According to the SITE Institute:
"A U.S.-based Islamic charity received millions of dollars in State Department funds for charitable work in Africa-at the same time that its overseas affiliates were allegedly funneling large sums of money directly to Osama bin Laden, according to newly released government documents. The new information about the Islamic American Relief Agency, and its parent organization in the Sudan, appears to represent the strongest evidence yet that, at least for several years in the late 1990s, U.S. taxpayer money may have been inadvertently used to finance the terrorist operations of Al Qaeda."
Friday, October 22, 2004
Bin Laden Still on Saudi Payroll?
Yes, says Roger L. Simon:
"According to 9-11 panelist John Lehman, Bin Laden is alive and well (?) in the inaccessible South Waziristan region of West Pakistan. Who knows if that's true, but here's the interesting part - George Soros he's not.
"According to 9-11 panelist John Lehman, Bin Laden is alive and well (?) in the inaccessible South Waziristan region of West Pakistan. Who knows if that's true, but here's the interesting part - George Soros he's not.
Asked how bin Laden was surviving, Lehman said he was getting money from outside countries, such as the United Arab Emirates, and high-ranking ministers inside Saudi Arabia.
'He is not a wealthy man,' Lehman said. 'We ran that information into the ground, and discovered he only receives about $1 million a year from his family's fortune. The rest of what he gets comes from radical sympathizers.'"
Why American Jews Should Vote Republican
From The Diplomad:
"Israel & Terror: President Bush has been a strong supporter of Israel, perhaps the most supportive of any President since Richard Nixon. He has not given into the phony moral-equivalence arguments about terrorism and Israel's response to it that you hear from liberals and Europeans. He has shunned the creepy, murderous Arafat. Now we see that Arafat has come out in support of Senator Kerry, which has Kerry scrambling around Florida's Jewish communities and hoping to win votes by saying 'Oy vey,' which is Hebrew for 'Read my lips, I have a plan.' President Bush has an excellent record on Israel, and should outpoll Kerry among Jews just for that; he does not deserve to lose four-to-one. The fact that President Bush has solid support among Christian conservatives should not scare Jews away--the Christian conservatives are every bit as pro-Israel as Jews themselves. Christians and Jews are in this battle together! On the same side! We would all fare very badly in the Wahabi Islamic Republic of America."
"Israel & Terror: President Bush has been a strong supporter of Israel, perhaps the most supportive of any President since Richard Nixon. He has not given into the phony moral-equivalence arguments about terrorism and Israel's response to it that you hear from liberals and Europeans. He has shunned the creepy, murderous Arafat. Now we see that Arafat has come out in support of Senator Kerry, which has Kerry scrambling around Florida's Jewish communities and hoping to win votes by saying 'Oy vey,' which is Hebrew for 'Read my lips, I have a plan.' President Bush has an excellent record on Israel, and should outpoll Kerry among Jews just for that; he does not deserve to lose four-to-one. The fact that President Bush has solid support among Christian conservatives should not scare Jews away--the Christian conservatives are every bit as pro-Israel as Jews themselves. Christians and Jews are in this battle together! On the same side! We would all fare very badly in the Wahabi Islamic Republic of America."
NGOs Hurt the Poor
From Sebastian Mallaby's article in Foreign Policy [link via Instapundit]:
"But it is also a tragedy for the fight against poverty worldwide, because projects in dozens of countries are similarly held up for fear of activist resistance. Time after time, feisty Internet-enabled groups make scary claims about the iniquities of development projects. Time after time, Western publics raised on stories of World Bank white elephants believe them. Lawmakers in European parliaments and the U.S. Congress accept NGO arguments at face value, and the government officials who sit on the World Bank's board respond by blocking funding for deserving projects. The consequences can be preposterously ironic. NGOs claim to campaign on behalf of poor people, yet many of their campaigns harm the poor. They claim to protect the environment, but by forcing the World Bank to pull out of sensitive projects, they cause these schemes to go ahead without the environmental safeguards that the bank would have imposed on them. Likewise, NGOs purport to hold the World Bank accountable, yet the bank is answerable to the governments who are its shareholders; it is the NGOs-- accountability that is murky. Furthermore, the offensives mounted by activist groups sometimes have no basis in fact whatsoever. "
"But it is also a tragedy for the fight against poverty worldwide, because projects in dozens of countries are similarly held up for fear of activist resistance. Time after time, feisty Internet-enabled groups make scary claims about the iniquities of development projects. Time after time, Western publics raised on stories of World Bank white elephants believe them. Lawmakers in European parliaments and the U.S. Congress accept NGO arguments at face value, and the government officials who sit on the World Bank's board respond by blocking funding for deserving projects. The consequences can be preposterously ironic. NGOs claim to campaign on behalf of poor people, yet many of their campaigns harm the poor. They claim to protect the environment, but by forcing the World Bank to pull out of sensitive projects, they cause these schemes to go ahead without the environmental safeguards that the bank would have imposed on them. Likewise, NGOs purport to hold the World Bank accountable, yet the bank is answerable to the governments who are its shareholders; it is the NGOs-- accountability that is murky. Furthermore, the offensives mounted by activist groups sometimes have no basis in fact whatsoever. "
Roger Kimball's The Rape of the Masters
Unfortunately, we couldn't attend today's lecture at the Hudson Institute here in Washington. It featured Roger Kimball talking about his new book, The Rape of the Masters. We found some excerpts at The New Criterion website; the book looks interesting:
"Why do we teach and study art history? A question that elicits a complicated answer. To learn about art, yes, but also to learn about the cultural setting in which art unfolds; in addition, to learn about--what to call it? 'Evolution' is not quite right, neither is 'progress.' Possibly 'development': to learn about the development of art, then, how artists 'solved problems'--for example, the problem of modeling three-dimensional space on an essentially two-dimensional plane.
"Those are some of the answers, or some parts of the answer, most of us would give. There are others. We teach and study art history--as we teach and study literary history or political history or the history of science--partly to familiarize ourselves with humanity's adventure in time. We expect an educated person in the West to remember what happened in 1066, to know the plot of Hamlet, to understand (sort of) the laws of gravity, to recognize The Venus of Urbino when he sees it. These are aspects of a huge common inheritance, episodes that alternately bask in and cast illuminations and shadows, the interlocking illuminations and shadows of mankind's conjuring with the world.
"All this might be described as the dough, the ambient body of culture. The yeast is supplied by direct acquaintance with the subject of study: the poem or play, the mental itinerary a Galileo or Newton traveled, the actual work of art on the wall. In the case of art history, the raison d'etre--the ultimate motive--is supplied by a direct visual encounter with great works of art. Everything else is prolegomenon or afterthought, scaffolding to support the main event, which is not so much learning about art as it is experiencing art first hand."
"Why do we teach and study art history? A question that elicits a complicated answer. To learn about art, yes, but also to learn about the cultural setting in which art unfolds; in addition, to learn about--what to call it? 'Evolution' is not quite right, neither is 'progress.' Possibly 'development': to learn about the development of art, then, how artists 'solved problems'--for example, the problem of modeling three-dimensional space on an essentially two-dimensional plane.
"Those are some of the answers, or some parts of the answer, most of us would give. There are others. We teach and study art history--as we teach and study literary history or political history or the history of science--partly to familiarize ourselves with humanity's adventure in time. We expect an educated person in the West to remember what happened in 1066, to know the plot of Hamlet, to understand (sort of) the laws of gravity, to recognize The Venus of Urbino when he sees it. These are aspects of a huge common inheritance, episodes that alternately bask in and cast illuminations and shadows, the interlocking illuminations and shadows of mankind's conjuring with the world.
"All this might be described as the dough, the ambient body of culture. The yeast is supplied by direct acquaintance with the subject of study: the poem or play, the mental itinerary a Galileo or Newton traveled, the actual work of art on the wall. In the case of art history, the raison d'etre--the ultimate motive--is supplied by a direct visual encounter with great works of art. Everything else is prolegomenon or afterthought, scaffolding to support the main event, which is not so much learning about art as it is experiencing art first hand."
Jeff Danziger's Racist Cartoon
From OpinionJournal, this item about a racist cartoon distributed by the New York Times syndicate:
"It's no secret that Jeff Danziger is a syndicated cartoonist who leans left of center. But who knew that he also considers himself an arbiter of black authenticity?
"One of Mr. Danziger's recent illustrations features National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice as a semi-literate mammy. Ms. Rice--a Russia scholar, former provost of Stanford University and concert pianist--is drawn barefoot and wearing a housedress. Mr. Danziger forgot to put a handkerchief on her head, but the size of her lips has been exaggerated sufficiently to make up for that oversight. She's sitting in a rocking chair and nursing an aluminum tube as though it were an infant. The caption reads: 'I KNOWS ALL ABOUT ALUMINUM TUBES! (Correction) I DON'T KNOW NUTHIN' ABOUT ALUMINUM TUBES . . .'
"Mr. Danziger, a proud member of the media's 'Bush Lied!' brigade, is making a point about the administration's supposed manipulation of prewar intelligence on Iraq. The caption is an apparent reference to Prissy, the house slave in 'Gone With the Wind' who uttered something similar about babies.
"A substantive debate about the president's handling of the war is something reasonable people welcome, especially in an election year. But it's impossible to see where the national security adviser's race or sex fits in to a debate about what Saddam Hussein planned to do with his aluminum tubes."
"It's no secret that Jeff Danziger is a syndicated cartoonist who leans left of center. But who knew that he also considers himself an arbiter of black authenticity?
"One of Mr. Danziger's recent illustrations features National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice as a semi-literate mammy. Ms. Rice--a Russia scholar, former provost of Stanford University and concert pianist--is drawn barefoot and wearing a housedress. Mr. Danziger forgot to put a handkerchief on her head, but the size of her lips has been exaggerated sufficiently to make up for that oversight. She's sitting in a rocking chair and nursing an aluminum tube as though it were an infant. The caption reads: 'I KNOWS ALL ABOUT ALUMINUM TUBES! (Correction) I DON'T KNOW NUTHIN' ABOUT ALUMINUM TUBES . . .'
"Mr. Danziger, a proud member of the media's 'Bush Lied!' brigade, is making a point about the administration's supposed manipulation of prewar intelligence on Iraq. The caption is an apparent reference to Prissy, the house slave in 'Gone With the Wind' who uttered something similar about babies.
"A substantive debate about the president's handling of the war is something reasonable people welcome, especially in an election year. But it's impossible to see where the national security adviser's race or sex fits in to a debate about what Saddam Hussein planned to do with his aluminum tubes."
Are International NGOs Out of Control?
From Gerald M. Steinberg's article in Middle East Quarterly:
"The horrors of the Holocaust and the outrage over the failure of Allied powers to intervene provided the impetus for the creation of today's international human rights system, anchored in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The United Nations (U.N.) and individual governments were the primary actors in establishing new international norms, but in time, a network of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) essentially privatized this international regime. The most powerful of them--Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch (HRW), the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), and others--exert a tremendous influence in the U.N., the European Union (EU), and Western capitals. The NGO community has prospered and grown. In 1948, sixty-nine NGOs had consultative status at the U.N.; by 2000 their numbers had swollen to over 2000, the majority defining themselves as 'universal human rights organizations'.
"Initially, human rights NGOs did little work in the Middle East. During the 1970s, these groups played a central role in the Helsinki process and in furthering the human rights agenda of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). Helsinki Watch (which later became Human Rights Watch) and Amnesty International were instrumental in protesting the denial of human rights to Jews in the Soviet Union and the communist regimes of eastern Europe, including the case of Anatoly (Natan) Sharansky.
"The emphasis in this early stage was on the protection of the rights of individuals in repressive systems. But over the last decade, NGOs have expanded their agendas dramatically, going far beyond campaigning against the violation of individual rights. The leaders of these organizations have been able to parlay the platforms and the massive resources at their disposal, to influence "high politics" on behalf of those they cast as the weak and oppressed. NGOs were heavily involved in the politics of the civil conflict between the Colombian government and the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarios de Colombia (FARC) guerillas, in the boycott that led to regime change in South Africa, in the debate over the legality of the Iraq war, and in the complex negotiations on the convention to ban land mines. NGOs are also very active in civil-society-building activities that reflect explicitly political and ideological agendas in many countries around the world.
"In the process, they have taken sides in international disputes. Nowhere has that been more evident than in the case of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Major NGOs such as HRW, Amnesty, and Christian Aid, working closely with the media and groups such as the U.N. Human Rights Commission, have been instrumental in promoting the Palestinian political agenda, using the terminology of international law. In 2001, the NGO community set the political agenda and shaped the discussions of the U.N. World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance (WARC, held in Durban, South Africa), a gathering that became an anti-Israeli rally. NGOs also drove the U.N. General Assembly resolution that referred the Israeli separation barrier to the International Court of Justice in The Hague. These NGOs also have gained a great deal of influence in shaping the Middle East policies of the EU, both collectively and as expressed by individual governments, as well as in the U.S. State Department."
"The horrors of the Holocaust and the outrage over the failure of Allied powers to intervene provided the impetus for the creation of today's international human rights system, anchored in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The United Nations (U.N.) and individual governments were the primary actors in establishing new international norms, but in time, a network of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) essentially privatized this international regime. The most powerful of them--Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch (HRW), the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), and others--exert a tremendous influence in the U.N., the European Union (EU), and Western capitals. The NGO community has prospered and grown. In 1948, sixty-nine NGOs had consultative status at the U.N.; by 2000 their numbers had swollen to over 2000, the majority defining themselves as 'universal human rights organizations'.
"Initially, human rights NGOs did little work in the Middle East. During the 1970s, these groups played a central role in the Helsinki process and in furthering the human rights agenda of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). Helsinki Watch (which later became Human Rights Watch) and Amnesty International were instrumental in protesting the denial of human rights to Jews in the Soviet Union and the communist regimes of eastern Europe, including the case of Anatoly (Natan) Sharansky.
"The emphasis in this early stage was on the protection of the rights of individuals in repressive systems. But over the last decade, NGOs have expanded their agendas dramatically, going far beyond campaigning against the violation of individual rights. The leaders of these organizations have been able to parlay the platforms and the massive resources at their disposal, to influence "high politics" on behalf of those they cast as the weak and oppressed. NGOs were heavily involved in the politics of the civil conflict between the Colombian government and the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarios de Colombia (FARC) guerillas, in the boycott that led to regime change in South Africa, in the debate over the legality of the Iraq war, and in the complex negotiations on the convention to ban land mines. NGOs are also very active in civil-society-building activities that reflect explicitly political and ideological agendas in many countries around the world.
"In the process, they have taken sides in international disputes. Nowhere has that been more evident than in the case of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Major NGOs such as HRW, Amnesty, and Christian Aid, working closely with the media and groups such as the U.N. Human Rights Commission, have been instrumental in promoting the Palestinian political agenda, using the terminology of international law. In 2001, the NGO community set the political agenda and shaped the discussions of the U.N. World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance (WARC, held in Durban, South Africa), a gathering that became an anti-Israeli rally. NGOs also drove the U.N. General Assembly resolution that referred the Israeli separation barrier to the International Court of Justice in The Hague. These NGOs also have gained a great deal of influence in shaping the Middle East policies of the EU, both collectively and as expressed by individual governments, as well as in the U.S. State Department."
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
Marco Polo in the Cornfields
Also while I was in Bloomington, I had a chance to hear the Silk Road Ensemble in concert at the Buskirk-Chumley Theater, a lovely old movie house cum cultural center. It was a fantastic evening.
The Silk Road ensemble is:
Rahman Assadollahi - Qarmon (Azerbaijani button Accordion)–absolutely spectacular! A real star, magnificent showmanship, passion, muscisianship, energy, and with a shock of white hair, big moustache, and dramatic flair. He’s from Tehran, and was just wonderful, such pain and sadness and joy and longing all combined in virtuoso solos. The audience went wild, all his CDs disappeared immediately from the sales kiosk in the lobby.
Munish Sharifov-Kamancha –from Azerbijan, excellent, too, played Eastern and Western numbers with great panache.
Novrus Mamedov-Vocal, Saz & Percussion–also Azerbaijani, also wonderful.
Arif Bagirov-Tar & Guitar-born in Azerbijan, he taught at Tashkent Music School Number 1, and was accompanist fro Ilyas Malayev and Mahabbat Shamayeva.
Avner Shakov-Naqara and Doira–born to a Bukharan Jewish family of musicians, he was the Ringo Starr of this group. Not surprisingly, he’s an alumnus of the drum department at the Tashkent conservatory.
Hakan Toker-Piano-from the Turkish city of Mersin, he has a piano degree from Indiana University. He was young and handsome, with a moustache that looked like one on a terra cotta relic from Alexander the Great. He got up and danced, too…
Shahyar Daneshgar-Vocal and Percussion-an Azerbaijani from Tehran, also an IU alumnus–and a lecturer on Central Eurasian Studies. He’s such a good musician, and such a charming MC, I’d believe what he says about the region…
They gave a heck of a performance. The show began at 7:30 and lasted until after 11 pm. There was a big delegation of Azerbaijanis in the audience, the concert was so exciting that lots of them marched up onto the stage and started dancing to the accordion and orchestra.
If I were I musicologist, I could tell you what it all meant. But all I can say was the show was great, the musicians were great, the MC was great. If the Silk Road ensemble ever plays near you, run–don’t walk–to the ticket office…
The Silk Road ensemble is:
Rahman Assadollahi - Qarmon (Azerbaijani button Accordion)–absolutely spectacular! A real star, magnificent showmanship, passion, muscisianship, energy, and with a shock of white hair, big moustache, and dramatic flair. He’s from Tehran, and was just wonderful, such pain and sadness and joy and longing all combined in virtuoso solos. The audience went wild, all his CDs disappeared immediately from the sales kiosk in the lobby.
Munish Sharifov-Kamancha –from Azerbijan, excellent, too, played Eastern and Western numbers with great panache.
Novrus Mamedov-Vocal, Saz & Percussion–also Azerbaijani, also wonderful.
Arif Bagirov-Tar & Guitar-born in Azerbijan, he taught at Tashkent Music School Number 1, and was accompanist fro Ilyas Malayev and Mahabbat Shamayeva.
Avner Shakov-Naqara and Doira–born to a Bukharan Jewish family of musicians, he was the Ringo Starr of this group. Not surprisingly, he’s an alumnus of the drum department at the Tashkent conservatory.
Hakan Toker-Piano-from the Turkish city of Mersin, he has a piano degree from Indiana University. He was young and handsome, with a moustache that looked like one on a terra cotta relic from Alexander the Great. He got up and danced, too…
Shahyar Daneshgar-Vocal and Percussion-an Azerbaijani from Tehran, also an IU alumnus–and a lecturer on Central Eurasian Studies. He’s such a good musician, and such a charming MC, I’d believe what he says about the region…
They gave a heck of a performance. The show began at 7:30 and lasted until after 11 pm. There was a big delegation of Azerbaijanis in the audience, the concert was so exciting that lots of them marched up onto the stage and started dancing to the accordion and orchestra.
If I were I musicologist, I could tell you what it all meant. But all I can say was the show was great, the musicians were great, the MC was great. If the Silk Road ensemble ever plays near you, run–don’t walk–to the ticket office…
Art in the Cornfields
Last weekend, after giving a talk at an academic conference at Indiana University, I took a short drive along twisting country roads to Nashville, Indiana. The town is an art colony, and since the 1920s has been a favored retreat for painters from Indianapolis. It is nearby the historic home/studio of T.C. Steele (1847-1926), founder of the "Hoosier Group" of artists. Nashville is a little bit like Carmel, California, with a midwestern accent. Nowadays, the town is pretty touristy. There is a fake train that pulls visitors on tours through the streets, lots of scented candle shops, and a gallery/shop dedicated to the work of Thomas Kinkade, "painter of light". Those sort of tourist traps aren't worth a detour. Luckily, there is much that is worth seeing and experiencing. For example, I had lunch at a fish fry under a big white tent, sponsored by the Volunteer Fire Department. Along with the fried fish sandwich I got an ear of fresh roasted corn (they ran out of apple cider), no doubt picked at a nearby farm. Down the road from the fish fry was the municipal Brown County Art Gallery, founded in 1926. It displayed a lot of works, in a variety of styles. And while Nashville, Indiana isn't Greenwich Village or Paris, it is a very nice spot to stop for lunch on the road from Bloomington to Indianapolis. At this time of year, the fall foliage was turning, so the ride featured colorful splashes of reds and golds around every turn. And artists still live in the area. From October 1-31, Brown County offers an artist's studio tour.
Florida's Terror Factor
According to Daniel Pipes, the terror factor is making a difference in the Florida senate campaign:
"Both candidates 'are consumed with al-Arian,' notes Marc Caputo in the Miami Herald. But there the symmetry stops, for the public so far has penalized Ms Castor and rewarded Mr. Martinez. It recognizes that for Mr. Martinez, Mr. Al-Arian was not an issue while Castor for six long years failed to handle the problem the professor presented. According to a Mason-Dixon poll, Ms Castor's soft treatment of Mr. Al-Arian ranks as her 'chief weakness.' A Martinez advisor reports that when asked, 'Who do you think is better on terrorism?' voters favor Mr. Martinez 2-1. Mr. Martinez has also enjoyed a 20 percent increase since August of voters who view him favorably; Ms Castor won just a 4 percent increase. The 'all Al-Arian all the time' campaign has several implications:
As Islamist terrorism grows in menace and capabilities, how American politicians deal with it is becoming more central to their attractiveness as candidates and their stature as leaders. The American voter rewards a tough policy toward those suspected of ties to terrorism. Both major parties must ignore those activists (Grover Norquist for the Republicans, James Zogby for the Democrats) who argue for courting the Islamist vote. It is unclear who will win the tight Florida race; it is clear, however, that politicians who coddle terrorists have adopted a losing electoral strategy."
"Both candidates 'are consumed with al-Arian,' notes Marc Caputo in the Miami Herald. But there the symmetry stops, for the public so far has penalized Ms Castor and rewarded Mr. Martinez. It recognizes that for Mr. Martinez, Mr. Al-Arian was not an issue while Castor for six long years failed to handle the problem the professor presented. According to a Mason-Dixon poll, Ms Castor's soft treatment of Mr. Al-Arian ranks as her 'chief weakness.' A Martinez advisor reports that when asked, 'Who do you think is better on terrorism?' voters favor Mr. Martinez 2-1. Mr. Martinez has also enjoyed a 20 percent increase since August of voters who view him favorably; Ms Castor won just a 4 percent increase. The 'all Al-Arian all the time' campaign has several implications:
As Islamist terrorism grows in menace and capabilities, how American politicians deal with it is becoming more central to their attractiveness as candidates and their stature as leaders. The American voter rewards a tough policy toward those suspected of ties to terrorism. Both major parties must ignore those activists (Grover Norquist for the Republicans, James Zogby for the Democrats) who argue for courting the Islamist vote. It is unclear who will win the tight Florida race; it is clear, however, that politicians who coddle terrorists have adopted a losing electoral strategy."
Tuesday, October 19, 2004
The Diplomad Endorses Bush
From The Diplomad:
"The Old Europeans and the NY Times bunch don't have a clue about how the world works. They think that words equal action; that feel-good resolutions and pronouncements at the UN, the International Criminal Court, or some other international fora will make evildoers reconsider. In fact, it's worse than that; they can't bring themselves to acknowledge the presence of evil, for them disputes are just misunderstandings open to resolution by men of goodwill. The Euros and their American imitators deny that Western civilization survives because the hard-pressed American taxpayer maintains 12 aircraft carrier battle groups, an incredibly lethal air force, and divisions of superbly trained and motivated marines and soldiers ready, willing and demonstrably able to reach out and 'touch' any corner of the globe. The same crowd who told us the USSR was a superpower with whom we needed to reach an accommodation, now tell us that the USSR was never really a threat and that it 'imploded' on its own, not because of anything the USA did. Likewise, they tell us that we are 'overreacting' to 9/11 and that, as a consequence, we have lost the sympathy of the world. They deride our patriotism and reverence for the flag, and snicker when we stand at attention at the playing of the Star Spangled Banner. They believe in the Michael Moore version of America. They simply cannot comprehend how it is that rock-and-roll addicted, video game playing, orange-haired, suburban teen-age 'mall rats' will respond to their country's hour of crisis, enlist in overwhelming numbers, and then in weeks take apart the 'fierce warriors of Afghanistan' or roll into Baghdad while hardly breaking a sweat. These people don't have a clue, and we must not elect a President who takes them seriously."
"The Old Europeans and the NY Times bunch don't have a clue about how the world works. They think that words equal action; that feel-good resolutions and pronouncements at the UN, the International Criminal Court, or some other international fora will make evildoers reconsider. In fact, it's worse than that; they can't bring themselves to acknowledge the presence of evil, for them disputes are just misunderstandings open to resolution by men of goodwill. The Euros and their American imitators deny that Western civilization survives because the hard-pressed American taxpayer maintains 12 aircraft carrier battle groups, an incredibly lethal air force, and divisions of superbly trained and motivated marines and soldiers ready, willing and demonstrably able to reach out and 'touch' any corner of the globe. The same crowd who told us the USSR was a superpower with whom we needed to reach an accommodation, now tell us that the USSR was never really a threat and that it 'imploded' on its own, not because of anything the USA did. Likewise, they tell us that we are 'overreacting' to 9/11 and that, as a consequence, we have lost the sympathy of the world. They deride our patriotism and reverence for the flag, and snicker when we stand at attention at the playing of the Star Spangled Banner. They believe in the Michael Moore version of America. They simply cannot comprehend how it is that rock-and-roll addicted, video game playing, orange-haired, suburban teen-age 'mall rats' will respond to their country's hour of crisis, enlist in overwhelming numbers, and then in weeks take apart the 'fierce warriors of Afghanistan' or roll into Baghdad while hardly breaking a sweat. These people don't have a clue, and we must not elect a President who takes them seriously."
Team America: World Police
Reviewed by OpinionJournal - Best of the Web Today:
'"The Feel-Good Hit of the Season: This column doesn't normally do movie reviews, but we just have to let the world know how much we adore 'Team America: World Police,' which we saw Saturday night in a big-screen IMAX theater on Manhattan's Upper West Side. Seeing an audience in deep-blue Manhattan cheer the destruction of the Eiffel Tower restored our faith in American unity. Be warned: This film will not be everyone's cup of tea. It's rife with obscene language, explicit sex (albeit involving anatomically incorrect puppets) and fake vomit. Reviewer Ed Blank of the right-wing Pittsburgh Tribune-Review calls it a work of 'crude excess' that widens 'the abyss between satire and garbage.' But the sanctimonious left-wing twit Roger Ebert also pans it; he's especially aggrieved by the song 'Everyone Has AIDS,' which even Andrew Sullivan says 'deserves to win an Oscar.' If the gross-out elements don't put you off, you will find 'TAWP' heartwarming, hilarious, inspiring and patriotic. And, as New York Times reviewer A.O. Scott acknowledges, 'the movie has an argument.' Unfortunately, we can't tell you what the argument is, because it rests entirely on vulgar anatomical references, and this is a family newspaper's Web site. We will say that the argument is simple yet profound, making the case for the war on terror in a way that ought to be especially appealing to immature males. If this film continues to do well at the box office, it could give President Bush a boost with the youth vote."
'"The Feel-Good Hit of the Season: This column doesn't normally do movie reviews, but we just have to let the world know how much we adore 'Team America: World Police,' which we saw Saturday night in a big-screen IMAX theater on Manhattan's Upper West Side. Seeing an audience in deep-blue Manhattan cheer the destruction of the Eiffel Tower restored our faith in American unity. Be warned: This film will not be everyone's cup of tea. It's rife with obscene language, explicit sex (albeit involving anatomically incorrect puppets) and fake vomit. Reviewer Ed Blank of the right-wing Pittsburgh Tribune-Review calls it a work of 'crude excess' that widens 'the abyss between satire and garbage.' But the sanctimonious left-wing twit Roger Ebert also pans it; he's especially aggrieved by the song 'Everyone Has AIDS,' which even Andrew Sullivan says 'deserves to win an Oscar.' If the gross-out elements don't put you off, you will find 'TAWP' heartwarming, hilarious, inspiring and patriotic. And, as New York Times reviewer A.O. Scott acknowledges, 'the movie has an argument.' Unfortunately, we can't tell you what the argument is, because it rests entirely on vulgar anatomical references, and this is a family newspaper's Web site. We will say that the argument is simple yet profound, making the case for the war on terror in a way that ought to be especially appealing to immature males. If this film continues to do well at the box office, it could give President Bush a boost with the youth vote."
A Short History of Assassins
Martin Kramer argues that assassination must be understod in the context of a struggle between tradition and modernity, in Middle East Quarterly:
"Until modern times, there existed no form of legitimacy in the Middle East outside of Islam. Rulers ruled in the name of God; assassins struck them down in the name of God. The assassinations of the early caliphs and the struggle between the Sunni rulers and the Assassins in the Middle Ages took precisely this form: each side claimed to act in accord with divine will, revealed in divine texts. Religion played a crucial role in the rationale of assassination, but it also played a crucial role in the rationale of government, law, and warfare--indeed, of everything. This invocation of God by the ruler and his assassin characterized the entire pre-modern period in the Islamic world, right up to the end of the nineteenth century. Assassination in modern times may be divided roughly into three sequential stages, in which the rationales shift dramatically. In the first stage, rulers continued to rule in the name of God as they always had, but their assassins claimed to act in the name of the nation. In the second stage, rulers themselves claimed to rule in the name of the nation; the assassins also claimed to act on behalf of the nation in striking them down. In the third stage, the present one, rulers still claim to rule in the name of the nation, but it is now assassins who claim to act in the name of God. This essay will briefly illustrate these three stages with examples."
"Until modern times, there existed no form of legitimacy in the Middle East outside of Islam. Rulers ruled in the name of God; assassins struck them down in the name of God. The assassinations of the early caliphs and the struggle between the Sunni rulers and the Assassins in the Middle Ages took precisely this form: each side claimed to act in accord with divine will, revealed in divine texts. Religion played a crucial role in the rationale of assassination, but it also played a crucial role in the rationale of government, law, and warfare--indeed, of everything. This invocation of God by the ruler and his assassin characterized the entire pre-modern period in the Islamic world, right up to the end of the nineteenth century. Assassination in modern times may be divided roughly into three sequential stages, in which the rationales shift dramatically. In the first stage, rulers continued to rule in the name of God as they always had, but their assassins claimed to act in the name of the nation. In the second stage, rulers themselves claimed to rule in the name of the nation; the assassins also claimed to act on behalf of the nation in striking them down. In the third stage, the present one, rulers still claim to rule in the name of the nation, but it is now assassins who claim to act in the name of God. This essay will briefly illustrate these three stages with examples."
News Flash: Kerry Talks Like Bush
From Language Log:
The thing is, I don't believe that George Bush's public speaking is nearly as different from John Kerry's, in terms of linguistic coherence, as (many) people think.
Let's start out by noting that the arguments about coherence go both ways. Bush has been stereotyped as linguistically and cognitively inept; but Kerry has been stereotyped as distracted by details, unable to articulate the forest for parenthesizing about the trees. When Kathleen Hall Jamieson told a NYT reporter that "the language of decisiveness is subject, verb, object, end sentence", she was supplying quotes to bolster the reporter's theory that "Kerry has a tendency to ramble, when an audience wants punchiness", and that he uses too many hedges, "words and grammatical constructions that imply uncertainty or qualification".
If you think about it, the two men's different stereotypes can be applied to exactly the same behavior, giving alternative and roughly opposite explanations for the same facts. If Bush sputters or rambles, it's because he's got some sort of linguistic or cognitive deficit: he's not intellectual enough. If Kerry sputters or rambles, it's because he's trying to be too nuanced, not responding from the gut: he's too intellectual.
But roughly as often as not, the stereotypes don't fit. For example, consider this passage from Kerry's side of the second presidential debate:
And I believe ((that)) if we have the option which scientists tell us we do
of curing Parkinson's
curing diabetes
curing
uh uh a- a-
you know
some kind of a- a- of a-
uh ((s- p- th- you know))
paraplegic, or quadraplegic, or
uh uh you know a spinal cord injury, anything
that's the nature of the human spirit.
This is hardly a paragon of linguistic facility, either syntactically or phonetically. There's that embarrassingly long (almost 7-second) delay in lexical access. If George Bush had experienced a lexical-access breakdown like this, we'd have commentary all over the "internets" about early senile dementia and the like. There's also a pronunciation issue here -- an extra schwa between [p] and [l] in paraplegic and quadraplegic, similar to the extra schwa in Bush's much-discussed "nucular" pronunciation of nuclear.
Thursday, October 14, 2004
Glenn Reynolds on Bush
From The Guardian :
"'God forbid a success story: 'US political blogger Glenn Reynolds says the media are doing their best to ignore the implication of elections elsewhere: that George Bush may have been doing something right."
"'God forbid a success story: 'US political blogger Glenn Reynolds says the media are doing their best to ignore the implication of elections elsewhere: that George Bush may have been doing something right."
Mark Steyn on the Debate
From SteynOnline:
"INSTANT DEBATE REACTION
1) Bob Schieffer is a terrible moderator: The questions are so much worse and so much more pompous than those from audience members last week. That lame-o 'poverty' question is a classic: It's fair enough to talk about poverty, but the assumption that the way to lessen poverty is to increase the minimum wage is reflexive leftie laziness.
2) 'Do you believe homosexuality is a choice?' Do you believe choosing dumb questions is a choice or socially conditioned by 73 years in the CBS newsroom?"
"INSTANT DEBATE REACTION
1) Bob Schieffer is a terrible moderator: The questions are so much worse and so much more pompous than those from audience members last week. That lame-o 'poverty' question is a classic: It's fair enough to talk about poverty, but the assumption that the way to lessen poverty is to increase the minimum wage is reflexive leftie laziness.
2) 'Do you believe homosexuality is a choice?' Do you believe choosing dumb questions is a choice or socially conditioned by 73 years in the CBS newsroom?"
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
From Our Ironies of Fate Department...
Thanks to OpinionJournal, this fascinating history of the link between the Baghdad Opera House and Arizona State University, from The Observer:
"In his fading years, the American architect Frank Lloyd Wright embarked on a final grand project. Invited in 1957 by King Faisal of Iraq to design a new opera house, Wright expanded the brief into a plan for Baghdad complete with museums, parks, university and authentic bazaar. Dispensing with his 'prairie style', he peppered the scheme with domes, spires and ziggurats. The 1958 revolution meant that none of it was built. But the ever-resourceful Wright simply offered the design to a new client. And today, the Baghdad opera house is the Grady Gammage Memorial Auditorium at Arizona State University: an example of Wright's versatility and the forum for next week's presidential debate. Under the arches of a lost Iraqi skyline, George W Bush and John Kerry will meet in debate for the final time. "
"In his fading years, the American architect Frank Lloyd Wright embarked on a final grand project. Invited in 1957 by King Faisal of Iraq to design a new opera house, Wright expanded the brief into a plan for Baghdad complete with museums, parks, university and authentic bazaar. Dispensing with his 'prairie style', he peppered the scheme with domes, spires and ziggurats. The 1958 revolution meant that none of it was built. But the ever-resourceful Wright simply offered the design to a new client. And today, the Baghdad opera house is the Grady Gammage Memorial Auditorium at Arizona State University: an example of Wright's versatility and the forum for next week's presidential debate. Under the arches of a lost Iraqi skyline, George W Bush and John Kerry will meet in debate for the final time. "
Solizhan Sharipov Returns to the Cosmos
Ferghana.Ru reports that Solizhan Sharipov, an ethnic Uzbek Russian citizen, from Kyrgyzstan's Ferghana Valley, will blast off on October 14th.
Soyuz-TMA-5 commander Sharipov is a Russian cosmonaut from the Ferghana Valley. This is going to be his second space flight. In 1998, he was a pilot on the ten-day Russian-American Endeavor expedition to Mir station. On a request from Uzbek Academician Shavkat Vakhidov and this correspondent who accompanied him to Cape Canaveral, Sharipov took state flag of the Republic of Uzbekistan and pennant of Uzbekiston Khavo Iullari (national airlines) with him to the orbit. Sharipov was decorated for the flight - a NASA bronze medal, order Hero of Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbek order Buyuk Khizmatlar Uchun. Sharipov received the Russian order For Service to the Fatherland (IV degree) at a later date. Rukhaniyat international foundation made Sharipov the Man of 1998 and presented him with a Kyrgyz racer (it lives at Sharipov's dacha near his native Uzgen nowadays)."
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
Mark Steyn on Ken Bigley's Murder
Here's the Mark Steyn column banned by The Telegraph:
"Paul Bigley can be forgiven his clumsiness: he's a freelancer winging it. But the feelers put out by the Foreign Office to Ken Bigley's captors are more disturbing: by definition, they confer respectability on the head-hackers and increase the likelihood that Britons and other infidels will be seized and decapitated in the future. The United Kingdom, like the government of the Philippines when it allegedly paid a ransom for the release of its Iraqi hostages, is thus assisting in the mainstreaming of jihad."
"Paul Bigley can be forgiven his clumsiness: he's a freelancer winging it. But the feelers put out by the Foreign Office to Ken Bigley's captors are more disturbing: by definition, they confer respectability on the head-hackers and increase the likelihood that Britons and other infidels will be seized and decapitated in the future. The United Kingdom, like the government of the Philippines when it allegedly paid a ransom for the release of its Iraqi hostages, is thus assisting in the mainstreaming of jihad."
Putin Goes To China
From Mosnews:
Russian President Vladimir Putin, accused in the West of backtracking on democracy, turns East this week, the Reuters news agency reports. Putin will visit China which many in the Kremlin camp see as a model of an economically-successful autocracy. Some Chinese analysts also see Putin’s trip, starting on Thursday on the heels of one by French President Jacques Chirac, as a sign that China’s new leader Hu Jintao is seeking stronger ties with Europe and Russia to balance those with Washington. Putin’s three-day trip comes a month after he proposed to nominate rather than elect regional governors and change the rules of parliamentary polls —- moves, criticised in the West, that would strengthen his already tight grip on Russia. “In the eyes of foreign investors, the centralisation of political power can make Russia much more similar to China, which has the best investment climate among developing countries,” the business daily Vedomosti wrote."
Russian President Vladimir Putin, accused in the West of backtracking on democracy, turns East this week, the Reuters news agency reports. Putin will visit China which many in the Kremlin camp see as a model of an economically-successful autocracy. Some Chinese analysts also see Putin’s trip, starting on Thursday on the heels of one by French President Jacques Chirac, as a sign that China’s new leader Hu Jintao is seeking stronger ties with Europe and Russia to balance those with Washington. Putin’s three-day trip comes a month after he proposed to nominate rather than elect regional governors and change the rules of parliamentary polls —- moves, criticised in the West, that would strengthen his already tight grip on Russia. “In the eyes of foreign investors, the centralisation of political power can make Russia much more similar to China, which has the best investment climate among developing countries,” the business daily Vedomosti wrote."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)