British General Slams US Military in Iraq

From Australia's The Age:

THE US Army in Iraq has been accused of cultural ignorance moralistic self-righteousness, unproductive micro-management and unwarranted optimism in a magazine published by the army.

The scathing critique of the US Army and its performance in Iraq was written by a senior British officer.

In an article published this week in the army magazine Military Review, Brigadier Nigel Aylwin-Foster, who was deputy commander of a program to train the Iraqi military, said American officers in Iraq displayed such "cultural insensitivity" that it "arguably amounted to institutional racism" and may have spurred the growth of the insurgency.

The army has been slow to adapt its tactics, he argues, and its approach during the early stages of the occupation "exacerbated the task it now faces by alienating significant sections of the population".

Here's a link to the original article in Military Review: Changing the Army for Counterinsurgency Operations by Brigadier Nigel Aylwin-Foster, British Army.

A Plug For Kate O'Beirne's New Book

Kate was one of the few people who was nice to me after I left the world of conservative think-tanks. Although we don't always agree on everything, she's very, very smart and also entertaining. In addition to heading the Washington bureau of National Review, she's a lawyer from New York City, where her father owned a 52nd Street jazz club, of all things . . .

Mark Steyn on Michael Crichton

The Canadian wit discusses State of Fear and the Kyoto protocol--siding with Michael Crichton against the Green movement:

Question: Why do most global warming advocates begin their scare statistics with "since 1970"?

As in, "since 1970" there's been global surface warming of half a degree or so.

Because from 1940 to 1970, temperatures fell.

Now why would that be?

Who knows? Maybe it was Hitler. Maybe world wars are good for the planet.

Or maybe we should all take a deep breath of CO2 and calm down.

BTW, Russian climatologists generally don't like the Kyoto protocol, either.

Bremer Picks Fight With Holland Over Afghanistan Troops

According to this United Press International story, the hapless former American viceroy in Baghdad appears to be trying to scare Holland into sending more troops to Afghanistan by threatening their American investments:

In an interview with Dutch newspaper De Volkskrant' Bremer said that while he understood Dutch concerns, a failure to send troops would raise questions in Washington about NATO's commitment if the mission doesn't go ahead. Bremer said, 'What is NATO all about if our allies are not prepared to stand should-to-shoulder with us?'

Bremer added that while Europe wanted more international cooperation, 'when the possibility emerges, people are side-stepping it. Time and time again decisions must be taken by the U.S. government, by Congress, that influence Dutch economic interests. It is not difficult to imagine decisions could be taken that would not be in the interests of the Netherlands.'

What can one say? Bremer almost lost Iraq--and if he keeps this up, he's on track to lose Holland as well as Afghanistan.

One thing about the Dutch, they are tough and do things their way.

If they send more troops to Afghanistan, it won't be to make more money. And if they don't do it, it won't be to make more money. Frankly, Holland is rich, and doesn't need our charity.

According to US Government reports, the Netherlands is currenlty the third largest foreign investor in the United States, after Great Britain and Japan.

Statements like Bremer's are not just crude insults, they are an invitation for the Dutch to stand up to American bullying by sticking it to us in Afghanistan.

Because of diplomatic bungling by the Bush administration in the war on terror, Spain has dropped out; Uzbekistan has kicked us out; and we are now waiting to find out what Holland wil do . . .

If Holland can put an end to the Bush administration's pathetic bullying, that will be be a service to humanity--and world peace.

When a Neighbor is Murdered . . .

The news that retired New York Timesman David E. Rosenbaum had been murdered a few blocks from our house has been troubling. Most disturbing of all has been the peculiar way the Times and Post have gingerly stepped around the story as a bona-fide news event.

There was not any first page coverage in either paper--although journalists killed, kidnapped or jailed in other countries are often covered in the main headlines. In fact, the NY Times initially printed only an obituary, without any news story whatsoever.

The reason may be emotional, that the death of a co-worker is too upsetting to print. However, I suspect that it reflects the conscious and unconscious biases at the Times and Post that have hampered their coverage of news elsewhere in the world.

For if the papers had been doing their job, the surviving family members would not have told reporters that they can't imagine who could possibly have killed a 63-year old man for his wallet. In DC, and in every American city, there are people killed every day for even less.

Right now, the DC area is facing some sort of crime wave. Violence has spilled out of the center city into places like Prince George's County and the neighborhood where David E. Rosenbaum was bashed in the head. Had the major media cared about this violence when it happened to non-subscribers, there is every likelihood that police might have cracked down before the perpetrators--emboldened by their ability to operate ever more widely--took a chance on Gramercy Street, NW. So, unable to accept their guilt, now the Times and Post downplay what should be a front-page story demanding at least the head of Washington's inept police chief--and probably the Mayor too. But they don't want to rock the boat, and so tiptoe around the failure of the government to fulfill its most basic function--the preservation of streets one can walk on.

Like common criminals, terrorists can get away with whatever people let them do. If the Times and Post showed that they cared about the victims of street crime, they would also be able to show that they care about the victims of terrorism. But to do that would require a re-thinking of their most closely held prejudices about law and order. Their sympathy for criminals rivals their sympathy for terrorists. And it is a problem for the David E. Rosenbaums of this world.

Where are the people like New York's Mayor Rudy Giuliani when you need them?

The Acropolis in 360 Degrees

Found this link to Arounder, a website featuring 360-degree panoramas of international tourist destinations. You can check out the Acropolis on this site, as well as other destinations around the world.

Plus VR Magazine has more about panoramas.

Clash of Civilizations Hits Denmark

Today's NY Times ran a shorter (and almost censored-sounding) version of Dan Bilefsky's International Herald Tribune article about the rise of Islamist extremism in Copenhagen:

In a secluded community center a few blocks from the school, Fadi Abdul Latif, the spokesman of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Denmark, said in an interview that the ban on school prayer was just the latest outrage from a political establishment that was trying to criminalize Islam in order to discredit the religion.

'The government says it's O.K. to make jokes about urinating on the Koran,' Abdul Latif said. 'They are inciting violence and provocation so that they can make new laws that discriminate even more against Muslims.'

He added that the anti-Muslim rhetoric of the Danish People's Party had contributed to a swelling of Hizb ut-Tahrir's ranks in recent months.

'When Muslims see the discrimination here, they begin to listen,' Abdul Latif said.

In 2002, Abdul Latif was charged with distributing hate literature that attacked Jews and praised suicide bombers as martyrs. A leaflet quoted a verse from the Koran: 'And kill them from wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out.' He received a 60-day suspended sentence.

In 2004, Abdul Latif distributed a flyer exhorting Muslims to 'go help your brothers in Falluja and exterminate your rulers if they block your way.'

The story struck my eye because when I lived in Uzbekistan, the media reported claims that the authoritarian regime of Islam Karimov drove young people to join Hizb-ut-Tahrir. Strangely, now the NY Times and International Herald Tribune report claims that liberal Danish democracy and freedom of speech are driving people to join the same Islamist extremist group.

My guess is that it has more to do with the Bush administration's failure to catch Osama Bin Laden or secure a decisive victory in Iraq. People like to bet on a winner. And right now, it looks like Bush is a loser. Which may be why people from Tashkent to Copenhagen are flocking to join extremist groups.

Crush them decisively, and the membership will decline dramatically. There's a precedent from the USA, in the case of a domestic terror group, not so very long ago--anyone remember the Michigan Militia?

Roger L. Simon on Google Video

The blogger, author, and Hollywood screenwriter wonders: Is Google Video the future of the media industry?

Tony Kornheiser on the Washington Redskins

From today's Washington Post:

Come closer, I don't want to shout this:

The Redskins are the luckiest people alive.

Did you hear me? I said the LUCKIEST people alive!

That was a touchdown, boys and girls. A touchdown that would have tied the game late, and given all the momentum to Tampa Bay. Except it wasn't. Because Edell Shepherd couldn't hold the ball. Shepherd had everybody beat, and he couldn't hold the ball.

Chopin: Desire for Love

The other day I watched Jerzy Antczak's musical biography Chopin: Desire for Love on DVD. It is the third film about Chopin and Georges Sand that I have seen. First there was the dazzlingly lush and sentimenal 1945 Hollywood classic: Song to Remember, starring Paul Muni, Merle Oberon, and Cornel Wilde as Chopin. Then, Jame LaPine's quirky American independent remake starring Hugh Grant. Judy Davis, Bernadette Peters, Emma Thompson, Julian Sands, Mandy Patinkin: Impromptu. Now--Chopin: Desire for Love. The latest looks at the story of George Sand and Frederic Chopin from a Polish perspective, and is just fascinating because it is so different.

Of course, I'm biased. Jerzy Antczak was my teacher at UCLA in the 1980s. He was a superb instructor, and as part of our course he screened his 1976 historical epic Nights and Days for us, a Polish War and Peace or Gone with the Wind. It was fascinating, because the style was so different from that of an American film. There was a wildness and intensity and spontaneity that was at first confusing, but seemed to a sort of signature style. In any case, he was trying to make another film, and I felt bad for him that Hollywood didn't seem supportive. I was afraid he'd never do another picture. We lost touch over the years, as I moved away from filmmaking and into Washington, DC think-tank circles.

When I went off to Moscow to teach last year I learned that after many years, Jerzy had indeed made another film, about Chopin. That would be interesting. Well, I thought, I'll be near Poland, maybe I can visit. So I emailed him, only to find out that he was still in Los Angeles. He was friendly, and offered to send me a copy of the picture, but I hesitated. What if I didn't like it? I wouldn't want to hurt his feelings...

Last week I bit the bullet, and ordered it from Netflix. I was pleasantly surprised to find that I really enjoyed it. After living in Russia and the former Soviet Union, I found he really captured something in the oppressive relationship between the Russian Grand Duke and Chopin--something I found in the post-Soviet space when it came to personal relations. Chopin had to leave before he suffocated.

Now, it seems to me that in telling Chopin's story, Jerzy was telling his own story of moving to Hollywood. I don't know if there's a George Sand in his life, but the very end, where Chopin's sister takes his heart back to Poland, struck me as a message from Jerzy, as well as a comment on Chopin. Wherever he lived, his heart was still in Poland.

The film has outraged some music lovers and Chopin fans (not to mention fans of George Sand), because unlike other versions, this Polish film depicts Chopin as spoiled, petulant, and childish. And Georges Sand as an inconsiderate and selfish woman who sacrifices her family to her young lover. But somehow, it makes more sense than either the very cutesy lovebirds in Impromptu or the dramatically romantic couple in Song to Remember. (Though I still love the Hollywood classic).

If I hadn't watched the other films, I might have been bothered. But having seen some talented and creative people acting badly, the "warts-and-all" approach Antczak chose for Chopin: Desire for Love, made a lot of sense to me. Yes, these people had problems, psychologically and emotionally. And yet because of, or in spite of, these problems, they made beautiful music and literature together.

In a sense, you come away saying to yourself, I'd like to listen to his music, but I'm not sure I would want to live with Frederic Chopin. The beauty of his music came for his yearning for a better life--a desire for love that perhaps was never fully realized in his lifetime.

Anyway, I'd recommend this film with the warning that this Chopin is not a pleasant fellow (he's certainly no Tom Hulce as a giggling Mozart), and unless you know something of the story of Chopin's life, the dramatic montage may be a little difficult to follow. That said, it is really a beautiful picture.

Add it to your Netflix queue.

UPDATE: Through a google ad on this blog, I found a link to the Carthusian cell where Chopin composed music in Majorca, Spain, which plays a role in the film, here. It is now a Chopin museum.

Moscow? Tashkent? No--Albany, NY . . .

Empire State Plaza, 2005

The Australian on Ariel Sharon

Martin Chulov writes:

What next for Israel is a question intrinsically tied to the immediate future of the Middle East. The options for much of the Arab world are not appealing. A time of turmoil appears certain in Israel, at a juncture in the region where time cannot be spared. Gaza, the February 2005 peace summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, the formation of Kadima and the UN speech convinced a reluctant Arab world that Sharon had matured into a Jewish leader they could deal with.

There is no one of his stature waiting in the wings, except perhaps the perennial loser of Israeli elections, the 82-year-old Shimon Peres, who split from the Labor Party to follow Kadima after being cast aside by his partyroom. Peres and Sharon are the only two lions left from the Ben-Gurion days. Alongside Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak they are the last living historic political figures in the region.

But there are serious doubts that Peres, also a political turncoat, could unify the disparate band of political refugees that comprises Kadima. They were there because of one man's vision and presence. The group may retain the vision, but, without Sharon's presence, Kadima is set to crumble. It is not without irony that Sharon fell on the day Kadima was officially registered as a political party.

Neurosurgeons at the Hadassah Hospital will gradually try to wake the comatose Israeli giant to assess the damage his massive stroke caused. As they do so, many Israelis will be making amateur medical assessments of their own, such as why their prime minister was given blood-thinning medication known to be linked to cerebral haemorrhaging or why he was taken one hour away to Jerusalem, past an emergency ward much closer to his farm.

They will also want to know why surgeons waited three weeks to schedule minor surgery to correct the congenital hole in his heart. Sharon's stroke came less than 11 hours before he was due to be readmitted after the minor collapse he suffered on December 18. There is, of course, an outside chance that Sharon may make a Lazarus-like return to health. But even then, his authority to lead will have died. In its absence, the region faces upheaval, and a startling awakening.

The end of the line for Sharon has revealed a sign of the times. Stability had been brought to the Middle East not by Arab wise men, but by a Jewish warrior.

Michael Barone on How Blogs Changed American Politics

Writing in US News and World Report, Barone declares that blogs helped Bush and the Republicans by discrediting the mainstream media, while simultaneously moving Democrats to the fringes of the left, rather than back to the center:

The right blogosphere's greatest triumph came after CBS's Dan Rather on September 8 reported that Bush had shirked duty in the National Guard and the network posted its 1972-dated documents on the Web. Within four hours, a blogger on freerepublic.com pointed out that they looked as though they had been created in Microsoft Word; the next morning, Scott Johnson of powerlineblog.com relayed the comment and asked for expert views. Charles Johnson of littlegreenfootballs.com showed that the documents exactly matched one he produced in Word using default settings. CBS defended the documents for 11 days but finally confessed error and eased Rather out as anchor. MSM tried to defeat Bush but instead only discredited itself. The Pew Center's post-election poll showed a sharp decline in the credibility of newspapers and broadcast TV and a sharp increase in reliance on cable news, especially Fox News, and radio.

So what hath the blogosphere wrought? The left blogosphere has moved the Democrats off to the left, and the right blogosphere has undermined the credibility of the Republicans' adversaries in Old Media. Both changes help Bush and the Republicans.

This 'n That on West Virginia's Coal Mine Tragedy

Hollywood blogger This 'n That compares yesterday's tragic news from West Virginia to what happens in Billy Wilder's classic film Ace in the Hole.(Amazon.com photo credit David Forehand)

Agustin Blazquez's New Documentary to Premiere in Miami

Just received this email today:

Dear Readers,

Agustin Blazquez and Jaums Sutton's important new documentary, Covering Cuba 4: The Rats Below, will premiere Saturday, January 21 at 8pm at the Tower Theater in Miami (1508 SW Eighth St.). It's free and will be followed by a panel discussion I'm in.

More information about the documentary is at Cuba Collectibles . I hope to see you there and encourage you to spread the word!

Best,

Myles

Presented by Miami Dade College

COVERING CUBA 4
THE RATS BELOW
(with Spanish subtitles)

US Corporate collaboration with totalitarian Cuba!
The truth about the Elian Gonzalez affair!
What the American liberal media won’t tell!
This complex story unravels through the testimonies of:

DAVID HOECH, DELFIN GONZALEZ, DENNIS K. HAYS, JAMES B. LIEBER,

JIM GUIRARD, LARRY KLAYMAN, MYLES KANTOR and the late REED IRVINE


featuring the songs “Solo Un Niño,” written and performed by
LUISA MARIA GÜELL
and “Sin Esperanzas,” written and performed by
GUSTAVO REX

Contacts: Alejandro Rios: 305-237-7482 & 305-989-1701
Beverly Counts Rodrigues, Director of Public Relations with the Press: 305-237-3949

COVERING CUBA 4: The Rats Below available through www.CubaCollectibles.com

also available COVERING CUBA 3: Elian the real story of injustice and deception by the U.S. government and the American media, COVERING CUBA 2: The Next Generation is a tool to bypass the wall of censorship of the U.S. media that prevents the average American citizen from learning and understanding why Cuban Americans act the way they do in their quest for freedom and democracy for their homeland and CUBA: The Pearl of the Antilles is a nostalgic visual and musical memory dating from pre-Columbian times to January 1, 1959. There is no narration to distract from the visuals or the music, just a few subtitles indicating the year and the places throughout the six original Cuban provinces. This enchanting documentary features 26 glorious melodies by the great Cuban composers performed by Cuban artists.

La Stampa on Russia v Ukraine

Today's Johnson's Russia List has this interesting article from La Stampa (translated by BBC Monitoring) explaining what Putin is up to in Urkaine:

BBC Monitoring
West forces Russia "play defence" if it is not treated as partner - analyst
Source: La Stampa website, Turin, in Italian 4 Jan 06

Text of interview with Russian political scientist Nadia Arbatova by
Francesca Sforza, in Moscow, date not given, entitled "'The West does not
understand how Putin's mind works'", published by Italian newspaper La
Stampa website on 4 January; first paragraph is La Stampa introduction

Moscow: The West's mistake? "You do not understand Vladimir Putin," said
Nadia Arbatova, director of the Institute of European Political Studies at
the Academy of Sciences in Moscow and head of the Russia in a United Europe
Committee. Much listened to in the Kremlin, but often tending in the
opposite direction compared to the ideas of the presidential
administration, Arbatova is convinced that too many post-Cold War
prejudices are still enduring between Russia and Western democracies, and
that the gas war with Ukraine - which broke out at the same time as the
first Russian presidency in the history of the G8 started - has shown once
again how much certain attitudes inherited from the past are hard to kill.

[La Stampa] Nadia Arbatova. Is Moscow's decision to shut off the gas taps
to Kiev a response to the Orange Revolution?

[Arbatova] I believe the question has to be framed in a broader context.
Moscow has not reacted against the legitimate desire of the Ukrainians to
choose their own leader, nor can it be said that cutting off the gas to
Kiev is the direct consequence of the waving of flags in Maidan
[(Independence) Square] a year ago.

Instead, Russia is worried about the enlargement of NATO to countries
traditionally in its sphere of influence and especially the fear of
remaining excluded from the big alliances. It is pointless to deny that
Moscow has special interests in the former Soviet republics - that that is
certainly not a crime - but my impression is that the Western democracies
have refused to accept this reality as a given geopolitical fact.

[La Stampa] Who has erred more in this negotiation?

[Arbatova] There have been mistakes by both sides. From the beginning, Kiev
showed itself reluctant to accept an increase based on the new laws of the
market - to which, in contrast, it gave its approval when it obtained the
status of market economy from the European Commission - and Russia, on the
other hand, made a mistake in not understanding that Kiev needs time to
build a stable economy.

[La Stampa] You must admit that interrupting the supply of gas is not a way
to facilitate a calm resumption of the negotiations on the prices. How do
you think it will be possible to go back to sitting down around the same table?

[Arbatova] What for the Western countries constitutes a reason for outrage
does not have the same importance, for example, to the Ukrainians
themselves, who in fact responded with the same language, illegally
withdrawing gas, as they have always done in the past. I understand the
bewilderment of the West, but this is about different languages, which have
to do with a long history of bilateral relations and which cannot be
replaced overnight by systems imported from Washington or Brussels. We can
debate ad infinitum about which of the two systems is the best, but in the
meantime why not recognize that there are, first of all, two different systems.

[La Stampa] So you believe that the negotiations will resume as if nothing
had happened?

[Arbatova] I think precisely that. Of course, now we are in a delicate
phase, where many sensitivities have been hurt, and there has been a
succession of mistakes by both sides, partly because at stake in this
negotiation is not only the question of the price of gas, but the future
balance between Moscow and Kiev. It is necessary to decide what type of
relationship we want to have, whether based on the laws of the market
economy or on other political objectives. If Ukraine wants to be completely
independent of Moscow, then I believe it is necessary to give it enough time.

[La Stampa] Russia has just assumed the presidency of the G8, and many
Western leaders think that Putin wants to play the energy card to put a new
power politics into operation.

[Arbatova] Russia is important for Europe and for all countries, but I
believe that the system of relations must now set itself a further goal. If
the West continues to perceive Russia as a threat, it is obvious that the
Russians will be forced to play defence; if, on the other hand, there is
the political will to start thinking of Russia as a partner, to involve it
in the decisions in an equal manner, then it is necessary for the West to
change its attitude towards Moscow.

A stroke of key

A stroke of key is a Russian blog that links to this website. I'll add it (and Netflix Fan) to my blogroll, asap. So check it out...

The Secrets of Netflix

Can be found on the Netflix Fan blog . . .

Haaretz's Q & A with Ehud Olmert

Acting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmertanswered questions in a revealing online interview with Haaretz.com last June 15th, which noted that the former Mayor of Jerusalem and Minister for Minorities (Arabs) "... is the most prominent supporter among Likud ministers of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan. He was the first politician on the right to enunciate the basic principles behind this plan..." Now, he's Prime Minster, and the interview is even more interesting than the first time round, since it gives some clue as to where he plans to take Israel.

Konstantin On Russian Ukrainian Gas War

I guess I'm not all alone after all. Konstantin's Russian Blog says Western criticism of Russia is ridiculous:

The way Western mainstream media “analyzed” Russian-Ukrainian natural gas crisis is the peak of idiocy. It simply incredible – a cocktail of logical inconsistencies, libel, juggling with fact and outright political propaganda. Just one “analytical” pearl that covers it all – Ukraine rightly refused to accept four times price hike as this price would ruin its economy. Does it mean that when natural gas prices would drop four times Russia would have the right to demand that Europeans pay the old price? Because such low prices would ruin Russian economy? Because well being of Russians depends on high gas prices? Because Evil West uses natural gas prices as an instrument of political blackmail? Because they want to put Putin on his knees? Would good Europeans agree with such arguments? I doubt it strongly. Actually I’m absolutely sure that Europeans would discard such arguments as stupid and silly. Somehow this perverse logic works well when it comes to Ukraine.

Now, if I could only find a non-Russian who saw things this way...