourage taxpayers of dozens of countries to provide more capital for its $23 billion in annual lending.

Did Wolfowitz Deal Corrupt US State Department?

Soren Ambrose notes the strange arrangement whereby the US State Department agreed to hire a British subject paid by the World Bank to improve the US image in the Muslim world. He doesn't think it appears kosher for Shaha Riza to be paid by the World Bank to promote US political goals:

An Overlooked Angle in Wolfowitz Scandal?
Isn't it odd that there are no questions being asked about a "secondment" arrangement in which international public funds are used to pay the exorbitant salary of a U.S. State Department staffer (and most recently director of a U.S. State Dept. front group) whose mission is to improve the U.S.'s image in the Muslim world?

I've seen nothing about a balancing of the secondment -- e.g., the State Dept. sends four of its staff to the Bank to balance out Shaha Riza's salary. And a five-year secondment must be rather unusually long.

But the key issue should be: why should international taxpayers be supporting efforts to popularize U.S. policy in the Middle East? Are we all really so cynical about the Bank's supposed status as a U.S. puppet that we don't even blink at such an arrangement?

The idea of a "non-political" World Bank was always a fantasy, but this seems to be pushing it a bit far.

He has a running account of Wolfowitz's problems here.

Paul Wolfowitz's Statement to World Bank Annual Meeting

From the World Bank Website:

... Let me also ask for some understanding. Not only was this a painful personal dilemma, but I also had to deal with it when I was new to this institution and I was trying to navigate in uncharted waters. The situation was unprecedented and exceptional. This was an involuntary reassignment and I believed there was a legal risk if this was not resolved by mutual agreement. I take full responsibility for the details. I did not attempt to hide my actions nor make anyone else responsible.

I proposed to the Board that they establish some mechanism to judge whether the agreement reached was a reasonable outcome. I will accept any remedies they propose.

In the larger scheme of things, we have much more important work to focus on. For those people who disagree with the things that they associate me with in my previous job, I’m not in my previous job. I’m not working for the U.S. government, I’m working for this institution and its 185 shareholders. I believe deeply in the mission of the institution and have a passion for it. I think the challenge of reducing poverty is of enormous importance. I think the opportunities in Africa are potentially historic. We have really been able to call attention to the progress that’s possible in Africa, and not just the despair and misery in the poorest countries. I think together we’ve made some progress in enabling this institution to respond more effectively and rapidly both in poor countries and in middle income countries to carry on the fight against poverty. I also believe—even more strongly now than when I came to this job—that the world needs an effective multilateral institution like this one that can responsibly and credibly manage common funds for common purposes, whether it is fighting poverty or dealing with climate change or responding to avian flu. I ask that I be judged for what I’m doing now and what we can do together moving forward.

Britain Says Wolfowitz Has Damaged World Bank

According to Reuters, the Wolfowitz scandal has embarrassed the UK:

Britain said on Saturday the scandal over World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz's promotion of his girlfriend has damaged his institution and the decision over his fate should now lie with its board.

"While this whole business has damaged the Bank and should not have happened, we should respect the board's process," British development minister Hilary Benn said in a statement released as he arrived in Washington for the World Bank/International Monetary Fund meetings.

"I am sure these views will be shared by other governors who will also be considering their responses."

Wolfowitz has been under growing pressure to resign after it became known that he approved a big pay rise and new job for his girlfriend -- a World Bank staffer.

The White House has offered its full backing for the former Bush administration stalwart but many other countries have so far remained cautious about prejudging any decision by the World Bank's board.

Here's a typical headline from Australia's Sydney Morning Herald: The banker, his lover and her pay rise of $80,000.

That Wolfowitz appears to be blind to the damage the World Bank scandal is doing to him and the institution he heads is another argument for his swift departure...

NGOs: A ‘New Class’ in International Relations

I've just learned that my latest Orbis article, NGOs: A ‘New Class’ in International Relations, is available online from Science Direct. Unfortunately, Science Direct charges for the full text download unless your library has a subscription. However, the abstract, at least, is available for free:

Nongovernmental organizations have attempted to take control of civil society, displacing traditional governing institutions. This serves the interests of the terrorists, warlords, and mafia dons, who benefit from weak central government, and hinders the West's ability to mobilize allies to participate in the war on terror. NGO leaders who are hostile to the nation-state itself seek to transform a voluntary system of participation in international organizations by sovereign member-states via a “power shift” to an unholy alliance of multinational corporations and NGOs. Since they do not possess the traditional sources of legitimacy enjoyed by nation-states, they seek to impose their will by financial or forceful means—for example, “sanctions” or “humanitarian intervention.” A new class of NGOs has thus emerged that is essentially opposed to the diplomatic, legal, and military measures required for dealing with civilizational conflict.

Banned Filmmaker Blasts PBS Islam Series Censors

In a Washington Times op-ed, producer Frank Gaffney accuses Robin MacNeil of collaboration with PBS censors:

As it happens, I was involved in making a film for the "America at a Crossroads" series that also focused on, among others, several American Muslims. Unlike Mr. MacNeil's, however, this 52-minute documentary titled "Islam vs. Islamists: Voices from the Muslim Center," was selected through the competitive process and was originally designated by CPB to be aired in the first Crossroads increment.

Also unlike Mr. MacNeil's film, "Islam vs. Islamists" focuses on the courageous Muslims in the United States, Canada and Western Europe who are challenging the power structure established in virtually every democracy largely with Saudi money to advance worldwide the insidious ideology known as Islamofascism. In fact, thanks to the MacNeil-Lehrer film, the PBS audience soon will be treated to an apparently fawning portrait of one of the most worrisome manifestations of that Saudi-backed organizational infrastructure in America: the Muslim Student Association (MSA). The MSA's efforts to recruit and radicalize students and suppress dissenting views on American campuses is a matter of record and extremely alarming.

In an exchange with me aired on National Public Radio last week, however, Robert MacNeil explained why he and his team had refused to air "Islam vs. Islamists," describing it as "alarmist" and "extremely one-sided." In other words, a documentary that compellingly portrays what happens to moderate Muslims when they dare to speak up for and participate in democracy, thus defying the Islamists and their champions, is not fit for public airwaves -- even in a series specifically created to bring alternative perspectives to their audience.

The MacNeil criticism was merely the latest of myriad efforts over the last year made by WETA and PBS to suppress the message of "Islam vs. Islamists." These included: insisting yours truly be removed as one of the film's executive producers; allowing a series producer with family ties to a British Islamist to insist on sweeping changes to its "structure and context" that would have assured more favorable treatment of those portrayed vilifying and, in some cases, threatening our anti-Islamist protagonists; and hiring as an adviser to help select the final films an avowed admirer of the Nation of Islam -- an organization whose receipt of a million dollars from the Saudis to open black Wahhabi mosques is a feature of our documentary. The gravity of this conflict of interest was underscored when the latter showed an early version of our film to Nation of Islam representatives, an action that seemed scarcely to trouble those responsible for the "Crossroads" series at WETA and PBS.

At this writing, it remains an open question whether PBS will get away with suppressing this film. The decision rests with the CPB, whose vision and support for "Islam vs. Islamists" in the face of sustained hostility for it exhibited by PBS and its friends has made this documentary possible.

Unless and until a way is found to translate into widespread distribution CPB's stated assessment that ours is a powerful and important film, though, the intention of the "Crossroads" series to diminish, if not end, the tyranny of the public airwaves by the left, will be substantially unfulfilled. And "Islam vs. Islamists" will remain the film PBS does not want you to see -- and can keep you from doing so.

Read This Book Online For Free

UC Press has a new digital publishing feature that has a posted an online edition of BEFORE THE NICKELODEON by Charles Musser, a classic film studies text about Thomas Edison's motion-picture business.

NEH Statement on Ken Burns Scandal

Found this statement from Noel Milan of the National Endowment for the Humanities in my email--his response to an earlier post: Unanswered Questions About NEH Role in Ken Burns Scandal:

Dear Dr. Jarvik:

Thanks for your query.

The National Endowment for the Humanities continuously strives through
its rigorous peer review process to fund excellence in significant
products. As a custodian of taxpayer dollars, we make every effort to
ensure a broad range of views are represented in projects we support,
however we cannot censor or manipulate content. The ultimate
responsibility for any project is that of the creator or author.

Sincerely,

Noel Milan

Although Ken Burns has surrendered to Hispanic veterans, I think questions about NEH responsibility--and the precise nature of Ken Burns' relationship with NEH--remain unanswered.

UK Foreign Office Condemns Berezovsky Declaration

According to RIAN Novosti, the British government is distancing itself from Berezovky's call for Putin's ouster--but if actions speak louder than words, the question remains: Will the British continue to give Beresovsky a safe haven?

LONDON, April 13 (RIA Novosti) - Britain's Foreign Office Friday condemned Boris Berezovsky's remarks urging a coup against the Russian president and said it will closely look into this and other statements by the exiled tycoon.

The Foreign Office said it deplores anyone who uses their residence in the U.K. as a

platform to call for the violent overthrow of a sovereign government, but stopped short of promising to extradite the fugitive oligarch - something Moscow has been pushing for ever since the billionaire was granted political asylum in 2003.

On Friday, Moscow renewed its calls for Berezovsky's extradition after he said in an interview with the British newspaper The Guardian that he has bankrolled Kremlin insiders conspiring to topple Vladimir Putin.

Berezovsky Calls for Violent Overthrow of Russian Government

In Kommersant, exiled oligarch Boris Berezovsky is quoted as calling for "regime change" in Russia:

The Guardian of Britain released an interview of Russia’s exile tycoon Boris Berezovsky Friday. “We need to use force to change this regime,” The Guardian quoted shadowy billionaire as saying.
”There is no chance of regime change through democratic elections,” Berezovsky announced via The Guardian. “We need to use force to change this regime.” When asked whether he was plotting a new revolution, the fugitive oligarch didn’t hesitate to answer. “You are absolutely correct,” he said.

President Putin is damaging Russia by rolling back democratic reforms, pressurizing the opposition, centralizing power and violating the constitution, Berezovsky made clear, emphasizing that he is funding his supporters in Russia, who are staging a coup. “There are also practical steps which I am doing now, and mostly it is financial.”

The oligarch said he didn’t fear to loose his refugee status, reasoning that the situation had recently changed for the better because of the polonium murder of Alexander Litvinenko.

Berezovsky could be again questioned by investigators of Russia’s Prosecutor General Office, this time because of his interview to The Guardian, said Dmitry Peskov, the briefer of Putin’s administration. “His words are very interesting. This is a very sensitive issue,” Peskov said as quoted by The Guardian.

Why Wolfowitz Is Finished At World Bank

This statement by Paul Wolfowitz, published in today's New York Times, means his departure from the World Bank is only matter of when, not if:

“In hindsight, I wish I had trusted my original instincts and kept myself out of the negotiations,” Mr. Wolfowitz said.

Wild Diner Films Blog

Turnabout is fair play. There's a mention of my film's DVD release here, so thought readers interested in DC's independent film scene might find Wild Diner Films Blog worth a look:

The WILD DINER FILMS Blog (ex-DIY Filmmaker Sujewa)
This is the blog of DIY (do-it-yourself, real indie/ultra-low budget & self-distributed) DC based filmmaker Sujewa Ekanayake. Current projects: DATE NUMBER ONE (2006) distribution, getting ready to shoot my '07 film FILMMAKING FOR THE POOR. For more information on Date Number One & other projects please visit: http://www.wilddiner.com/. Thanks!

Weinraub's "Accomplices" Explains "Israel Lobby"

According to Jonathan S. Tobin, of The Jewish Exponent, one theme of Bernard Weinraub's play set during World War II is a dispute over American Jewry's appropriate role in US politics (another version published in The Jerusalem Post):

According to a growing number of academics and political extremists, the Jews have too much power in America.

This backlash against the so-called "Israel Lobby" has predictably caused many to wonder whether the assertive voice of contemporary Jewish political activism is too loud, too brash and, most of all, too pushy in making its case.

Those who wonder what the world would be like if only those pushy Jews listened to their critics need not engage in science fiction. All you need is a history lesson about how American Jewish organizations and leaders -- the predecessors of the ones that are today considered the take-no-prisoners cornerstone of "the lobby" -- acted during the Holocaust. And to do that, a visit to an off-Broadway theater this month will do nicely.

More here, in the Downtown Express review by Jerry Tallmer.

Anniversary of Yuri Gagarin's First Spaceflight

As Google reminded one on its homepage, today is the anniversary of Yuri Gagarin's launch into space. Wikipedia entry here.

Ken Burns & PBS Surrender

Just received this email:

Dear Defenders of the Honor,
Great news today: PBS President and CEO Paula Kerger this afternoon sent the Defend the Honor  organizers a 3-page letter, announcing that Ken Burns and co-director/producer Lynn Novick "have decided to create additional content that focuses on stories of Latino and Native American veterans of the Second World War. The new narrative will be included in the broadcast of the series, as well as in THE WAR's DVD, Web site and educational outreach materials."

You may read Kerger's entire letter, the Defend the Honor response, and the Defend the Honor press release, at our website, www.defendthehonor.org, under NEWS/PRESS RELEASES   
(We are unable to attach those PDF documents because many of you are receiving this via listservs which will not accept attachments.)

In a letter to Kerger, our Defend the Honor core group noted that this development represents a historic moment.: "We are gratified that PBS has taken our concerns seriously and has made the decision to include, in a substantive manner, the Latino, as well as Native American experiences in The War." 

In a news release from the Defend the Honor core group, Angelo Falcon, of the National Institute for Hispanic Politics, noted: "This result was made possible by the unusually strong collaboration between the many Latino organizations and leaders that came forward to let PBS know that our community must be respected."

The core group will be meeting sometime in the near future with Paula Kerger to nail down details of exactly how the Latino and Native American experiences will be incorporated. We want to make sure that our celebration isn't unfounded.

The Defend the Honor core group looks forward to collaborating closely with the other organizations, including the  Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the National Council of La Raza, the American GI Forum, the National Hispanic Media Coalition, the National Hispanic Media Council, individual members of Congress and of both the California and the Texas state legislatures who have also led the charge.

Thank you to the thousands of individuals who have voiced their concerns and propelled this movement forward. There will be other developments in the coming weeks and we will keep you apprised. But just for today, on behalf of Gus Chavez, Angelo Falcon, and Marta Garcia, I hope you will savor the sweet taste of success.
                 
Maggie

Ken Burns & PBS Blind to Hispanic Community

Writes Janet Murguia in the Kansas City Star:

I have admired much of Ken Burns’ work, but the exclusion of Latinos from the World War II series appears to be part of a pattern. That his series on jazz failed to include even a passing reference to Latino artists seemed questionable at best. But his virtual exclusion of Latinos from his series on baseball, a game where Hispanics historically have made enormous contributions and dominate today, was completely inexplicable.

It seems obvious that, notwithstanding his creative genius, Mr. Burns has a serious blind spot when it comes to our community.

The lack of action by PBS also follows an unfortunate, longstanding pattern. Any objective review of current PBS programming would demonstrate that the number of Hispanic-focused stories is inadequate.

In this sense, the record of Mr. Burns and PBS is no different than that of much of the mainstream media. But Ken Burns is not just another filmmaker, and PBS is not just another network. PBS is funded in part with public dollars and, more important, holds a public trust. The extraordinary relationship between Mr. Burns and PBS has made him the chief television chronicler of our nation’s history. Yet neither PBS nor Mr. Burns have addressed the Latino community’s concerns is any meaningful way.

Producer Charges PBS Censored Documentary on Islamist Extremism

Martyn Burke's charges against PBS are reported in the Arizona Republic (ht LGF):

The producer of a tax-financed documentary on Islamic extremism claims his film has been dropped for political reasons from a television series that airs next week on more than 300 PBS stations nationwide.

Key portions of the documentary focus on Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser of Phoenix and his American Islamic Forum for Democracy, a non-profit organization of Muslim Americans who advocate patriotism, constitutional democracy and a separation of church and state.

Martyn Burke says that the Public Broadcasting Service and project managers at station WETA in Washington, D.C., excluded his documentary, Islam vs. Islamists, from the series America at a Crossroads after he refused to fire two co-producers affiliated with a conservative think tank.

"I was ordered to fire my two partners (who brought me into this project) on political grounds," Burke said in a complaint letter to PBS and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which supplied funds for the films.

Burke wrote that his documentary depicts the plight of moderate Muslims who are silenced by Islamic extremists, adding, "Now it appears to be PBS and CPB who are silencing them."

A Jan. 30 news release by the corporation listed Islam vs. Islamists as one of eight films to be presented in the opening series.

More about this at Current.org.

Who Shall Live and Who Shall Die? on DVD at Potomac Video

John, the very kind manager of Potomac Video here in NW DC, has put up the 1982 one-sheet poster that last hung in front of New York City's Carnegie Hall Cinema, when my film premiered theatrically. He told me that he already rented the film to a customer, who told him that he liked it...so I'm glad it is finally on DVD (their VHS copy hadn't been rented since 2001). Here's a link to Potomac Video's website:

David Finkle on Bernard Weinraub's "The Accomplices"

In his review today, David Ng of the New York Times criticized Bernard Weinraub's "The Accomplices" saying, "Scenes unfold at such an uninflected pace that you’d think you were watching C-Span." Yet, to a Washingtonian like me, that sounded like a compliment. So, I looked around the Web, and found critic David Finkle's positive review on TheatreMania:

As Bernard Weinraub's heavy-tonnage docudrama The Accomplices unfolds, the effect is like that of an entire population -- you among them -- feeling a slow, steadily mounting burn. While the sensation is uncomfortable enough to have you shifting in your seat, it is absolutely necessary.

I'm going up later this month to see for myself...

UPDATE: Nikki Finke's DeadlineHollywoodDaily.com story here.

Charles in Space...

To read Charles Simonyi's blog about his space tourist trip to the International Space Station, click here:

Dr. Charles Simonyi and the crew of Expedition 15 have completed a successful launch into orbit from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan at 17:31 GMT April 7. The Soyuz TMA-10 spacecraft lifted off the launch pad bound for the International Space Station (ISS). The capsule will orbit the Earth for two days until its rendezvous with the space station at 19:15 GMT April 9.

Kathleen Parker: After Iran Hostage Photo-Op, Take Women Off Combat Duty

Kathleen Parker says one lesson of Britain's Iran hostage crisis is that young mothers of small children ought not be sent to war, in The Washington Post (of all places):

It is not fashionable these days to suggest that women don't belong in or near combat -- or that children need their mothers. Yes, they need their fathers, too, but children in their tender years are dependent on their mothers in unique ways.

There's not enough space here to go into all the ways that this is true, but children (and good parents) know the difference even if some adults are too dim, brainwashed or ideologically driven to see what's obvious.

Why the West has seen it necessary to diminish motherhood so that women can pretend to be men remains a mystery to sane adults. It should be unnecessary to say that the military is not a proper vehicle for social experimentation but is a machine dedicated to fighting and, if necessary, killing.

Women may be able to push buttons as well as men can, but the door-to-door combat in Fallujah proved the irrelevance of that argument. Meanwhile, no one can look at photos of the 15 British marines and sailors and argue convincingly that the British navy is stronger for the presence of Acting Leading Seaman Faye Turney -- no matter how lovely and brave she may be.

Happy Easter!

This year Orthodox and Western Easter fall on the same Sunday, in a rare coincidence. Wikipedia entry here:

Easter, the Sunday of the Resurrection, Pascha, or Resurrection Day, is the most important religious feast of the Christian liturgical year, observed at some point between late March and late April each year (early April to early May in Eastern Christianity). It celebrates the resurrection of Jesus, which his followers believe occurred on the third day after his death by crucifixion some time in the period AD 27 to 33 (see Good Friday).

Easter also refers to the season of the church year, previously called Eastertide, lasting for fifty days, from Easter Sunday through Pentecost; and, in the Roman Catholic Church, to the eight-day feast beginning on Easter Day called the Octave of Easter.

Douglas Feith's Powerpoint Slides Assessing the Relationship Between Iraq & Al Qaida

Thanks to Senator Levin making the Office of Special Plans briefing public (with some item blacked out, which makes the presentation more credible, rather than less), we can now see what all the fuss is about.You can download the complete briefing as a PDF file here.

Findings:

*More than a decade of numerous contacts

*Multiple areas of cooperation

*Shared anti-US goals and common bellicose rhetoric
- Unique in calling for killing of Americans and praising 9/11

*Shared interest and pursuit of WMD

*Some indications of possible Iraqi coordination with al Qaida specifically related to 9/11

*Relationship would be compartmented by both sides; closely guarded secret; indications of excellent operational security by both parties.

Good Friday

Wikipedia entry here:

Good Friday is the Friday before Easter or Pascha. It commemorates the crucifixion and death of Jesus at Calvary. This year, it is on April 6, 2007.
Good Friday is a holy day observed by most Christian religions. Special prayer services are often held on this day with readings from the Gospel giving accounts of the events leading up to the crucifixion. Mainstream Christian churches view Christ's crucifixion as a voluntary and vicarious act, and one by which, along with resurrection on the third day, death itself was conquered.

The Concert Podcast

Someone I know recently subscribed to The Concert Podcast from the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum. It's terrific. We just listened to:

The Concert No.19
Contrasting Beethoven and Mozart (37.8MB)
Works for piano trio and string quintet played by the Claremont Trio and the Orion String Quartet, with violist Ida Kavafian

•Beethoven: Allegretto in B-flat Major, WoO. 39
•Mozart: String Quintet No. 4 in G minor, K. 516

You can subscribe using iTunes, or by downloading podcasts from their website.

Albuquerque Journal: Ken Burns Shows "Patterned Disrespect" for Hispanic-Americans

From Hispanic Vets Lose the Battle With 'The War' by John M. García and Eduardo Díaz:

More than 40 interviews and 14 hours of programming, and no Latinos? How do you explain this "brown out" of a publicly financed and supported project?
Producer and director Ken Burns states, "We are dismayed and saddened by any assumption that we intentionally excluded anyone from our series." The producers assert that the series is about individuals and the "universal human experience," however, it highlights discrimination against Japanese-Americans and African-Americans. We applaud this effort, but ignoring the Latino experience is inexplicable.
Sacramento is one of the cities where the producers conducted interviews. Sacramento is over 25 percent Latino; they couldn't find one of our World War II vets? But, really what can you expect from a producer whose series on jazz excluded the likes of Machito, Tito Puente and Eddie Palmieri, or whose series on baseball included a scant six minutes on Roberto Clemente only?
Burns has shown a patterned disrespect for our community's contributions in building America and shaping our popular culture.

American GI Forum Resolution Condemns PBS & Ken Burns

From the American GI Forum Website:

AMERICAN GI FORUM OF THE UNITED STATES

RESOLUTION- PBS/Ken Burns Documentary, THE WAR

WHEREAS, The American GI Forum of the United States, is the only Congressionally Chartered Hispanic/Latino Veterans Organization in the United States whose primary purpose is to serve Hispanic/Latino Veterans and their families;

WHEREAS, The American GI Forum was founded by Dr. Hector P. Garcia in 1948 because of the inequities and discrimination inflicted upon returning Mexican-American Veterans after their distinguished service in World War II;

WHEREAS, Hispanic/Latino individuals, as members of the Armed Forces of the United States, served with valor and distinction during World War II;

WHEREAS, In World War II, Hispanic/Latino individuals fought and died for the principles of equality, justice and freedom for all.

WHEREAS, Hispanic/Latino individuals during World War II were the most decorated minority group to receive this Country's highest award, "The Congressional Medal of Honor";

WHEREAS, Hispanic/Latino Americans, as an ethnic group, made tremendous and significant contributions during World War II, for example:

. . . In 1940, while America was still at peace, two National Guard units from New Mexico, the 200th and 515th Coast Artillery (Anti-aircraft) battalions were activated and dispatched to the Philippine Islands. Largely made up of [Mexican Americans]-- both officers and enlisted men from New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas -- the two units were stationed at Clark Field, 65 miles from Manila.

On December 7, 1941, the Japanese Imperial Navy launched a surprise attack on the American naval fleet at Pearl Harbor, forcing America into war. Within days, Japanese forces attacked the American positions in the Philippines. Outnumbered and desperate, General Douglas MacArthur moved his forces, including the 200th and 515th, to the Bataan Peninsula west of Manila. Here, fighting alongside their Filipino comrades, they made a heroic three-month stand against the large, well-equipped invading forces. As the weeks passed, rations, medical supplies, and ammunition diminished and became scarce. On April 9, 1942, starving and greatly outnumbered, most of the surviving troops were ordered to surrender. After their capture, the American and Filipino soldiers had to endure the 12-day, 85-mile "Death March" from Bataan to the prison camps, followed by 34 months of captivity. Three years later, General Jonathan Wainwright praised the men of the 200th and 515th units, saying that "they were the first to fire and the last to lay down their arms and only reluctantly doing so after being given a direct order."

In the Pacific theater, the 158th Regimental Combat Team, known as the Bushmasters, an Arizona National Guard unit comprised of many Hispanic soldiers, saw heavy combat. They earned the respect of General MacArthur who referred to them as "the greatest fighting combat team ever deployed for battle." Company E of the 141st Regiment of the 36th Texas Infantry Division was made up entirely of [Hispanic] Americans, the majority of them from Texas. After 361 days of combat in Italy and France, the 141st Infantry Regiment sustained 1,126 killed, 5,000 wounded, and over 500 missing in action. In recognition of their extended service and valor, the members of the 141st garnered 31 Distinguished Service Crosses, 12 Legion of Merits, 492 Silver Stars, 11 Soldier's Medals, 1,685 Bronze Stars, as well as numerous commendations and decorations. In all, twelve Hispanic soldiers received the Medal of Honor for their services during World War II.

From 1940 to 1946, more than 65,000 Puerto Ricans served in the American military, most of them going overseas. The 295th and 296th Infantry Regiments of the Puerto Rican National Guard participated in the Pacific theater, while other Puerto Rican soldiers served in Europe.

(Excerpts from: Houston Institute for Culture, The Hispanic Experience, Hispanics in Military Service, Hispanic Contributions to America's Defense, by John Schmal. - Originally published by the Puerto Rico Herald, November 11, 1999.);

WHEREAS, The PBS (Public Broadcasting Service) has announced it is airing in September, 2007, the new Ken Burns documentary series, THE WAR. This seven-part, 14 hour, documentary series, is directed and produced by Ken Burns and Lynn Novick. It explores the history and horror of World War II from an American perspective. It follows the fortunes of so-called ordinary men and women who get caught up in the greatest cataclysm in human history;

WHEREAS, This documentary exposes the racism of World War II directed at African-American and Japanese-Americans, however, it fails to outline the same as it affected Hispanic/Latino Americans;

WHEREAS, This documentary purports to honor the heroism of all Americans, when in fact, it glaringly fails to honor those heroic Hispanic Americans who have earned such an honor;

WHEREAS, Whether intentionally or inadvertently, the contributions of Hispanic/Latinos in World War II were omitted;

WHEREAS, This oversight appears to have violated PBS's own policy on "Diversity" i.e.,

. . . Content diversity furthers the goals of a democratic society by enhancing public access to the full range of ideas, information, subject matter, and perspectives required to make informed judgments about the issues of our time. It also furthers public television's special mandate to serve many different and discrete audiences. The goal of diversity also requires continuing efforts to assure that PBS content fully reflects the pluralism of our society, including, for example, appropriate representation of women and minorities. . . .

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,

1. That the American GI Forum of the United States condemns this documentary as not presenting the contributions of Hispanic Americans during World War II and until such time as Hispanics are fairly and adequately represented, demands that it not be aired,

2. That the American GI Forum of the United States requests that the Public Broadcast System forthwith correct this omission.

3. That failure to correct this omission will result in the institution of a nationwide boycott of PBS and its affiliates. Further, we would lead an effort requesting that all public and private funding be curtailed.

For it was Abraham Lincoln who said, "History is not history unless it's true."

Adopted on the 13th day of March, 2007
By the American GI Forum of the United States
National Board of Directors Meeting in Las Vegas, NV
ANTONIO GIL MORALES,
National Commander & Board Chairman

How come I haven't seen this controversy discussed on the Jim Lehrer Newshour, BTW?

Unanswered Questions about NEH Role in Ken Burns Scandal

I sent the following email to the National Endowment for the Humanities about that organization's responsibility for the Ken Burns documentary that has caused such great offense to Hispanic-American veterans of World War II. So far, no answers. I'll let readers know what Dr. Bruce Cole's organization has to say in this regard, as soon as I get a reply...The following email was sent to NEH Public Affairs on March 31, 2007:

Dear NEH Public Affairs,

I have been reading about the controversy over Ken Burns' new documentary about World War II with interest, and would appreciate information on the NEH role, which presumably should safeguard historical accuracy against a filmmaker's "artistic license" in portraying historical events. I assume that is the purpose of academic review and the peer panel process.

Therefore, for publication on my blog, I would appreciate written answers to the following questions:

How much has NEH paid for this documentary? What were the conditions of the grant relating to historical accuracy and comprehensiveness?

Who are the historical advisors for this project?

Who reviewed the grant application for NEH--peer panelist names as well as staff names?

Who signed the final approval for this project?

Did anyone notice the absence of Latino veterans in the documentary prior to the current controversy--as part of the NEH peer review process?

I look forward to hearing from you in this regard.

Yours sincerely,
Laurence Jarvik
Laurence A. Jarvik, Ph.D.
http://laurencejarvikonline.blogspot.com

UPDATE: I have received an email from info@neh.gov calling the attention of "Noel" to this request. I assume that is Noel Milan, director of communications for NEH. So, I'll post NEH's answers to the above questions --once the NEH sends them to me...

Fred Thompson on Ayaan Hirsi Ali

The possible Presidential candidate, actor, and former senator had his say in National Review:

Ayaan Hirsi Ali can’t leave her Washington D.C. home without guards.

Born a Muslim in the African nation of Somalia, she was treated as property. Hirsi Ali, though, escaped a marriage, arranged by her father, to a cousin in Canada she’d never met.

Granted exile in the Netherlands, Hirsi Ali rose like cream and was elected to the Dutch parliament. She also wrote a script based on her experience volunteering in battered women’s shelters. There, she learned that her fellow Somali immigrants were maintaining the feudal ways she thought she had left behind.

Filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, the great-grand-nephew of the famous painter, made her movie — but paid for it with his life. His Islamist murderer used a dagger to pin a note, promising Hirsi Ali’s death, to the director’s chest. Unsafe, and unwelcome to many, Hirsi Ali came to America last year and was able to live pretty much like a normal person.

But her new autobiography, Infidel, is out now and the usual suspects are furious that she would argue for the liberation of Muslim women. Due to serious and credible threats, she is once again surrounded by guards.

There were many Germans and other Europeans who came to America and warned of the Nazi threat in the 1930s, including writers and filmmakers. Can you imagine that any of them would have ever needed bodyguards?

Hirsi Ali does — right here in America. Yet too many people still don’t understand what our country is up against. They might if they read her book.

Thompson recorded a radio spot with the same message available as an mp3 download here

Gerald Steinberg: Close Down EU-Funded NGOs in Israel

From The Jerusalem Post:

Furthermore, the scale of European government funding for Israeli and Palestinian political organizations that claim to promote human rights, peace and democracy is huge, and largely hidden. The massive Euro-bureaucracy has created a complex network of funding agencies for "civil society" in the region, and no central index or reporting system exists.

Until last year, the EU office in Tel Aviv violated its own principles of transparency and kept the list of Israeli NGO beneficiaries secret, ostensibly due to threats of violence. NGO Monitor's investigations led to a change in this instance, but funding for Palestinian NGOs is still largely covert.

THE CHANGE in Israeli government policy and a willingness to confront such anti-democratic manipulation, particularly by European governments (including non-EU countries such as Norway and Switzerland), marks an important step. Going beyond the terse statement, the Israeli representatives should bring a detailed file on the funding provided for politicized NGOs to every meeting between heads of state, foreign ministers and government officials.

If Europe expects to play a more important role in regional security and diplomacy, it cannot also continue to provide funding designed to undermine the Israeli government's positions, both internally and in the international arena.

In Europe, the amorphous entities known as "civil society organizations" and NGOs also need close scrutiny. These bodies are unelected, and their officials are not accountable.

In democratic societies, government officials who provide funds to these entities generally use this as a means to promote their own interests and objectives, without checks and balances or transparency. In closed non-democratic societies, such as Syria, Egypt and the Palestinian Authority, foreign government assistance for NGOs that promote democracy, tolerance, and human rights may have a positive impact, but only if this support is carefully monitored to prevent abuse. Europe's failure to provide such monitoring exacerbates the damage.

Israel, as a vibrant democracy, does not need, and should not be the target of "civil society initiatives" engineered by foreign governments, whether well-meaning or hostile. From this perspective, the example of Bimkom, the security barrier, and the British Embassy is small but highly illustrative.

The time has come to end this misguided and patronizing policy.

Belinda Acosta: "Deplorable" Ken Burns No Da Vinci

In the Austin Chronicle, Belinda Acosta weighs in against Ken Burns and PBS:

Perhaps the most perplexing response to date comes from Lionel Sosa, a Latino member of the PBS board of directors.

"Asking Burns to change his documentary is like asking Leonardo da Vinci to add another apostle to The Last Supper because somebody was left out," Sosa said in a Laredo Morning Times article by Tricia Cortez published March 20. "This is artistic. This is a film. It's not journalism."

Apparently, Sosa needs a dictionary to look up the definition of "documentary."

By comparing Burns to da Vinci, Sosa inadvertently strikes the crux of the matter. Burns' work is branded as the definitive statement on a subject. This brand comes largely because of his affiliation with PBS, the mandate of which is to serve the American public but much more so because of PBS's reach beyond television (already pervasive) as an approved "text" for use in classrooms across the nation.

Being ignorant – willfully or otherwise – of the flesh-and-blood impact of Latinos in World War II, not to mention the role of World War II in defining U.S. Latino history, is, in a word, deplorable. I don't expect PBS to impose its will on a filmmaker's vision – but it is painfully disappointing to discover that PBS's vision is little more than a few "diversity" dishes served at a card table near the banquet table. No, if PBS is truly interested in expanding its base, it means more than making room at the table. It means allowing other cooks in the kitchen when the meal is being prepared.

Sosa makes another interesting statement in the aforementioned Laredo Morning Times article. Although "disappointed" by the omission of Latinos in The War, he says it's up to Latinos, not Burns, to tell their stories.

"We have the talent in terms of writers, producers, directors, and historians to tell the story," he said. "And we have the resources to raise the money to make the films."

In that case, why bother supporting PBS at all?

Antigua Beats USA in WTO Dispute

The WTO has spoken in favor of Antigua's offshore internet gambling business and against American prohibitions--because the US permits domestic gambling. Slashdot reports that if the US doesn't change its policy, them Antigua has the legal right to retaliate against American sanctions--and may do so by permitting bootleg MP3 download sites for media. The Caribbean once hosted rum smugglers and real pirates...will it now become a haven for music and video pirates? This post from TechDirt raises the question:

TechDirt writes "For some time we've been following the ongoing conflict between the US and the island nation of Antigua surrounding internet gambling. Even before the passage of the most recent anti-gambling law, Antigua had gone to the WTO to complain that the US government's actions against online gambling were de facto protectionist measures, and thus violated international trade law. The WTO ended up siding with Antigua, although, quite predictably, the US did nothing to resolve the issue -- in fact, things have only gotten worse. Now the WTO is speaking out again, slamming the US government for its failure to abide by the decision against it. Once again, it seems likely that the US will ignore the decision, although that would give Antigua the right to retaliate. One possibility that's been thrown out there is that Antigua may turn itself into a haven for free music and software and set up some site like allofmp3.com. Of course, the US put pressure on Russia to crack down on that site, as part of the country's admittance into the WTO, but since Antigua is already part of the organization, the US would have no such leverage. Now, the WTO has spoken out again."

For Antigua's view of the dispute, here's a link to the Antigua Online Gaming Association.

First Review of Bernard Weinraub's "The Accomplices"

It hasn't opened yet, but Cameron's Theatre Snobbery at its Finest has published an early--and favorable--review of Bernard Weinraub's new play about Ben Hecht, Peter Bergson and the struggle to save European Jewry during World War II:

I'm having a hard time thinking of one negative comment I can make about Bernard Weinraub's The Accomplices, currently at Theatre Row in a production by The New Group. It's not a great play, but I left feeling that I had seen one of the most interesting and fascinating political dramas in a long while. Weinraub, a journalist by profession who is making his theatrical debut, tells the story of a fringe group in the early 1940s who tried to shine a light on Hitler's regime at a time when the Roosevelt administration was turning a blind eye to it. The performances are universally excellent: Daniel Sauli plays the protagonist (the son of a Palestinian rabbi) perfectly, while Zoe Lister-Jones hits all the right notes as the woman who loves him, and who has spent much of her life running from her Jewish heritage. Veteran David Margulies is superb as the Rabbi Stephen Wise, who chooses to scorn the radical movement in favor of blind support for FDR, and Jon DeVries offers great comic relief (and social commentary) as both the President of the United States and one of the movement's famous supporters, playwright Ben Hecht. Sign yourself up for this exemplary history listen.

Ken Burns Scandal Hits Philadelphia

The Philadelphia Daily News asks: "Que Pasa PBS?":

USUALLY a Ken Burns television documentary is greeted with great anticipation.

But hype for "The War," Burns' seven-part documentary about World War II that's scheduled to air in September on PBS television stations, has been anything but good, considering the outrage it has triggered among Latino organizations.

Burns' documentary, which looks at the war from the perspective of four cities and towns, excludes the contributions made by America's Latinos who fought in World War II, they say. Estimates are that about 500,000 Latinos served in the war. And 12 were awarded Medals of Honor. With a population of 44 million, Latinos are America's largest minority group.

Janet Murgula, president of the National Council of La Raza, sent a letter to Paula Kerger, president of the Public Broadcasting Service. Kerger will soon rule on how PBS plans to handle the omission.

The brouhaha shows Latinos will not allow [themselves] to be marginalized. Even in Philadelphia.

Iran Frees British Hostages

Whew! Glad that's over...

Though I don't know if Iran backed down under international pressure, Britain blinked when she kow-towed to hostage-takers, or if the lesson is, as this BBC report concludes, quoting a relative of one of the hostages :

"Whoever has been in the right or wrong, the whole thing has been a political mess, so let's just get them home," said his uncle, Ray Cooper.

Speaking of World War II Documentaries...

My film, Who Shall Live and Who Shall Die?, is officially released on DVD today by Kino International, in a special 25th anniversary edition that includes a copy of Billy Wilder's historically-significant short film Death Mills as an "extra".

For some unknown reason, I haven't seen any mentions in the press, not even in Dave Kehr's usually excellent NY Times DVD column. Netflix hasn't stocked it yet, either. Don't know why...

So, please go to your local video store to find a copy to rent or buy (or request your public library to stock it). If you live in the Washington, DC metro area our local Potomac Video has four copies in stock--or you can order a copy from Amazon.com here:

Tawfik Hamid on Islamist Extremism

From OpinionJournal.com (ht JihadWatch):

Progressives need to realize that radical Islam is based on an antiliberal system. They need to awaken to the inhumane policies and practices of Islamists around the world. They need to realize that Islamism spells the death of liberal values. And they must not take for granted the respect for human rights and dignity that we experience in America, and indeed, the West, today.

Well-meaning interfaith dialogues with Muslims have largely been fruitless. Participants must demand--but so far haven't--that Muslim organizations and scholars specifically and unambiguously denounce violent Salafi components in their mosques and in the media. Muslims who do not vocally oppose brutal Shariah decrees should not be considered "moderates."

All of this makes the efforts of Muslim reformers more difficult. When Westerners make politically-correct excuses for Islamism, it actually endangers the lives of reformers and in many cases has the effect of suppressing their voices.

Tolerance does not mean toleration of atrocities under the umbrella of relativism. It is time for all of us in the free world to face the reality of Salafi Islam or the reality of radical Islam will continue to face us.

Russian Translation of Cultural Challenges to Democratization in Russia

Thanks to the work of Professor Tatiana Samsonova of Moscow State University, my Winter 2006 ORBIS article, Cultural Challenges to Democratization in Russia, is now available in Russian.

Click here to download the Russian version: КУЛЬТУРНЫЕ ВЫЗОВЫ ДЕМОКРАТИЗАЦИИ В РОССИИ--Лоренс Джарвик (MS Word).

Rory O'Connor to Ken Burns: "Re-edit your precious art..."

PBS documentary producer Rory O'Connor chides Ken Burns & PBS for disrespecting Latino WWII veterans, on AlterNet:

As a documentary filmmaker myself, I'm definitely in favor of respecting the work of producers. But isn't respect for the audience also important? In a 14-hour documentary, couldn't Burns have devoted a few minutes (at least!) to include the WWII experiences of America's Latinos? I certainly am not asking for the imposition of any kind of "political litmus tests" for documentaries -- but I am calling for Burns to listen to and show respect for valid complaints from the public broadcasting audience and, in this case, to reassess his startling and ahistorical omission.

But to date both Burns and his PBS supporters seem instead to be circling their wagons and taking a defensive posture, instead of reaching out and trying to rectify the situation. "People, when they see the film, they will see the universality," Burns claims. But Latinos won't see themselves -- and that's the crux of the problem.

To acknowledge the ground that the film does not cover, Burns will begin each episode of the documentary with a title card acknowledging its limited scope. He has also asked PBS and CPB to back the related project of local outreach and production. "The film is done yet there are all these opportunities to tell all these other stories," Burns said.

In other words -- leave it to others to clean up the mess I've made ...

Come on, Ken -- you're better than that! You have fourteen hours in well-promoted prime time, coupled with the most extensive outreach campaigns ever tied to a national broadcast, so why not give it up? Do the right thing! Listen to the voice of the people and then re-edit your precious art ...

So far, however, Burns demurs. "It's not just me that can tell all these stories," he maintains. "This is public broadcasting."

Precisely ...

Happy Passover!

Wikipedia entry here.

Dorothy Rabinowitz on AIPAC's Trial

From The Wall Street Journal:

In October 2005, with pro bono attorney Plato Cacheris at his side, Lawrence Franklin pleaded guilty--a decision he could not avoid making, given the indisputable proof of offense--to keeping classified documents at his home. His indictment charged much more--conspiring to communicate national defense information to persons not entitled to receive it, meetings with representatives of foreign nation A (Israel), and Messrs. Rosen and Weissman, cited as furtherance of a conspiracy. The former desk officer for Iran stood charged with conspiracy to "advance his own personal foreign policy agenda" and influence people in government. One Washington insider, hearing this, tartly noted that if all government officials who leaked material to effect policy changes were charged and convicted, the prisons would soon be packed.

The guilty plea brought a sentence of 12 years, seven months--not a light one. Mr. Franklin's hope for reducing it hinges on the cooperation he gives government prosecutors in the trial of the lobbyists. The role assigned him has from the beginning been noteworthy--a reversal of norms. Government officials don't normally get to take part in stings of ordinary citizens. But Mr. Franklin, an official with top security clearance, sworn to protect classified information, is the one asked to wear a wire to amass evidence against the two men with whom he has allegedly conspired. It usually goes the other way around. There is a reason that the government official caught taking a bribe is the object of the law's pursuit, rather than the citizen who has tried to pay him off--and why it is the citizen, crooked as he may be, who wears the wire and gets the possibility of a deal. That reason, of course, is the higher standard expected of those sworn to uphold their offices. If nothing else, the role assigned Mr. Franklin testifies to the government's singular focus on nailing the AIPAC lobbyists.

Even so it remains to be seen what help Mr. Franklin will give the prosecutors at the forthcoming trial of Messrs. Rosenvand Mr. Weissman. In the course of his guilty plea, the otherwise respectful Mr. Franklin forcefully objected to the government's characterization of the self-typed paper about Iran he'd faxed to Mr. Rosen--a document at the heart of one of the significant charges against the lobbyist--as "classified."

"It was unclassified," Lawrence Franklin told the court, "and it is unclassified."

The government would "prove that it was classified," announced the U.S. attorney.

Mr. Franklin: "Not a chance."

What chance the defendants--who asked no one for classified information--have of acquittal and the avoidance of prison remains to be seen. Though Judge T. S. Ellis rejected defense motions to dismiss the charges on constitutional grounds, his early rulings have so far shown a keen appreciation of the meaning this case. In this he stands in sharp contrast to the nation's leading civil rights guardians, these days busy filing lawsuits against the government and fulminating on behalf of the rights of captured terrorists in Guantanamo and elsewhere, while accusing the U.S. of failing to provide open trials and assurances that the accused have the right to view the evidence against them. As of this day neither the ACLU nor the Center for Constitutional Rights has shown the smallest interest in this prosecution so bound up with First Amendment implications. Nor has most of the media, whose daily work includes receiving "leaks" from government officials far more damaging to national security than anything alleged in this case. In this as in the Scooter Libby matter, the desire to see Bush Administration officials nailed apparently counts for more than First Amendment principle.

The government has also moved (in the interest of protecting classified information) to impose strict limits during the trial, on the testimony the public and press will be allowed to hear. If the proposal is allowed, significant portions of the testimony will be available only in the form of summaries. Witnesses, furthermore, would not be allowed to deliver certain testimony directly to jurors, who would instead be told to look at secret documents. It will be, as a member of the Reporters Committee For Freedom of the Press, now opposing the government efforts, describes it, "a secret trial within a public trial." (Dow Jones, publisher of this newspaper, has joined the Reporters Committee in filing an objection.)

Will US Bomb Iran?

Russian News Agency RIA-Novosti seems to think so:

MOSCOW, March 30 (RIA Novosti) - Russian intelligence has information that the U.S. Armed Forces have nearly completed preparations for a possible military operation against Iran, and will be ready to strike in early April, a security official said.

The source said the U.S. had already compiled a list of possible targets on Iranian territory and practiced the operation during recent exercises in the Persian Gulf.

"Russian intelligence has information that the U.S. Armed Forces stationed in the Persian Gulf have nearly completed preparations for a missile strike against Iranian territory," the source said.

American commanders will be ready to carry out the attack in early April, but it will be up to the country's political leadership to decide if and when to attack, the source said.

Official data says America's military presence in the region has reached the level of March 2003 when the U.S. invaded Iraq.

The U.S. has not excluded the military option in negotiations on Iran over its refusal to abandon its nuclear program. The UN Security Council passed a new resolution on Iran Saturday toughening economic sanctions against the country and accepting the possibility of a military solution to the crisis.

The source said the Pentagon could decide to conduct ground operations as well after assessing the damage done to the Iranian forces by its possible missile strikes and analyzing the political situation in the country following the attacks.

A senior Russian security official cited military intelligence earlier as saying U.S. Armed Forces had recently intensified training for air and ground operations against Iran.

"The Pentagon has drafted a highly effective plan that will allow the Americans to bring Iran to its knees at minimal cost," the official said.

More Confessions From Iran's British Hostages

From the BBC:

All 15 Britons held by Iran accept they were in the country's waters despite the UK's insistence they were in Iraqi territory, Iranian state radio says.

The BBC report can be watched here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_6510000/newsid_6516700/6516753.stm?bw=nb&mp=rm.

The video names the British frigate involved as HMS Foxtrot.

A friend mentioned that this story reminds him of the Pueblo incident, when an American naval vessel was captured by North Korea on January 23, 1968, humiliating the United States during the Vietnam War. The commander of the USS Pueblo, Lloyd M. (Pete) Bucher was recommended for Courts Martial. The crew was kept prisoner in North Korea for 11 months--and the USS Pueblo remains in North Korea to this day...Wikipedia entry here.

The US Code of Military Conduct would seem to prohibit American POWs from delivering the type of public confessions broadcast on television by Iran's British hostages:

5. When questioned, should I become a prisoner of war, I am required to give name, rank, service number, and date of birth. I will evade answering further questions to the utmost of my ability. I will make no oral or written statements disloyal to my country and its allies or harmful to their cause.

When questioned, a prisoner of war is required by the Geneva Conventions and this Code to give name, rank, service number (SSN) and date of birth. The prisoner should make every effort to avoid giving the captor any additional information. The prisoner may communicate with captors on matters of health and welfare and additionally may write letters home and fill out a Geneva Convention "capture card."

It is a violation of the Geneva Convention to place a prisoner under physical or mental duress, torture, or any other form of coercion in an effort to secure information. If under such intense coercion, a POW discloses unauthorized information, made an unauthorized statement, or performs an unauthorized act, that prisoner’s peace of mind and survival require a quick recovery of courage, dedication, and motivation to resist anew each subsequent coercion.

Actions every POW should resist include making oral or written confessions and apologies, answering questionnaires, providing personal histories, creating propaganda recordings, broadcasting appeals to other prisoners of war, providing any other material readily usable for propaganda purposes., appealing for surrender or parole, furnishing self-criticisms, communicating on behalf of the enemy to the detriment of the United State, its allies, its Armed Forces, or other POWs.

Every POW should also recognize that any confession signed or any statement made may be used by the enemy as a false evidence that the person is a "war criminal" rather than a POW. Several countries have made reservations to the Geneva Convention in which they assert that a "war criminal" conviction deprives the convicted individual of prison of war status, removes that person from protection under the Geneva Convention, and revokes all rights to repatriation until a prison sentence is served.

Recent experiences of American prisoners of war have proved that, although enemy interrogation sessions may be harsh and cruel, one can resist brutal mistreatment when the will to resist remains intact.

The best way for prisoner to keep faith with country, fellow prisoners and self is to provide the enemy with as little information as possible.

I wonder if this type of code applies for British military personnel?

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Wins Nobel Peace Prize

(April Fool)

On the other hand, here's a link to Mark Steyn's Chicago Sun-Times column:

On this 25th anniversary of the Falklands War, Tony Blair is looking less like Margaret Thatcher and alarmingly like Jimmy Carter, the embodiment of the soi-disant "superpower" as a smiling eunuch.