Rumsfeld became wealthy during a 24-year business career between stints in government. A family foundation, set up in 1985 by him and his wife, Joyce, is now valued at about $20 million and makes charitable contributions to dozens of groups a year.According to the New Zealand blog Scoop, Rumsfeld will join The Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace, at Stanford University.
Rumsfeld plans to fund the new foundation with a grant from the old one and with other personal assets, plus any contributions that friends might make. He does not intend to solicit money from others, nor keep either foundation going after he and his wife have died.
Royalties from Rumsfeld's planned memoirs also will go into the new foundation, which is to be called the Rumsfeld Foundation. But Rumsfeld said he is "in no rush" to get the book out. "I'm not going to try to get something out fast -- a kiss-and-tell -- and affect the elections," he said. "That's not me."
Details about the number and size of the Rumsfeld fellowships have yet to be worked out. But they will not be attached to a particular school, going instead to individuals for study in foreign and national security affairs, economics, and other public policy fields. Similarly, the foundation's lecture series will not be confined to a single campus, Rumsfeld said.
Rumsfeld has long spoken of the need to encourage government service. The other main aims of his foundation -- loans to micro-enterprises and help for Central Asian republics -- reflect more recent interests.
Micro-enterprise is a burgeoning global phenomenon in which people who lack access to normal credit receive financing to operate small businesses. It has proved to be an economic boon to some poor regions. Rumsfeld noted that the repayment rates have been high, and he said such loans have the advantage of bypassing sometimes corrupt governments and landing directly in the hands of beneficiaries.
His focus on Central Asian republics such as Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan stems from a concern that they lack the U.S.-based support groups that benefited the Eastern European states in their transition from communist rule. "We don't have, in Chicago or Detroit or Pittsburgh, Uzbeks or Tajiks or Kazakhs," Rumsfeld said. "I think that we need to have people who understand what's going on in Central Asia . . . and the difficulty of that transition."
“This is slavery, not to speak one's thought.” ― Euripides, The Phoenician Women
Monday, September 17, 2007
Rumsfeld Foundation Focuses on Central Asia
Bradley Graham reports in today's Washington Post that the recently retired Defense Secretary is turning international to charity work--especially in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan (perhaps also Afghanistan?):
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Putin's Next Step: "Prepare Three Envelopes"
Anyone practicing amateur (or professional) Kremlinology must have been struck by an exchange published in the transcript of the Valdai discussion club. IMHO Putin's joke about leadership style explains why Yeltsin's chaos was blamed for Russia's problems; why there was an economic boom in the middle period; and finally why there is such uncertainlty about the future:
PIOTR DUTKIEWICZ: Which do you think are the three most important things you have achieved during your time in the Kremlin? Which three things did you not have enough time to do or were not able to do? And what are three pieces of advice that you would give your successor when you have your first meeting with him?
VLADIMIR PUTIN: On this account we have an old joke. When the head of a company or - let’s take a bigger picture - of a region, leaves his position, he gives his successor three envelopes and tells him the following: ‘Open the first envelope now, the second in two years, and the third just before you leave your position’. Upon opening the first envelope he reads: ‘Blame it all on me’. In two years he opens the second envelope which reads: ‘Promise everything’. And when he has six months left he opens the third envelope and reads: ‘Prepare three envelopes’. (Laughter). This story is relevant because our colleague has asked me to formulate three things three times right now.
I am not ready to state all of the most important things in all three spheres. But it is very obvious that we were able to strengthen Russian statehood. It seems to me that there is a great deal that can still be done in this field: to administratively and morally strengthen Russian statehood and establish more or less capable power and economic agencies.
The second achievement concerns the restoration of the Russian economy. We mentioned basic economic indicators. When I started working Russia’s gold and currency reserves amounted to 12 billion USD. Just this year they grew by 80 billion and total around 275 or 280 billion USD, I think. We had hyperinflation. And though it remains high I think that this year we will achieve nine percent. And before it was 30 or more and even went off the scale, up to unknown levels.
We constantly held out our hand to all international financial organisations for credits. As you know, today we are not financing our main activities with money obtained from credit and we are also repaying our debts ahead of schedule. And just recently we paid back 22 billion USD that we owed. Now the ratio of our foreign debt to GDP is one of the best in Europe. On average over the last three years the economy has grown by seven percent. In the first six or seven months of 2006 it grew by 7.4 percent.
40 million Russian citizens lived below the poverty line. Today there is still quite a lot of poverty. But it is no longer 40 percent of citizens – I think it is somewhere around 20 percent. The number has been halved. And I think that before the end of 2008 this indicator will approach the general European level.
We have minimal unemployment, quite simply minimal unemployment. And I think that we have learned to be quite pragmatic, but not confrontational, when defending our interests in the international arena. In other words we strengthened the Russian Federation’s international position.
If asked to state briefly and from the top of my head, these are three basic things that I would classify as positive.
What would I have liked to do and what is still incomplete? I have already referred to lowering the number of citizens below the poverty line as an advantage but, at the same time, there are still large numbers of poor people. The average income is still too low. However, we understand that in order to maintain macroeconomic stability and the rate of economic growth we cannot lessen the numbers of poor people in a way that is harmful to macroeconomic stability. This is the first and most important thing.
The second is the fight against corruption. I think that this is one of the very significant negative things that we have to continue to fight against.
And the third – something we have already talked about with Mrs D’Encausse – is demography.
What must we do in the near future? Incidentally, it is impossible to talk about such things with certainty and I am very much at risk when I do so. But nevertheless I will talk about things on a general level. We need to continue developing our country’s political system. We need to establish a truly multiparty system, develop self-management and improve relations between the federal centre, the regions and the municipalities so that each level takes responsibility upon itself and is able to accomplish the tasks incumbent to it. And of course we must continue to diversify the economy and thereby create the conditions that will help us resolve social problems.
Leon Aron on Liberty in Russia
From AEI's Russian Outlook:
Away from the "Chaos" Myth?
After Yeltsin died this past spring, 25,000 people stood for hours in a very long line on a cold April night to pay their last respects to Russia's first freely elected chief executive--until the body was suddenly whisked away by the authorities for a quick burial after fewer than twenty hours of lying in state. Even more remarkable, given the negative opinions of Yeltsin and his era to which the Russian people had become accustomed, was the tone of the obituaries (mostly on the uncensored Internet sites) that strongly challenged the "chaos" stereotype. Instead of a period of senseless destruction and chaos, emerging from the obituaries, appreciations, and comments was a precious and unique moment in Russian history--a hectic time, marred by ignorance and corruption, but, in the main, an earnest trial-and-error search for modern liberal economic and political arrangements best suited to the national conditions.
Putin's former personal economic adviser, Andrei Illarionov, captured the tenor of the reevaluation when he wrote that Yeltsin had "pulled the country out of communism, out of empire and out of its past" and "pushed it forward toward civilization, openness and freedom." In another view, the 1990s have shown that the traditional Russian "feudal mentality" and the worst features of Russian political culture, which many consider immutable--disrespect of laws, the delegation of complete power and responsibility to the supreme leader, the "thousand-year-old corruption" and the notion that authorities of all ranks were there to "feed" off whatever they were appointed to supervise, the servility toward those above, and the violence toward those below--could, at least in principle, be changed. It is possible in Russia to "respect liberty," to tackle "laziness," and to treat other people not "as enemies and scoundrels."
In the 1990s a Russia began to be forged that was not an empire or a monarchy, but a "democratic and civilized country, of which others are not afraid," wrote a former Yeltsin aide. "A country that did not harbor treachery or hostility. A country that is liked in the world. A country in which there could be market economy, competition, freedom of speech."
Yeltsin's death seems to have occasioned a broader public reevaluation as well. Compared to 2000, the percentage of those who thought that the Yeltsin era was overall more negative than positive dropped by almost one-third, from 67 percent to 47 percent, while the share of those remembering the 1990s positively increased by two-fifths from 15 percent to 26 percent. ] Attitudes toward Yeltsin have changed even more decisively: the share of those who say they liked him grew by more than half from 2000-07 (9 percent to 19 percent), while the proportion of those disliking him diminished by more than half from 55 percent to 26 percent.
Most likely these numbers testify to the well-known feature of human memory: only distance can provide a proper notion of scale and meaning for events of such magnitude.
Writing about the American republic almost half a century after its birth, Alexis de Tocqueville noted "a mature and thoughtful taste for freedom." ] The first decade of Russian political and economic liberty brought nothing less than a different order of being to Russia, but hardly made the taste for it mature. The development of such a taste, along with a balanced view of the 1990s untinged by the political needs of a ruling regime, may be a project for decades.
Rod Dreher on the Muslim Brotherhood
From the Dallas Morning News (ht lgf):
This "explanatory memorandum," as it's titled, outlines the "strategic goal" for the North American operation of the extremist Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan). Here's the key paragraph:More here.
The process of settlement [of Islam in the United States] is a "Civilization-Jihadist" process with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that all their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" their miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who choose to slack.
The entire 18-page platform outlines a plan for the long haul. It prescribes the Muslim Brotherhood's comprehensive plan to set down roots in civil society. It begins by both founding and taking control of American Muslim organizations, for the sake of unifying and educating the U.S. Muslim community – this to prepare it for the establishment of a global Islamic state governed by sharia.
It sounds like a conspiracy theory out of a bad Hollywood movie – but it's real. Husain Haqqani, head of Boston University's Center for International Relations and a former Islamic radical, confirms that the Brotherhood "has run most significant Muslim organizations in the U.S." as part of the plan outlined in the strategy paper.
The HLF trial is exposing for the first time how the international Muslim Brotherhood – whose Palestinian division is Hamas – operates as a self-conscious revolutionary vanguard in the United States. The court documents indicate that many leading Muslim-American organizations – including the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Muslim American Society – are an integral part of the Brotherhood's efforts to wage jihad against America by nonviolent means.
Friday, September 14, 2007
Andrew Kuchins on Journalist Deaths in Russia
From the Center for Strategic and International Studies website:
Did you know that nearly twice as many Russian journalists were killed in the 1990s when Boris Yeltsin was president of Russia as in the seven years of Vladimir Putin’s presidency? According to the records of the Committee to Protect Journalists, a New York–based organization that tracks violations against free journalism around the world, in Yeltsin’s Russia, 42 journalists were killed and 3 disappeared. Since Mr. Putin became president, 22 journalists have been killed and 2 disappeared. As in the Yeltsin years, the motivations for the great majority of these tragic killings are tied to the wars in Chechnya and/or criminal activities. And, as in the Yeltsin years, almost none of these murders has been solved. The truth is that in Putin’s Russia, like Yeltsin’s Russia, being an investigative journalist is a very dangerous profession. And today, as in the 1990s, Russia’s ramshackle legal system provides virtually no incentive for investigators to solve the crimes. They would only discover the same dangerous information that the journalists did, and you can bet they are not counting on the Russian legal system to protect them in that event...
Putin's Zubkov Gambit
Nabi Abdullaev reports in the Moscow Times on the meaning of Putin's choice of Russia's new prime minister, Viktor Zubkov:
Olga Kryshtanovskaya, who tracks Kremlin politics at the Russian Academy of Sciences, said Zubkov had already become the frontrunner, surpassing acting First Prime Ministers Sergei Ivanov and Dmitry Medvedev, who have been intensely groomed for months as potential presidential successors.Interestingly, this took place shortly after a meeting of the Valdai discussion club, a group of international opinion leaders who get together with the Russian president from time-to-time to discuss Russia's role in global affairs. At the meeting, CSIS expert Andrew Kuchins questioned Putin about growing anti-Americanism in Russia:
Putin might be opting for a scenario in which he would not anoint a single successor to avoid charges of trampling on democratic procedures, but instead would offer voters the choice between three or four loyal followers instead, said Sergei Mikheyev, of the Center for Political Technologies.
"And it is possible that after eight years of an active and relatively young Putin, Russia's cautious voters would prefer aged and conservative Zubkov over the younger and dynamic Medvedev and Ivanov," said Dmitry Orlov, an analyst at the Agency for Political and Economic Communications. "Dispersing support behind such different candidates would be rational for Putin at the moment."
ANDREW KUCHINS: ...I want to ask you a question about Russian-American relations. I am worried about our relations and their long-term development prospects. I had the opportunity to meet with President Bush. Marshall Goldman and several others were also there. I know that President Bush is worried about the increase of anti-Americanism in Russia and especially among young people. Of course, anti-Americanism is increasing in many countries in the world.
I lived in Moscow for two and a half years and when I came back to the States at the end of last year I was also very upset with the biased and negative image that Russia has in the American media.
But my question refers to the representation of the USA in Russian media, especially on Russian national television. When I lived here for two and a half years I often watched television and it left a strong impression on me. If Russian national television had been my only source of information I would have concluded that the USA is a hostile country and perhaps even an enemy.
But I know that this is not your policy and that you support improving our relations and making them more constructive. And during our meeting I told our President this in a very frank and direct way.
But it seems to me that there is a certain contradiction between the image of the USA as presented on Russian television and Russia’s foreign policy. Can you explain to me why this exists and how we can correct or improve the situation?
VLADIMIR PUTIN: I can. The media reflects the realities of the present life and mood of Russian society. And independently of whether or not the media is state-owned or independent, if it doesn’t reflect society’s mood then it will not be interesting and people won’t trust the media. And they say what people want to hear. The media reflects real life. And the Russian government’s foreign policy is pragmatic and designed to improve Russian-American relations.
While the press does not need to look at the future of international relations, international life and Russian-American relations it is part of my task to do so. For that reason there is really a marked difference between the mood among society, in the media and our concrete policies. I am only chagrined and confused by those who, unlike you, sometimes pretend not to notice the fact that we are increasing our efforts to not only maintain but also to improve Russian-American relations.
I think that our colleagues’ main problem is that they are not inclined to search for compromises. They almost always insist that we accept certain decisions that they consider optimal. But of course this does not happen 100 percent of the time. Sometimes we engage in joint work and in these cases, as a rule, we are able to achieve viable results.
I would very much like for this practice to take hold in our relations with our American partners. This will only happen in the event that they acknowledge our national interests and take them into consideration.
I repeat that we don’t intend to work against American interests, nor do we intend to neglect our own interests in favour of our partners’ interests.
I repeat that this work will be effective if they acknowledge our national interests.
We have really developed very good relations with President Bush. And without any undue exaggeration I think that this is a very important factor in intergovernmental relations. Recently this element became even more obvious because there are a lot of various small problems. In any case, we value this. It seems to me that President Bush also values this. We shall continue to rely on this in the future. And of course we are going to expand this base.
For instance, in accordance with American legislation we wanted to conclude contracts with various lobbying groups that officially operate in Congress. You know what they told us? And this is normal, this is in accordance with American laws. But the people we contacted told us that state department employees did not support such relations with Russian partners. That is strange. It is true that in direct dialogue with our American colleagues they did not admit this. They said: ‘No, that can’t be true, we did not do this’. But this means that someone – either the representatives of the lobbies or of the state department – is giving us the wrong information.
But such trifles prevent us from establishing a constructive dialogue. Why should this be possible for all other countries and not for Russia? We are not doing this underground, with the help of the FSB or the Foreign Intelligence Service. We are doing this openly and as it should be done with a view to engaging in a meaningful dialogue with legislators. What is wrong here? They say: ‘No, that is not possible’. Why is it impossible? It is a trifle, a detail. It is simply evidence of how they automatically applied the presumption of the Soviet Union’s guilt to Russia. This is not right, it is harmful and it bothers us.
For example, I believe that Europe will grow to become a political entity and that European statehood will be strengthened, and that both will inevitably occur because they are product of life’s basic needs and global economic development. During these processes political forces in the United States that are interested in the existence of a strong viable Russia and in developing intergovernmental ties will also grow. We will put emphasis on precisely this part of American society and of the American political establishment.
Thank you.
An Email From Rudy Giuliani About The New York Times
Found this in my inbox:
Dear Friend,
MoveOn.org, well-known for its character assassinations on Republicans, decided to participate in a character assassination on an American General.
Before General David Petraeus could give his testimony to Congress about our brave men and women in uniform overseas in Iraq, MoveOn.org, aided by an enormous discount at the New York Times, ambushed an American hero with baseless attacks on his integrity. Senator Clinton furthered the slander by saying that General Petraeus required "the willing suspension of disbelief."
The way forward in Iraq requires proven leadership. The American people demand more than Democratic Presidential candidates who refuse to denounce extremist liberal organizations. These candidates and a do-nothing Democratic Congress undermine our troops' service. These times call for statesmanship, not politicians spewing political venom. Join me in telling MoveOn.org that there is no place in American politics for these kinds of attacks. Please review my ad here and make a contribution to set the record straight.
Sincerely,
Rudy Giuliani
Iraq Blog Count
А friend told us about IraqBlogCount, a 'blog of blogs' about Iraq. There's something for everyone...
John T. Reed on the Petraeus-Crocker Report on Iraq
![](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_aQYwbBNZDTI/RurgIEN0z_I/AAAAAAAAAyI/2BzmOSNlhq4/s320/pethearing.jpg)
John T. Reed watched the Petraeus testimony, and posted a detailed critique on his blog, here. An excerpt:
Bloodbath if we leave
We are repeatedly told that there will be a bloodbath if we leave.
We were told that in Vietnam as well. It was correct in Vietnam. There was a blood bath known as the Killing Fields in Cambodia and another known as the boat people in Vietnam after we left.
But the embarrassing fact is that while the American people regret the post-pull-out civilian deaths in Southeast Asia, we would do the exact same thing only sooner if we had it to do over again. Simply stated, the American people did not care about the deaths of the Cambodian and Vietnamese civilians at the hands of the Communists in Southeast Asia nor do they care about the likely future deaths of Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq. Sure, they care enough to wring their hands and make statements against it, but they do not care enough to spend another 600 billion dollars or another 5,000 U.S. military lives.
Most Americans probably think that a civil war in Iraq could not happen to a nicer bunch of ungrateful, religious nut cakes. Nobody, not Petraeus or anyone else, is talking about that elephant in the room...
A Shofar Blast for Rosh Hashana
When I was growing up in New York City, The New York Times would usually publish a photo of a rabbi blowing a shofar to welcome the New Year, from a congregation somewhere in the city, or sometimes elsewhere in the world, with a caption reading something like "Jewish New Year welcomed in Brooklyn." In fact, the paper used to carry little ads at the bottom of page one listing candle-lighting times, two lines intended for Orthodox readers. In vain did I search my national edition over the past couple of days. So, I googled to find a Shofar blast to post on this blog. Here it is, thanks to YouTube--L'Shanah Tovah! A Happy New Year to all our Jewish readers--and all the readers of The New York Times who remember when the paper still considered news of Jewish Holidays "fit to print."
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Top British Think Tank: Stop Appeasing Islamists!
With traditional British understatement, Strategic Survey 2007, a publication of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, Britain's top foreign policy think-tank, responds to the growth of Al Qaeda after 9/11. Former MI6 civil servant Dr. John Chipman's report finally begins to admit that Western leaders made a mistake by humoring outrageous Islamist "grievances" (perhaps blinded by oil money from Islamist regimes like Saudi Arabia) rather than unite with secularists to decisively crush aspirations for Islamic supremacy over non-believers:
Islamist Terrorism
There is increasing evidence, Strategic Survey argues, that ‘core’ al-Qaeda is proving adaptable and resilient, and has retained the ability to plan and coordinate large-scale attacks in the Western world. Regional jihadist groups such as al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia and al-Qaeda in the Maghreb have sworn allegiance to al-Qaeda and have begun to show ambitions beyond parochial concerns in support of al-Qaeda’s global objectives. Plots that have come to light in Europe and elsewhere point to a growing trend of Islamic radicalisation.
The long-term challenge is to confront the extremist ideology which gives rise to terrorism and which al-Qaeda has shown great skill and ingenuity in propagating. That challenge is of a different kind in different parts of the world and needs to be met in specific contexts. Overall, what is referred to as the ‘single narrative’, that sees Muslims as victims of non-Muslim aggression, needs to be addressed, both in the Islamic world and elsewhere. In the Islamic world, governments with de-radicalisation programmes tend not to contest the propositions of the single narrative but rather to encourage individuals to contemplate non-violent responses to perceived injustices affecting their co-religionists. Over time, that approach may not be sufficient, and there will be a need to build political cultures that encourage aspirations for the fruits of modernity and success, something best done by leaders able to establish their political legitimacy.
Western governments tend to meet the Muslim ‘single narrative’ by way of rebuttal, arguing against its basis in fact. But this too is an approach with limited effects. While there is a consensus among all European elites that the war on terror cannot be fought by military means alone, there is a less overt acceptance that defending the largely liberal and secular nature of the ‘public space’ in Europe will require a more assertive application of the ‘political science’ of that liberal-secular tradition. That means looking again at issues as complex as the relative balance between individual and community rights and between secular and religious visions of social organisation. On this basis, it may become possible to find more fluid ways to achieve the effective integration of Muslim minorities into European societies and obtain the national cohesion necessary to meet the wide range of security challenges the modern world poses.
Raoul Wallenberg Exhibit Opens in Moscow
Wallenberg's mission to save Hungarian Jews, including now-US Congressman Tom Lantos, was sponsored by the War Refugee Board that resulted from Peter Bergson (Hillel Kook) and Ben Hecht's agitation. Wallenberg was taken prisoner by the Soviets and never heard from again. The mystery of his fate has never been resolved--by Russia, Sweden, or the US.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Melanie Phillips on France's New Dreyfus Affair
It's the Karsenty case, now on appeal in a Paris courtroom, of a libel judgement against Karsenty's complaint that French television staged anti-Israel propaganda:
This scandal has many layers of evil. It reveals the wickedness of the Palestinians who so cynically stage hoaxes like this, as a result of which murderous hatred and mass hysteria are exponentially spread and innocent people are attacked and butchered in a rising spiral of terrorist atrocities. It reveals the wickedness of western journalists who transmit footage they know is a fraud as a matter of routine, becoming as a result active collaborators in the deaths of innocents. As someone from France 2 remarked during this affair, ‘It happens all the time’. Sure it does — we saw it last year in the Lebanon war when ‘atrocities’ that had been faked by Hezbollah were transmitted as true accounts by broadcasting organisations which turned a blind eye to the evidence of journalistic fraud because the story they told fitted the broadcasters’ own prejudices. And it reveals the intellectual corruption of the French judiciary, which perpetrates a transparent injustice and in turn helps further promulgate a murderous lie because, instead of holding power to account, the French judiciary is in its pocket.
To my knowledge, there has been no coverage whatsoever of these revelations about the al Durah footage, let alone the Karsenty case, in the British media. That says it all. They are so resistant to the suggestion that the story in which they so fervently believe — that Israel is the evil aggressor in the Middle East and the Palestinians are their innocent victims —might be wrong, that they simply do not register any evidence which bears that out. How can it possibly be the case, they think, that fashionable progressive French journalists (like themselves) could deliberately make themselves party to a lie? Since in their own eyes progressive people are by definition the unique repository of moral virtue, anyone who challenges that position is by definition evil. It is therefore impossible that the Palestinians staged a theatrical hoax, impossible that France 2 deliberately transmitted such a fraud, impossible that the Israelis could be the innocent victims of such a deception. The image of the killing of Mohammed al Durah exists; and the image is all. Nothing else has any reality. The fact that the ‘corpse’ moved and peered behind its hand to see if the cameras were still filming is irrelevant. The terrible thing about so many western journalists is that they really do deeply and sincerely believe their own lies.
The trial of Philippe Karsenty is an event of the greatest political and cultural significance. It may well come to define the relationship of Europe to Israel and the Jews as devastatingly as the 19th century Drefyus affair — in which the false accusation of treason against a patriotic Jewish French army captain produced an outpouring of virulent anti-Jewish prejudice — once convinced an assimilated French journalist by the name of Theodor Herzl that there could be no future for the Jews unless they had their own country. But now the French are determined to traduce and defame that country, too.
The Karsenty appeal is a very big story indeed. Let’s see how many journalists, in these degraded times, are able to recognise it.
Maajid Nawaz's Anti-Hizb ut-Tahrir Blog
For some strange reason, Jane Perlez's profile in today's New York Times of Maajid Nawaz failed to provide a link to his anti-Hizb ut-Tahrir blog (although it did provide a link to the official Hizb ut-Tahrir website). Since Nawaz is a former leader of the group--a recruiter, no less--I thought it might be helpful to be able to read what he has to say. Here's what Perlez reported:
Now, more than a year after his return to Britain, Mr. Nawaz, 29, has defected from Hizb ut-Tahrir, saying that he learned from scholars he met in jail that the ideology he so fervently espoused ran counter to the true meaning of his religion.Here's a link to his blog: http://www.maajidnawaz.blogspot.com.
Hizb ut-Tahrir, or Party of Liberation, also calls for the end of Israel and the withdrawal of Western interests from the Middle East, though it says it wants to achieve those goals through nonviolent means. There have been calls in Britain to ban the group, but the government has always stopped short of doing so.
Mr. Nawaz’s departure from the group, which he announced on his personal blog several days ago and in an interview shown on BBC television on Tuesday night, is considered significant because he was such a highly valued member of Hizb ut-Tahrir — one of a handful of men on its executive committee in Britain.
Before being imprisoned in Egypt, Mr. Nawaz played a central role in recruiting new members for Hizb ut-Tahrir at home and abroad. Over and over again, he said, he spread the belief that the dictatorships of the Muslim world must be replaced by a caliphate similar to that which held sway after the death of the Prophet Muhammad.
But for the past year, he has felt nothing but regret, he said in an interview with The New York Times in a Bayswater Road coffee shop on Tuesday before his BBC appearance.
“I gave talks in Pakistan, Britain and Denmark,” he said. “Wherever I’ve been I’ve left people who joined Hizb ut-Tahrir. I have to make amends. What I did was damaging to British society and the world at large.”
Little Green Footballs: Poland Remembers 9/11
![](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_aQYwbBNZDTI/RuftrkN0z9I/AAAAAAAAAx4/fHYN6E6LNTQ/s320/20070911Poland01.jpg)
Candles will burn again on the symbolic graves of those from the Podlasie Region in Poland who perished in the terrorist attack on the World Trade Centre six years ago.
Among them were Lukasz Milewski from Suwalki and Dorota Kopiczko from Augustow.
In the Suwalki cementary, there is a tombstone dedicated to the two who died, which resembles the Twin Towers joined by a crucifix, where candles are lit up on every September 11.
The Christ the King Chapel in Suwalki is dedicated to Lukasz and the church bell is named after him.
A mass is held in his honour Suwalki on every anniversary of the tragedy. Lukasz Milewski was 21 years old.
His body was one of many never identified.
Ali Alyami on Democracy in Saudi Arabia
Ali Alyami recently sent us this email message:
In an interview with the Associated Press on 9/4/07, Prince Talal Bin Abdul Aziz, who does not hold an official position, but known to be a confidant of King Abdullah, declared that he will form a political party inside Saudi Arabia and invite Saudi reformers who have been imprisoned for calling for constitutional monarchy to join him. This is the most promising hope for any sharing of power in Saudi Arabia, if in fact the prince could or is allowed to carry out what he said he would do.
In an interview with the Washington Post on May 14, 2007, Talal lashed at his autocratic family openly "Here, the family is the master and the ruler," he said of his brothers and cousins, as he sat at Fakhariya Palace. "This style can't continue the same way. There has to be change in the nature of authority, if things are going to change in the kingdom itself."
In addition, Talal, for the first time any family member has ever done, accused the staunch opposition to reform by powerful family members which the Saudi people know to be Defense Minister Prince Sultan, Interior Minister Prince Naif and governor of Riyadh, Prince Salman. None of these men has ever mentioned political reform let alone supported it.
The Center for Democracy and Human Rights in Saudi Arabia, located in Washington, call on the US officials to issue a statement to support Prince Talal move, because peaceful reform can only happen now if the Saudi ruling dynasty allows it. This is an opportunity that the Bush Administration and members of US Congress should support publicly and immediately.
Both Rosh Hashanah & Ramadan Start Tonight
Happy holidays to all our readers! (Yes, we have them in both Israel and the Muslim world).
From the Pioneer-Press:
From the Pioneer-Press:
Sundown today marks the beginning of two important Muslim and Jewish holidays: Ramadan, the Islamic month of fasting, and Rosh Hashana, the Jewish new year observance that starts a 10-day period of reflection and renewal.
Doron Rosenblum on Israel in 5768
From Ha'aretz:
To try to understand the spirit of the times, we need to go back a generation, to the War of Attrition, when Moshe Dayan delivered his "fear not, my servant Jacob" speech to the Command and Staff College: "Jacob, do not be fearful, do not be cowardly, you are fated to live in constant struggle, and heaven forbid you fail by cowardice," he said. Many were shocked that just two years after the great victory of the Six-Day War, Dayan could say "constant struggle." Yet, in the years since then we have known wars, peace treaties, a sea of terror and unilateral withdrawals, but never has the hope for rest been abandoned, never have the wishes and the yearnings stopped: if not for a catharsis of full peace, then at least for a type of tension-relaxing settlement.
Barak's return to the Defense Ministry is more significant than it looks. He is "corresponding" in a certain sense with Dayan's period as both chief of staff and defense minister: in personal courage, spirit of adventure and pessimism. From now on, then, we are going to have many murky operations about which silence is golden, many smart-aleck tricks and thrilling stratagems, a lot of action, abductions and counter-abductions, reprisals and painful counter-reprisals. Sometimes things will be happy, at other times the opposite. But that is what "living by the sword" looks like, in case you were wondering.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Sophia Tolstoy's Photo Album
![](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_aQYwbBNZDTI/RuaXcCCpIxI/AAAAAAAAAxw/UTJbO7EGvdU/s320/BendavidValF07.jpg)
On a happier note, someone I know and I had a wonderful time with a friend Saturday night at a party for Song Without Words: The Photographs of Countess Sophia Tolstoy at the Cyrus and Myrtle Katzen Museum at American University. It was just terrrific, in a beautiful building, with an outstanding companion show of works by American University alumni. Great, great, great. Cyrus and Myrtle Katzen may be the new Medicis of Washington...
Ann Applebaum on Bin Laden's Recruiting Video
From today's Washington Post:
Al-Qaeda's long-term goal is to convert Americans and other Westerners to its extreme version of Islam.
Before you fall over laughing, think again. It would only take a very few such converts to do a lot of damage. The results of the Soviet Union's massive propaganda campaign on behalf of world Marxist revolution were also numerically small but at the time were considered quite effective: the Baader-Meinhof gang, the Italian Red Brigades, the Weather Underground. There are always disaffected young people -- Gadahn himself is a former fan of "death metal" rock bands -- and they're always looking for a cause. Conversion in general is increasingly common across Europe. Some 4,000 Germans were recently found to convert annually, and if only 0.1 percent of them choose the militant version of Islam, that would be enough to cause trouble.
For, as news from Germany well illustrates, there is no one quite so passionate as a recent convert. At least two of the men recently arrested and accused of plotting to bomb American interests in Germany were converts. So were Richard Reid, the failed shoe-bomber, and Jose Padilla, the U.S. citizen who was suspected of planning to construct a dirty bomb.
It is legitimate to ask whether it matters what is said by a man who is no longer thought to be in control of his organization, even if he still has access to a video camera inside his cave. Yet that's precisely the point. Bin Laden will sooner or later die or be captured. But he, or someone close to him, is trying to ensure that his ideology lives on. And he, or someone else, wants it to survive in a form that will appeal to Americans and other Westerners disillusioned with their own political systems.
To put it bluntly, someone with an Irish or Hispanic name could have a better chance of slipping past the FBI, or through airport security, than someone named Mohammed. In a world in which counterintelligence and security procedures will slowly, slowly improve -- that's the future.
Another Bin Laden Video
The last one was apparently aimed at Western audiences. On the 6th anniversary of 9/11, Bin Laden aims his latest video message at Muslims. From Al Jazeera:
The video begins with a photograph of bin Laden in front of a brown backdrop.More from the Associated Press:
In a voiceover, he is heard saying: "His talk of mine consists of some reflections on the will of a young man who personally penetrated the most extreme degrees of danger and is a rarity among men: one of the 19 champions, may Allah have mercy on them all."
"We shall come at you from your front and back, your right and left," al-Shehri said in the tape, asserting that the US would suffer the same fate as the former Soviet Union.
In the tape, al-Shehri also praised the losses the United States suffered in Somalia in the late 1990s.
"As for our own fortune, it is not in this world," he said. "And we are not competing with you for this world, because it does not equal in Allah's eyes the wing of a mosquito."
In a tape released on Friday, bin Laden had mocked the US as "weak" and threatened to escalate the war in Iraq.
News of the latest video emerged before the US was to hold ceremonies to remember the dead from New York's Twin Towers, the US defence department headquarters in Washington and a hijacked jet that crashed into a field in Pennsylvania.
In the tape, bin Laden praised al-Shehri, saying he "recognized the truth" that Arab rulers were "vassals" of the West and had "abandoned the balance of (Islamic) revelation."
"It is true that this young man was little in years, but the faith in his heart was big," he said.
"So there is a huge difference between the path of the kings, presidents and hypocritical Ulama (Islamic scholars) and the path of these noble young men," like al-Shehri, bin Laden said. "The formers' lot is to spoil and enjoy themselves whereas the latters' lot is to destroy themselves for Allah's Word to be Supreme."
"It remains for us to do our part. So I tell every young man among the youth of Islam: It is your duty to join the caravan (of martyrs) until the sufficiency is complete and the march to aid the High and Omnipotent continues," he said.
At the end of his speech, bin Laden also mentions the al-Qaida leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who was killed in an U.S. air strike there. Al-Zarqawi followed in the footsteps of al-Shehri and his brothers who "fulfilled their promises to God."
"And now it is our turn," bin Laden says.
After bin Laden speaks, the video of al-Shehri appears. Al-Shehri — one of the hijackers on American Airlines Flight 11, which hit the World Trade Center — is seen wearing a white robe and headscarf, with a full black beard, speaking in front of a backdrop with images of the burning World Trade Center.
On General Petraeus' Testimony...
Looking at General Petraeus' PowerPoint presentation after hearing his Congressional testimony on C-Span radio while driving in the car, I was reminded of Fouad Ajami's description of a visit to Iraq:
"PowerPoint meets Heart of Darkness."Personally, I'd feel a little better if Petraeus did not have his Ivy League Ph.D....
Judith Miller: US "Buying Time"
After hearing some of Petraeus on C-Span, I thought it sounded like American strategy was to buy time until Bush left the White House, then dump the Iraq mess in the lap of the next President (hopefully, Giuliani, who I believe can clean it up). Now, it appears that "buying time" is also US strategy in the war against Bin Laden. Writing in the Daily Telegraph, Judith Miller reports.
As Bob Dole used to ask: "Where's the outrage?"
Complacency would indeed be dangerous. There will be no "mission accomplished" banners in this war - a campaign unlikely to end in my lifetime. American intelligence and counter-terrorism officials can only do their jobs, buy time, and hope that the wave of militancy that has engulfed so many Islamic communities ebbs.Personally, contra Judith Miller and US intelligence and counter-terrorism officials, I would prefer the war on terror to end in my lifetime, if not sooner. I think Miller's article provides evidence that we need a military draft and mobilization of the entire American people to get this job done as soon as possible. It's manifestly become bogged down in bureaucracy and careerism at the highest levels of government...unforgivable six years after attacks on New York and Washington, DC.
Osama bin Laden marked the September 11 anniversary not by conducting another devastating strike but by releasing a videotape, his first in three years. His continued freedom is a triumph of sorts. It also shows how challenging a task defeating such an enemy has become.
A recent National Intelligence Estimate warned Americans that al-Qa'eda remains the single greatest terrorist threat to the US. Other assessments share its gloomy findings that the number of jihadis is increasing.
As Bob Dole used to ask: "Where's the outrage?"
The MINERVA September 11th Web Archive
![](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_aQYwbBNZDTI/RuZvBCCpIwI/AAAAAAAAAxo/LRaOB9I8umM/s320/minerva-onwhite.jpg)
Trying to remember what happened on September 11th, 2001?
Here's a link to the US Library of Congress MINERVA September 11th Web Archive, which has catalogued thousands of websites from that day, and the months following, from around the world:
The Library of Congress, in partnership with the Internet Archive, WebArchivist.org and the Pew Internet & American Life Project, has created a collection of digital materials known as the September 11 Web Archive.
The September 11 Web Archive preserves the web expressions of individuals, groups, the press and institutions in the United States and from around the world in the aftermath of the attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001.
The Web Archive is important because it contributes to the historical record, capturing information that could otherwise be lost. With the growing role of the Web as an influential medium, records of historic events could be considered incomplete without materials that were "born digital" and never printed on paper.
The September 11 Web Archive consists of over 30,000 selected Web sites archived from September 11, 2001 through December 1, 2001.
Approximately 2,300 Web sites were identified for further processing and were cataloged using MODS (Metadata Object Description Schema), an XML schema for a bibliographic element set which enables the creation of original resource description records.
The collection uses the Wayback Machine interface, a display designed to display Web sites captured over time, which was pioneered by the Internet Archive. Web sites in the collection can be discovered through browsable and searchable interfaces. Please review the Technical Architecture for more information on these interfaces.
More on the MINERVA project at this link.
Monday, September 10, 2007
NY Times Magazine on Rudy Giuliani
Author Matt Bai writes on Hizzoner in an article headlined "Crusader."
The logic of Giuliani’s pitch to voters on terrorism will feel familiar to anyone who paid close attention to his political ascent. When he first won office in 1993, New York was widely considered a city beyond governance, an uncontrollable metropolis where violent crime, entrenched bureaucracy and swollen welfare rolls were accepted as the grim but unshakable realities of urban decline. Rudy ran as a real S.O.B., the guy who had the steel to restore order and sanity where no one else could or would. Whatever you think of Giuliani personally, it’s hard to argue that he didn’t succeed; crime and the welfare rolls plummeted for the first time in decades, while jobs and neighborhoods came back. Giuliani maintained an uneasy détente with the overwhelmingly liberal pool of voters who had chosen him for the job. He did the dirty work that made their city, at long last, livable and safe, the things their political correctness would never allow them to openly countenance. For their part, New Yorkers made a show of disdaining him at dinner parties for his bullying ways and pitiless programs, but they slept better knowing that Rudy was wrestling the city’s myriad demons.
Now Giuliani is running to become that same kind of president. In Giuliani’s view, we live in a dark time, caught up in the opening stages of a war with Islamic radicals that may span a few decades and several continents before it’s won. A president has to be willing to be the bad guy, to do the things that may make even his allies uncomfortable, and to do them with ruthless efficiency. So you wouldn’t want to have a beer with me, Rudy seems to be saying. So even my own kids don’t want to have a beer with me. But whom do you really want staring down the terrorists — me, or one of these other guys? Do you want someone squeezable, or would you rather hire the single-minded enforcer who had the testicular fortitude to tame New York?
Giuliani’s presidential campaign brings to mind that famous scene from “A Few Good Men,” in which Jack Nicholson lectures a boyish Tom Cruise on the practical realities inherent in protecting freedom. In Giuliani’s telling, only a thin wall separates innocent Americans from the violent apostles of a brutal and repressive ideology. You want me on that wall, Rudy would have us believe. You need me on that wall.
Inevitably, presidential campaigns take on the peculiar personalities of the candidates themselves. Bill Clinton’s aides worked without sleep and always behind schedule. George W. Bush’s team couldn’t conceal their Texan arrogance. Giuliani’s campaign staff is remarkably — almost unnervingly — disciplined. His campaign appearances inevitably begin and end on time. Each day of campaigning has a theme (“trial lawyers are bad,” “adoption is good,” etc.), to which the candidate lashes himself without fail, while high-powered surrogates back in Washington issue carefully timed statements backing him up. The campaign is unusually guarded with routine information, giving out only Giuliani’s public schedule, and almost no one associated with the campaign will talk to a reporter without a press aide listening in on the line.
When I first managed to track down Giuliani on the western edge of Iowa in mid-July, I was more impressed than I expected to be. In the abstract, after all, it’s hard to imagine the slashing mayor of New York getting on famously with the people of Sloan, Iowa, a one-strip farming town of about 1,000 people. (Motto: “A Good Place to Grow.”) But Rudy out of his element turns out to be a surprisingly deft campaigner. Ever the prosecutor, he retains a talent for explaining complex concepts, flipping his round spectacles on and off his face for emphasis and rubbing his forehead as if deep in thought. He has a penchant for talking to voters as if he were their tough-love therapist, frequently invoking words like “reality” and “denial.” Vowing to end illegal immigration during one town-hall meeting in Iowa, Giuliani told the crowd, “Every other country does it, and we can do it.” Then he clutched his heart and spoke softly. “It’s O.K. to do it.” You could almost hear a collective sigh among the Iowans, who didn’t consider themselves bigots just because they wanted to seal the borders, and who now felt validated by America’s mayor. They lined up for autographs.
Walid Phares on Osama Bin Laden's New Video
From the American Thinker:
In the end, the speech shows that the War of Ideas is the ultimate battlefield in the War on Terror. This is why, US leaders in both parties and all branches of power should not ignore or dismiss bin Laden's tape. To the contrary, I strongly suggest they respond to it, point by point. All those named in the speech must answer al Qaeda directly, instead of fleeing into domestic politics.Here's a link to Walid Phares' blog.
The Meaning of Bin Laden's New Video
Contrary to White House claims that Bin Laden is "irrelevant," the new video shows that he is all too relevant six years after 9/11. His taunting of the US, messages to anti-globalists, Chomsky-ites, and even Democrats should be generating outrage rather than dismissal from pundits. A basic principle of propaganda is that including one claim with which an audience agrees tends to give a "he's on our side" impression, no matter how horrible other factors may be. This is Bin Laden's "with us or against us" moment--he's the anti-Bush. If you hate Bush, Bin Laden is on your side. And now, he feels comfortable enought to proudly take credit for 9/11.
This is why, as NY Times columnist David Brooks says, Bin Laden now sounds like a "lefty blogger." Publication of excerpts only helps Bin Laden's cause. Bits and pieces may make sense to different sub-audiences. The full insanity of the psychopathic killer with delusions of grandeur oncly comes across in extenso. For example, Judy Woodruff on PBS's Newshour with Jim Lehrer on Friday (note, the day reserved for Friday prayer and sermons in Islam) seemed perplexed shuffling through the printout on McNeil-Lehrer, looking up from a text not shared with viewers, looking disturbed, surprised and baffled.. Her Q & A with University of Missouri professor Mohammed Hafez reveals an inability to come to terms with what is going on:
Only confronting the explicit messages from Bin Laden will lead to a new course. He cannot be ignored, or explained away as irrelevant. He can only be defeated and destroyed--like Hitler, Bin Laden has stated his aims clearly. He claims credit for the collapse of the USSR and now seeks to achieve a similar result for America and the West. He says that Iraq is one battlefield in a world-wide war. Bush, and Bush's opponents must take Bin Laden at his word. Each sentence of the speech--obviously delivered with a Western audience in mind--must be answered with actions, not rhetoric, dismissal, or denial.
The AFP report concludes, correctly:
Taking Bin Laden's insane videos seriously, countering his propaganda of the word with propaganda of the deed--beating him in every arena in the world-wide conflict now in progress--is unfortunately the only path open to the West at this moment, other than conversion to Islam.
The absurdities of Bin Laden cannot be permitted to remain unanswered any longer. Which means devoting more public discussion to their exposure--in the US and around the globe. Denial, as a strategy, cannot work. For, as Voltaire noted, "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Because it has been difficult to find the full text online at other sites, posted below is the full transcript from MideastWeb:
This is why, as NY Times columnist David Brooks says, Bin Laden now sounds like a "lefty blogger." Publication of excerpts only helps Bin Laden's cause. Bits and pieces may make sense to different sub-audiences. The full insanity of the psychopathic killer with delusions of grandeur oncly comes across in extenso. For example, Judy Woodruff on PBS's Newshour with Jim Lehrer on Friday (note, the day reserved for Friday prayer and sermons in Islam) seemed perplexed shuffling through the printout on McNeil-Lehrer, looking up from a text not shared with viewers, looking disturbed, surprised and baffled.. Her Q & A with University of Missouri professor Mohammed Hafez reveals an inability to come to terms with what is going on:
JUDY WOODRUFF: Professor Hafez, what do you make of this -- you brought it up a moment ago -- but this almost obsession with the capitalist system and how, you know, telling Americans to throw off the yoke of capitalism?That six years after 9/11 Woodruff even thought Bin Laden might have made some sense, demonstrates how skillful Al Qaeda propaganda--and how inept Bush administration "public diplomacy" has been. Bin Laden's speech is an example of what David Horowitz' book calls an unholy alliance between the radical left and Islamist extremists. That the media as part of the left has shown sympathy for the Devil (as in Woodruff's puzzled reaction), has objectively helped Bin Laden's cause, whatever the intent--and paradoxically helped George Bush to remain in power as well. To defend Bin Laden and his partisans in order to embarrass Bush only makes matters worse--yet a "worse the better" scenario complaining of "terrorist bogeymen" conjured up to increase political power is absurd. Bush didn't "conjure up" this Bin Laden tape. Bin Laden is definitely a "bogeyman".
MOHAMMED HAFEZ: Well, I think it's a message for the American public, but also for the world public. What bin Laden is trying to do is really take up the themes that Ahmadinejad and Chavez have brought up; that is, to try to portray America as this hegemonic bully that doesn't care about issues, for instance, the environment and global warming, and say that, essentially, that the world is -- you need to stay away from America and to not cooperate with America, and you'll be safe. I think that is an important message.
But also what he's trying to do is to appeal to a subculture, particularly in Europe, of youth, interestingly some that recently converted Islam or that might convert to Islam, that are anti-globalist, anti-hegemonic, that are anti-establishment. And in that respect, he might be trying to reach out to a new audience, not just the traditional jihadists that we're accustomed to seeing.
I think he's struggling to prove his relevance by casting a very wide net to as broad a constituency as possible, by touching on just about all the major issues that are in the public discourse today and then, like everyone else, weighing in on Iraq.
Appealing to a young audience
JUDY WOODRUFF: He makes specific reference to several people, the new book -- recent book, I should say -- by the former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer, the title of it "Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror." What did you make of that?
MOHAMMED HAFEZ: Well, he also recommends for people to read Noam Chomsky, again, kind of a leftist anarchist, not the Prophet Muhammad or Sayyid Qutb, which is, you know, the normal stable of radical Islamists. And, again, I think what he's trying to do is to really appeal to the youth, particularly in Europe, to try to get that segment that does not fit the normal profile and create a new generation perhaps of jihadists that are mobilized on anti-globalist, anti-imperialist themes.
Only confronting the explicit messages from Bin Laden will lead to a new course. He cannot be ignored, or explained away as irrelevant. He can only be defeated and destroyed--like Hitler, Bin Laden has stated his aims clearly. He claims credit for the collapse of the USSR and now seeks to achieve a similar result for America and the West. He says that Iraq is one battlefield in a world-wide war. Bush, and Bush's opponents must take Bin Laden at his word. Each sentence of the speech--obviously delivered with a Western audience in mind--must be answered with actions, not rhetoric, dismissal, or denial.
The AFP report concludes, correctly:
In the latest video bin Laden appears with a trimmed beard that is apparently dyed black, which experts have said is a "sign of war" according to the rigorous Salafi Islamic school to which bin Laden belongs.
A senior Pakistani official involved in the hunt for Al-Qaeda said there was "no evidence of bin Laden being present in our areas", repeating Islamabad's frequent mantra on the subject.
But there is intelligence suggesting bin Laden's Egyptian deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and "some senior operation commanders come to our region frequently," the official added on condition of anonymity.
Bin Laden's continuing defiance is meanwhile winning the group new recruits, another Pakistani official with a government intelligence agency said on condition of anonymity.
"Al-Qaeda is perceived by a young Muslim mind as a fighting unit against US and Western forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and the bordering areas of Pakistan and its stubborn defiance brings more volunteers," the official said.
Taking Bin Laden's insane videos seriously, countering his propaganda of the word with propaganda of the deed--beating him in every arena in the world-wide conflict now in progress--is unfortunately the only path open to the West at this moment, other than conversion to Islam.
The absurdities of Bin Laden cannot be permitted to remain unanswered any longer. Which means devoting more public discussion to their exposure--in the US and around the globe. Denial, as a strategy, cannot work. For, as Voltaire noted, "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Because it has been difficult to find the full text online at other sites, posted below is the full transcript from MideastWeb:
"All praise is due to Allah, who built the heavens and earth in justice, and created man as a favor and grace from Him. And from His ways is that the days rotate between the people, and from His Law is retaliation in kind: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth and the killer is killed. And all praise is due to Allah, who awakened His slaves' desire for the Garden, and all of them will enter it except those who refuse. And whoever obeys Him alone in all of his affairs will enter the Garden, and whoever disobeys Him will have refused."
"As for what comes after: Peace be upon he who follows the Guidance. People of America: I shall be speaking to you on important topics which concern you, so lend me your ears. I begin by discussing the war which is between us and some of its repercussions for us and you."
"To preface, I say: despite America being the greatest economic power and possessing the most powerful and up-to-date military arsenal as well; and despite it spending on this war and is army more than the entire world spends on its armies; and despite it being the being the major state influencing the policies of the world, as if it has a monopoly on the unjust right of veto; despite all of this, 19 young men were able - by the grace of Allah, the Most High- to change the direction of its compass. And in fact, the subject of the Mujahideen has become an inseparable part of the speech of your leader, and the effects and signs of that are not hidden."
"Since the 11th, many of America's policies have come under the influence of the Mujahideen, and that is by the grace of Allah, the Most High. And as a result, the people discovered the truth about it, its reputation worsened, its prestige was broken globally and it was bled dry economically, even if our interests overlap with the interests of the major corporations and also with those of the neoconservatives, despite the differing intentions."
"And for your information media, during the first years of the war, lost its credibility and manifested itself as a tool of the colonialist empires, and its condition has often been worse than the condition of the media of the dictatorial regimes which march in the caravan of the single leader."
"Then Bush talks about his working with al-Maliki and his government to spread freedom in Iraq but he in fact is working with the leaders of one sect against another sect, in the belief that this will quickly decide the war in his favor."
"And thus, what is called the civil war came into being and matters worsened at his hands before getting out of his control and him becoming like the one who plows and sows the sea: he harvests nothing but failure."
"So these are some of the results of the freedom about whose spreading he is talking to you. And then the backtracking of Bush on his insistence on not giving the United Nations expanded jurisdiction in Iraq is an implicit admission of his loss and defeat there. "
"And among the most important items contained in Bush�s speeches since the events of the 11th is that the Americans have no option but to continue the war. This tone is in fact an echoing of the words of neoconservatives like Cheney, Rumsfeld and Richard Pearle, the latter having said previously that the Americans have no choice in front of them other than to continue the war or face a holocaust."
"I say, refuting this unjust statement, that the morality and culture of the holocaust is your culture, not our culture. In fact, burning living beings is forbidden in our religion, even if they be small like the ant, so what of man?! The holocaust of the Jews was carried out by your brethren in the middle of Europe, but had it been closer to our countries, most of the Jews would have been saved by taking refuge with us. And my proof for that is in what your brothers, the Spanish, did when they set up the horrible courts of the Inquisition to try Muslims and Jews, when the Jews only found safe shelter by taking refuge in our countries. And that is why the Jewish community in Morocco today is one of the largest communities in the world. They are alive with us and we have not incinerated them, but we are a people who don't sleep under oppression and reject humiliation and disgrace, and we take revenge on the people of tyranny and aggression, and the blood of the Muslims will not be spilled with impunity, and the morrow is nigh for he who awaits."
"Also, your Christian brothers have been living among us for 14 centuries: in Egypt alone, there are millions of Christians whom we have not incinerated and shall not incinerate. But the fact is, there is a continuing and biased campaign being waged against us for a long time now by your politicians and many of your writers by way of your media, especially Hollywood, for the purpose of misrepresenting Islam and its adherents to drive you away from the true religion. The genocide of peoples and their holocausts took place at your hands: only a few specimens of Red Indians were spared, and just a few days ago, the Japanese observed the 62nd anniversary of the annihilation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by your nuclear weapons."
"And among the things which catch the eye of the one who considers the repercussions of your unjust war against Iraq is the failure of your democratic system, despite it raising of the slogans of justice, liberty, equality and humanitarianism. It has not only failed to achieve these things, it has actually destroyed these and other concepts with its weapons - especially in Iraq and Afghanistan- in a brazen fashion, to replace them with fear, destruction, killing, hunger, illness, displacement and more than a million orphans in Baghdad alone, not to mention hundreds of thousands of widows. Americans statistics speak of the killing of more than 650,000 of the people of Iraq as a result of the war and its repercussions."
"People of America: the world is following your news in regards to your invasion of Iraq, for people have recently come to know that, after several years of the tragedies of this war, the vast majority of you want it stopped. Thus, you elected the Democratic Party for this purpose, but the Democrats haven't made a move worth mentioning. On the contrary, they continue to agree to the spending of tens of billions to continue the killing and war there, which has led to the vast majority of you being afflicted with disappointment."
"And here is the gist of the matter, so one should pause, think and reflect: why have the Democrats failed to stop this war, despite them being the majority?"
"I will come back to reply to this question after raising another question, which is:"
"Why are the leaders of the White House keen to start wars and wage them around the world, and make use of every possible opportunity through which they can reach this purpose, occasionally even creating justifications based on deception and blatant lies, as you saw Iraq?"
"In the Vietnam War, the leaders of the White House claimed at the time that it was a necessary and crucial war, and during it, Rumsfeld and his aides murdered two million villagers. And when Kennedy took over the presidency and deviated from the general line of policy drawn up for the White House and wanted to stop this unjust war, that angered the owners of the major corporations who were benefiting from its continuation."
"And so Kennedy was killed, and al-Qaida wasn�t present at that time, but rather, those corporations were the primary beneficiary from his killing. And the war continued after that for approximately one decade. But after it became clear to you that it was an unjust and unnecessary war, you made one of your greatest mistakes, in that you neither brought to account nor punished those who waged this war, not even the most violent of its murderers, Rumsfeld. And even more incredible than that is that Bush picked him as secretary of defense in his first term after picking Cheney as his vice president, Powell as secretary of state and Armitage as Powell's deputy, despite their horrific and blood history of murdering humans. So that was clear signal that his administration - the administration of the generals- didn't have as its main concern the serving of humanity, but rather, was interested in bringing about new massacres. Yet in spite of that, you permitted Bush to complete his first term, and stranger still, chose him for a second term, which gave him a clear mandate from you - with your full knowledge and consent- to continue to murder our people in Iraq and Afghanistan."
"Then you claim to be innocent! This innocence of yours is like my innocence of the blood of your sons on the 11th - were I to claim such a thing. But it is impossible for me to humor any of you in the arrogance and indifference you show for the lives of humans outside America, or for me to humor your leaders in their lying, as the entire world knows they have the lion's share of that. These morals aren't our morals. What I want to emphasize here is that not taking past war criminals to account led to them repeating that crime of killing humanity without right and waging this unjust war in Mesopotamia, and as a result, here are the oppressed ones today continuing to take their right from you."
"This war was entirely unnecessary, as testified to by your own reports. And among the most capable of those from your own side who speak to you on this topic and on the manufacturing of public opinion is Noam Chomsky, who spoke sober words of advice prior to the war, but the leader of Texas doesn't like those who give advice. The entire world came out in unprecedented demonstrations to warn against waging the war and describe its true nature in eloquent terms like "no to spilling red blood for black oil," yet he paid them no heed. It is time for humankind to know that talk of the rights of man and freedom are lies produced by the White House and its allies in Europe to deceive humans, take control of their destinies and subjugate them. "
"So in answer to the question about the causes of the Democrats' failure to stop the war, I say: they are the same reasons which led to the failure of former president Kennedy to stop the Vietnam war. Those with real power and influence are those with the most capital. And since the democratic system permits major corporations to back candidates, be they presidential or congressional, there shouldn't be any cause for astonishment - and there isn't any- in the Democrats' failure to stop the war. And you're the ones who have the saying which goes, "Money talks." And I tell you: after the failure of your representatives in the Democratic Party to implement your desire to stop the war, you can still carry anti-war placards and spread out in the streets of major cities, then go back to your homes, but that will be of no use and will lead to the prolonging of the war."
"However, there are two solutions for stopping it. The first is from our side, and it is to continue to escalate the killing and fighting against you. This is our duty, and our brothers are carrying it out, and I ask Allah to grant them resolve and victory. And the second solution is from your side. It has now become clear to you and the entire world the impotence of the democratic system and how it plays with the interests of the peoples and their blood by sacrificing soldiers and populations to achieve the interests of the major corporations."
"And with that, it has become clear to all that they are the real tyrannical terrorists. In fact, the life of all of mankind is in danger because of the global warming resulting to a large degree from the emissions of the factories of the major corporations, yet despite that, the representative of these corporations in the White House insists on not observing the Kyoto accord, with the knowledge that the statistic speaks of the death and displacement of the millions of human beings because of that, especially in Africa. This greatest of plagues and most dangerous of threats to the lives of humans is taking place in an accelerating fashion as the world is being dominated by the democratic system, which confirms its massive failure to protect humans and their interests from the greed and avarice of the major corporations and their representatives."
"And despite this brazen attack on the people, the leaders of the West - especially Bush, Blair, Sarkozy and Brown- still talk about freedom and human rights with a flagrant disregard for the intellects of human beings. So is there a form of terrorism stronger, clearer and more dangerous than this? This is why I tell you: as you liberated yourselves before from the slavery of monks, kings, and feudalism, you should liberate yourselves from the deception, shackles and attrition of the capitalist system."
"If you were to ponder it well, you would find that in the end, it is a system harsher and fiercer than your systems in the Middle Ages. The capitalist system seeks to turn the entire world into a fiefdom of the major corporations under the label of "globalization" in order to protect democracy."
"And Iraq and Afghanistan and their tragedies; and the reeling of many of you under the burden of interest-related debts, insane taxes and real estate mortgages; global warming and its woes; and the abject poverty and tragic hunger in Africa: all of this is but one side of the grim face of this global system."
"So it is imperative that you free yourselves from all of that and search for an alternative, upright methodology in which it is not the business of any class of humanity to lay down its own laws to its own advantage at the expense of the other classes as is the case with you, since the essence of man-made positive laws is that they serve the interests of those with the capital and thus make the rich richer and the poor poorer."
"The infallible methodology is the methodology of Allah, the Most High, who created the heavens and earth and created the Creation and is the Most Kind and All-Informed and the Knower of the souls of His slaves and the methodology that best suits them."
"You believe with absolute certainty that you believe in Allah, and you are full of conviction of this belief, so much so that you have written this belief of yours on your dollar."
"But the truth is that you are mistake in this belief of yours. The impartial judge knows that belief in Allah requires straightness in the following of His methodology, and accordingly, total obedience must be to the orders and prohibitions of Allah Alone in all aspects of life."
"So how about you when you associate others with Him in your beliefs and separate state from religion, then claim that you are believers?!"
"What you have done is clear loss and manifest polytheism, And I will give you a parable of polytheism, as parables summarize and clarify speech."
"I tell you: its parable is the parable of a man who owns a shop and hires a worker and tells him, "Sell and give me the money," but he makes sales and give the money to someone other than the owner. So who of you would approve of that?"
"You believe that Allah is your Lord and your Creator and the Creator of this earth and that it is His property, then you work on His earth and property without His orders and without obeying Him, and you legislate in contradiction to His Law and methodology."
"This work of yours is the greatest form of polytheism and is rebellion against obedience to Allah with which the believer becomes an unbeliever, even if he obeys Allah in some of His other orders. Allah, the Most High, sent down His orders in His Sacred Books like the Torah and Evangel and sent with them the Messengers (Allah's prayers and peace be upon them) as bearers of good news to the people."
"And everyone who believes in them and complies with them is a believer from the people of the Garden. Then when the men of knowledge altered the words of Allah, the Most High, and sold them for a paltry price, as the rabbis did with the Torah and the monks with the Evangel, Allah sent down His final Book, the magnificent Quran, and safeguarded it from being added to or subtracted from by the hands of men, and in it is a complete methodology for the lives of all people."
"And our holding firm to this magnificent Book is the secret of our strength and winning of the war against you despite the fewness of our numbers and materiel. And if you would like to get to know some of the reasons for your losing of your war against us, then read the book of Michael Scheuer in this regard."
"Don't be turned away from Islam by the terrible situation of the Muslims today, for our rulers in general abandoned Islam many decades ago, but our forefathers were the leaders and pioneers of the world for many centuries, when they held firmly to Islam."
"And before concluding, I tell you: there has been an increase in the thinkers who study events and happenings, and on the basis of their study, they have declared the approach of the collapse of the American Empire."
"Among them is the European thinker who anticipated the fall of the Soviet Union, which indeed fell. And it would benefit you to read what he wrote about what comes after the empire in regard to the United States of America. I also want to bring your attention that among the greatest reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union was their being afflicted with their leader Brezhnev, who was overtaken by pride and arrogance and refused to look at the facts on the ground. From the first year of the Afghanistan invasion, reports indicated that the Russians were losing the war, but he refused to acknowledge this, lest it go down in his personal history as a defeat, even though refusal to acknowledge defeat not only doesn't do anything to change the facts for thinking people, but also exacerbates the problem and increases the losses. And how similar is your position today to their position approximately two decades ago. The mistakes of Brezhnev are being repeated by Bush, who - when asked about the date of his withdrawing of forces from Iraq - said in effect that the withdrawal will not be during his reign, but rather, during the reign of the one who succeeds him. And the significance of these words is not hidden."
"And here I say: it would benefit you to listen to the poignant messages of your soldiers in Iraq, who are paying - with their blood, nerves and scattered limbs - the price for these sorts of irresponsible statements. Among them is the eloquent message of Joshua which he sent by way of the media, in which he wipes the tears from his eyes and describes American politicians in harsh terms and invites them to join him there for a few days. Perhaps his message will find in you an attentive ear so you can rescue him and more than 150,000 of your sons there who are tasting the two bitterest things: "
"If they leave their barracks, the mines devour them, and if they refuse to leave, rulings are passed against them. Thus, the only options left in front of them are to commit suicide or cry, both of which are from the severest of afflictions. So is there anything more men can do after crying and killing themselves to make you respond to them? They are doing that out of the severity of the humiliation, fear and terror which they are suffering. It is severer than what the slaves used to suffer at your hands centuries ago, and it is as if some of them have gone from one slavery to another slavery more severe and harmful, even if it be in the fancy dress of the Defense Department's financial enticements."
"So do you feel the greatness of their sufferings?"
"To conclude, I invite you to embrace Islam, for the greatest mistake one can make in this world and one which is uncorrectable is to die while not surrendering to Allah, the Most High, in all aspects of one's life - ie., to die outside of Islam. And Islam means gain for you in this first life and the next, final life. The true religion is a mercy for people in their lives, filling their hearts with serenity and calm."
T"here is a message for you in the Mujahideen: the entire world is in pursuit of them, yet their hearts, by the grace of Allah, are satisfied and tranquil. The true religion also puts peoples' lives in order with its laws; protects their needs and interests; refines their morals; protects them from evils; and guarantees for them entrance into Paradise in the hereafter through their obedience to Allah and sincere worship of Him Alone."
"And it will also achieve your desire to stop the war as a consequence, because as soon as the warmongering owners of the major corporations realize that you have lost confidence in your democratic system and begun to search for an alternative, and that this alternative is Islam, they will run after you to please you and achieve what you want to steer you away from Islam. So your true compliance with Islam will deprive them of the opportunity to defraud the peoples and take their money under numerous pretexts, like arms deals and so on. "
"There are no taxes in Islam, but rather there is a limited Zakaat [alms] totaling only 2.5%. So beware of the deception of those with the capital. And with your earnest reading about Islam from its pristine sources, you will arrive at an important truth, which is that the religion of all of the Prophets (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them) is one, and that its essence is submission to the orders of Allah Alone in all aspects of life, even if their Shari'ahs [Laws] differ."
"And did you know that the name of the Prophet of Allah Jesus and his mother (peace and blessings of Allah be on them both) are mentioned in the Noble Quran dozens of times, and that in the Quran there is a chapter whose name is "Maryam," i.e. Mary, daughter of 'Imran and mother of Jesus (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them both)? It tells the story of her becoming pregnant with the Prophet of Allah Jesus (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them both), and in its confirmation of her chastity and purity, in contrast to the fabrications of the Jews against her. Whoever wishes to find that out for himself must listen to the verse of this magnificent chapter: one of the just kings of the Christians - the Negus - listened to some of its verses and his eyes welled up with tears and he said something which should be reflected on for a long time by those sincere in their search for the truth."
"He said, "verily, this and what Jesus brought come from one lantern": i.e., that the magnificent Quran and the Evangel are both from Allah, the Most High; and every just and intelligent one of you who reflects on the Quran will definitely arrive at this truth. It also must be noted that Allah has preserved the Quran from the alterations of men. And reading in order to become acquainted with Islam only requires a little effort, and those of you who are guided will profit greatly. And peace be upon he who follows the Guidance."
Sunday, September 09, 2007
Mark Weil, 55, World-Renowned Tashkent Theatrical Impressario
![](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_aQYwbBNZDTI/RuQEXiCpIvI/AAAAAAAAAxY/HEZFLHOiFew/s320/novweil.jpg)
Terrible news from Uzbekistan, according to Registan.net. Mark Weil, the impressario behind the Ilkhom Theatre, has been stabbed to death in the stairwell of his apartment building. Yesterday's New York Times carried a report by Anna Kisselgoff:
"Mark Weil, an internationally known theater director in Uzbekistan whose troupe, Ilkhom, caused controversy at home with its experimental productions, was fatally stabbed late Thursday night in Tashkent, the capital. He was 55.I went to the Ilkhom theatre when I lived in Tashkent–it provided a window to the West, a post-Soviet cultural link to theatrical trends abroad, in addition to a venue for popular shows such as “Tortilla Flats” (the musical!) which had been running for some 10 years, and “White, White, Black Stork” a classic Uzbek drama based on the stories of Abdullah Kadyri. Yes, the latter show had gay themes–but they were 70 years old. Mark Weil’s Ilkhom theatre represented the best of Uzbekistan, it was a real showcase for talent, and also showed the nation could host modern, intelligent, and deeply moving drama. I hope they keep it going–and name the theatre in his honor as a tribute, like the Hamza theatre.
Mr. Weil died in a hospital after being attacked in front of his apartment building, a spokesman for his troupe told The Associated Press. Neighbors saw two young men waiting for him, The A.P. reported.
At the hospital, he was able to say he had not been robbed and did not know his assailants, according to actors from his company. The A.P. quoted a theater spokesman as saying the police would not speculate on a motive.
Mr. Weil made his name as a dissident artist when he directed plays in other companies in Moscow and conceived and directed unconventional productions for Ilkhom in the Soviet era. He also worked regularly abroad with American and other foreign collaborators. In recent years, his updating of the classics and treatment of subjects like homosexuality were considered sensitive in an increasingly repressive Uzbek society.
Mr. Weil had homes in his native Tashkent and in Seattle, to which he moved his wife and two daughters in the 1990s because of increasing unrest in Uzbekistan. Like many Russian Jews, Mr. Weil felt at home in Tashkent’s cosmopolitan society. He traced the cultural coexistence of Russians and Uzbeks from the czars to the post-Soviet era in “The End of an Era: Tashkent,” a highly personal documentary with remarkable archival material that was shown at European film festivals from 1996 to 1998.
He founded his Russian-speaking company in 1976 and named it Ilkhom, “inspiration” in Uzbek. He always included Uzbek actors and collaborators. With no subsidy, the troupe functioned as an Off Broadway theater and incorporated disparate styles and elements, including mime.
A twin-city theater project between Seattle and Tashkent first took Mr. Weil to Seattle in 1988. He also directed and held drama workshops at universities throughout the United States.
In 1991, Ilkhom performed as part of the New York International Festival of the Arts with “Ragtime for Clowns.” It was essentially a mime show. But Mr. Weil had his four characters dancing into changing predicaments like silent-film comics.
Last year he worked with the American choreographer David Rousseve in Tashkent on “Ecstasy with the Pomegranate,” a mixed-media work.
The company was scheduled to open its new season this weekend in Tashkent with his new staging of Aeschylus’ “Oresteia.” A company spokesman said that the company would carry on and that Mr. Weil’s ashes would be flown to Seattle.
Members of his troupe said his last words in the hospital were “I open a new season tomorrow, and everything must happen.”
As far as suspects go, I’m no expert, but someone I know compared the killing to the death of Theo van Gogh in Holland–a cultural figure stabbed to death as an act of terrorism, to punish a cultural figure and set an example. I hope this is not the case.
However terrible, I would prefer if it were a random act of violence by ordinary criminals. Something similar happened to my translator and her mother when we were living in Center-1, a supposedly safe neighborhood, in 2003. Shortly after a Presidential Amnesty, she and her mother were ambushed in the stairwell of their apartment building by a man wielding a knife. They fought back, she was stabbed, but managed to push him down the stairs after he had knocked down her mother. He ran away, and she had only a minor wound. We were told there is often a crime wave after an amnesty.
There will be a memorial service in Tashkent on September 12th at the Ilkhom. Here is a link to the Ilkhom Theatre website. Guardian (UK) story here.
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Peter Rainer on 3:10 to Yuma
I knew Peter years ago in Los Angeles, when he was working as a film critic for the defunct Herald-Examiner and Los Angeles Magazine. I often wondered what happened to him since then. Today I found out, thanks to Google. Glad to see Peter's still working. Here's an excerpt from his review from the Christian Science Monitor:
A posse, of course, is an essential appurtenance of any self respecting Western. It's been a long time – too long – since I've heard those glorious words, "Spread out!" As the posse is methodically worn away and only Dan and Ben remain, "3:10 to Yuma" becomes a study in unlikely kinship – another Western mainstay. Dan knows Ben is a better man than many who have hunted him down. But he never forgets that Ben is a killer.
Bale acts as if he's still playing the POW survivalist from Werner Herzog's "Rescue Dawn." His hyperrealistic performance is a drag next to Crowe's dapper prince of darkness. Crowe understands that the classic Western villains wear their mythology like a cape. His underplaying here is in many ways as hammy as if he were overplaying, and that's just fine.
Mangold and his screenwriters aren't trying to be revisionists. Ben is celebrated in the dime novels of the day and, in person, he still seems larger than life. Because Dan's son idealizes Ben, or at least the Ben of the dime novels, the movie turns on the notion of heroism. Dan's heroics, in the end, become a match for Ben's antiheroics, and Will learns to love his father.
This drippy father-son stuff is the least successful aspect of the movie, perhaps because it's overly familiar not only from other Westerns, but also from all-too-many current contemporary films. Who can blame Will for being starry-eyed around Ben? From a didactic standpoint, the problem with most morality plays, this one included, is that the villains are almost always more exciting than the champions of decency.
On the other hand, what Alfred Hitchcock once said about thrillers also applies to Westerns: The stronger the bad guy, the better the film. By that measure, "3:10 to Yuma" is excellent. Grade: B+
Luciano Pavarotti, 71
In memoriam, here's a clip of Pavarotti singing "Nessun Dorma" from YouTube:
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
James A. Baker on "Pragmatic Idealism"
The former Secretary of State's 10 maxims to guide American foreign policy have been published in The National Interest:
What I suggest might be called “pragmatic idealism.” While firmly grounded in values, it appreciates the complexity of the real world—a world of hard choices and painful trade-offs. This is the real world in which we must live, decide and act.
It is a world that Ronald Reagan understood. He was, famously, a man of deeply held conviction. But he was also pragmatic. When I was his chief of staff, he often told me, “Jim, I’d rather get 80 percent of what I want than to go over the cliff with my flag flying.” The Gipper, of course, was right.
I am not proposing a dogmatic list that must be checked off for each foreign- policy challenge we confront. On the contrary, these maxims embody a mindset marked by a realistic assessment of events and a practical response to them. They represent anything but elements of a rigid ideology that forces events into preconceived notions and creates “either/or” choices that are both false and dangerous. This approach embodies one of our most distinctive national characteristics: We Americans are a practical people less interested in ideological purity than in solving problems. Our pragmatism should inform our foreign policy.
Such a balanced approach can help us avoid both the cynicism of “realism” and the impracticality of “idealism.” It is based on an optimistic view of man but is tempered by our knowledge of human imperfection. It promises no easy answers or quick fixes. But neither did the containment policy pursued by U.S. administrations, Democratic and Republican alike, during the Cold War. Yet that policy ultimately triumphed. It was based, much like the approach I have sketched, on a unique melding of idealism and realism. It eschewed the temptations of both isolationism on the one hand, and rollback of communism through direct conflict with the Soviet Union on the other. And it reflected, at an important level, a confidence about the future that we need to recapture.
Such an approach does, I am convinced, offer our surest guide and best hope for navigating our great country safely though this precarious period of unparalleled opportunity and risk in world affairs.
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Just in Time for the Jewish Holidays...
Thanks to an email from a friend in Hollywood, I've learned that ![](//2.bp.blogspot.com/_aQYwbBNZDTI/Rt20eSCpIbI/AAAAAAAAAtI/fwivVab5Fuk/s320/70076315.jpg)
Netflix now carries WHO SHALL LIVE AND WHO SHALL DIE? My distributor tells me they ordered 100 copies, so there should be plenty of DVDs available....
![](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_aQYwbBNZDTI/Rt20eSCpIbI/AAAAAAAAAtI/fwivVab5Fuk/s320/70076315.jpg)
Netflix now carries WHO SHALL LIVE AND WHO SHALL DIE? My distributor tells me they ordered 100 copies, so there should be plenty of DVDs available....
The Blogger Who Ended Senator Craig's Career
Profiled in today's Washington Post Style section by Jose Antonio Vargas under the headline: "The Most Feared Man on the Hill?" He reportedly has a hit list with 30 names on it, so far. His name is Mike Rogers:
A little volume titled "The Book of Questions: Business, Politics and Ethics" is tucked under his coffee table. There, on Page 193, is the question: "How much right do we have to know about the private lives of elected officials?"Mike Rogers' blog is BlogActive.com.
Rogers says, "When those private lives are in direct conflict with the public policy that these officials espouse, I think it's fair game that their private lives be brought into this. And I have to blog to do that with. Here's the question: What community is expected to protect its own enemies? Don't beat up the gay community, and then expect us to protect your secrets and your double life. It's just not right."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)