|
|
| |
|
 |
| |
Saturday, May 25, 2002
Summer Concert Security
Buried in this story about the IDF going back into Bethlehem is this:
the northern West Bank, meanwhile, Israeli troops stopped a taxi and arrested a 16-year-old Palestinian boy with an explosives belt strapped to his waist, on an apparent suicide mission, the army said.
The troops set up a "surprise roadblock," and asked the four Palestinians in the taxi to get out and lift their shirts — a now common practice designed to check for would-be bombers wearing explosives.
When the 16-year-old lifted his shirt to expose the explosives, the army seized all four on the road, near the village of Sanur. The belt was removed from the youth and blown up, the army said.
DUUUDE. That is so uncool. It's just the man trying to hassle you for your stash. Their getting their security advice from the concert promoters or something.
This is what I, and so many others, go through every summer to catch a show at an amphitheater; especially for Widespread Panic, Blues Traveler, and Phish shows. Granted, they aren't quite looking for the same thing. [Insert obligatory stoner humor here.]
Still Have Our Freedoms
A Pennsylvania court of appeals reversed the conviction of a man charged for failing to provide identification. State game officers came to Ickes' house to investigate a possible violation that occurred some 4 months prior. The officers demanded Ickes produce identification before they would disclose what they wanted. He refused. He was charged and convicted under 34 Pa. C.S. § 904; PA Game Code makes it unlawful for any person to refuse to produce identification upon the request of a game officer. The court found the law unconstitutional under the 4th Amendment right against unlawful search and seizure.
The state argued that it was akin to a Terry stop -- an articulable and reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, allowing the officer to conduct a brief investigatory stop. The court rejected that argument since a Terry stop is based possible criminal activity at that time, and even under Terry, there is no requirement by the person stopped to answer questions. Here, they were investigating a possible criminal violation that occurred 4 months ago. The actual decision is here.
Teachers being Tested
In Pennsylvania there are 70 schools that are certified as "teacher preparation institutions" (schools where you can get a degree in education and be certified as a school teacher). The PA Dept of Education has just released a study that tested the teachers' knowledge of subjects -- the Professional Development Assistance Program (PDAP). Not surprisingly, this has created a bit of a stir. Right now the PDAP Testing Results are giving several of the schools who looked bad a headache, and they are going into spin mode.
California University [of Pennsylvania] graduates scored 1 point below the state norm in elementary mathematics; 2 points below the middle school level mathematics norm; 1 point below the elementary reading norm, 2 points below the middle school reading norm and 2 points below the norm in secondary school reading.
...
"We don't even know how many alumni took the test. Statistics can say anything," said California spokeswoman Michele McCoy. "We're looking at a 50-page report that we just received yesterday."
Translation: Sure we scored below the average on everything, but that means nothing.
The study did show that more recent graduates, scored better in the math tests than older teachers. I don't find this as surprising since math skills, like language skills is a bit of a "use it or lose it" skill; and math teaching has been receiving an increased emphasis in recent years.
Why NGOs will destroy themeselves
Several Latin American AIDS-related NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) are planning protests in front of Brazilian embassies. This seems odd since Brazil has been a world leader in seeking to create global funding for AIDS, state-run labs actually produce many of the drugs for its own people (some with and some without license from the patent holder -- but that is a different issue), has gotten out in front with awareness, and generally not pretended there isn't risk and a problem.
When the AIDS epidemic exploded in the 1980s, Brazil's 170 million population was seen as a major casualty, running infection rates similar to South Africa. Now, HIV-AIDS infection rates in Brazil stand at 0.6 percent of the adult population versus 25 percent in South Africa.
So why are they protesting?
Activists say Brazil could do more to share that success.
"We have a humanitarian problem of worldwide proportions. Anyone with the resources to help should not be inhibited by politics or trade agreements," said Richard Stern, director of Agua Buena Human Rights Association in Costa Rica.
NGOs say 10 to 15 people die daily in Latin America due to a lack of access to AIDS medicines.
Brazil says it is doing all it can to pressure the region's governments while respecting national sovereignty. And under a new program, Brazil will give 2.5 million reais ($1 million) in AIDS assistance, including donations of drugs and technological help, for AIDS programs in poor countries.
Essentially Brazil is being targeted because it already responds to the issue. Since they do something, the NGOs believe it is insufficient, because it doesn't reflect their level of concern on the issue.
Seems like a familiar pattern for NGOs. Think about it, all over Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Cuba, there are horrid examples of human rights violations, but Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch go after Israel and America. Why? It isn't just anti-semitism or anti-American sentiments, it's the fact that these countries already address these issues and care about them. Why give a s**t about Sudanese slavery, Nigeria using a brutal form of Sharia (Islamic law), Cuban repression of freedoms, Saudi Arabia's brutal actions against anyone who isn't Muslim, and so on if the ruling government ignores you and won't even respond?
Ah, but the US and Israel don't (at least not yet). So, while paying lip service to decrying the actions in the other countries, all their time and resources go to acting against the regimes that are actually doing most of the things they want (but not all)
As the NGOs hypocrisy gets further put on display, people will be less willing to be supportive of their actions -- more specifically, they will be less willing to give them money for their activities.
Whoo-Hoo!!!
That was my reaction when I was surveying the links on The Watcher's page, and realized I had been added to the Warblogs list.
Friday, May 24, 2002
Martinis
I love a good dry martini. The chilled glass, 1-2 olives (1 is elegant, 2 is proper, 3 is a meal), the shaker with cracked ice, a slight touch of vermouth, and gin. When I go to a nice bar or restaurant, my test is to order a "martini, dry." A good bartender or waiter will assume or ask, "straight up?" I find it a minor annoyance when the bartender/waiter taking my order says, "vodka or gin?" [Private thoughts: I ordered a martini, not a vodka martini, pay attention you dolt!] The best places don't ask that question, they just assume gin unless specified for something else. Places that will piss me off are the ones that will not ask, then bring you a vodka martini. VMs are so bland, they lack character and flavor, and I don't care if it was what James Bond drank -- but notice he always specified the "vodka martini, medium dry, shaken not stirred." He knew and respected the difference.
Why the meaningless rant? The wife and I went to a nice restaurant tonight. A fairly new place, that specifically mentioned its martinis. I ordered one. The waiter took my order, and then came back a minute later to ask, "You did want the blue cheese stuffed olives?" The horror definitely showed on my face. Ugh. The idea of blue cheese crumbling, polluting my martini in appearance and taste. I can deal with a lemon rind (especially on the more humid and hot days), or a couple coffee beans (but then it should be called by the appropriate name, Boston Bullet), but cheese in my drink. Never! Well he brought me my drink with two regularly stuffed olives. It was, however, a vodka martini. I decided not to fight it. I just wanted to eat and go at that point, and treat myself to a proper one at home. Sometimes you just have to do things yourself.
Blog Blast
Jonah Goldberg's latest syndicated column takes aim at blogs. Specifically he takes aim at some of the rather hyperbolic claims of a "blogging revolution."
The bloggers talk of the growing power of the "blogosphere" and how there's a "blogging revolution" taking place. The hype is often over the top. Newsweek recently asked "Will the Blogs Kill Old Media?" Dave Winer, a leading software designer and blog booster, bets that more people will get their news from bloggers than from The New York Times by 2007.
Basically he's saying there won't be any overpowering of the mainstream media by bloggers. I agree, and the funny thing is, most other bloggers would agree. Sure there are always those that will get caught up in such a thing, and claim it will effect major changes, but they are in the distinct minority.
The thing about this column that amuses me, is that it is so untimely. Issues of a "blogger revolution" have already been considered, dissected and tossed aside by most bloggers. Most use the term "blogger revolution" with tongue planted firmly in cheek. Just about no one believes that bloggers will replace mainstream media. They can't. It is symbiotic (though, some of the victims of blogger-analysis would consider it parasitic) with the media. Bloggers comment on the information supplied by others. They expose lies, biases, and mistakes of reporting, editorials, and opinion pieces. They bring attention to others works they find interesting, challenging, and good (at least consistent with their own biases).
Blogosphere. Most (I include myself here) use the terms blogosphere because it is a good way to describe what is happening within a limited community. It hardly applies to the whole world or the mainstream world. This hardly entails a revolution.
The general feeling is that blogging is an effective way to comment and analyze news with the blogger's biases fully on display and not hidden behind any claims of balance.
I don't know if it's because Jonah spends so much time online, and gets so much e-mail from bloggers that he felt a need to "put them in their place" in the general scheme of the whole world, but it looks kind of petty.
Unprotected Sex Lowers Depression (in the short term)
According to this story, women who frequently have unprotected sex are less likely to be depressed than those who utilized condoms or abstained. This is based on a study being released by the Archives of Sexual Behavior, a medical journal that must be a lot of fun to edit. Sorry, it's not online to all. The link is only a description of the journal.
Thursday, May 23, 2002
Lucas' World
George Lucas will never release a DVD set of the original Non-Special Edition Star Wars Trilogy (the original theatrical version, not the remastered digital additions, extra scenes he added a few years ago). Link courtesy of Bob Hovorka.
To Lucas, the subject is not even worth debating:
don't think so. I think of the film as THE SPECIAL EDITION. I don't think of it as the early version, any more than I would put early rough cuts on.... I consider THE SPECIAL EDITION as being the final version at this point.
I understand his viewpoint. The Special Edition is closer to his true vision, and as the creator, owner and artist, it is his right.
That said, Lucas shows some astonishing lack of understanding and/or concern for his fans. (I like Star Wars, but I'm not a huge fan, I only married one) The original version was the one most saw for the first time. It is nostalgia, fondness and part of what they saw and shaped them when they were growing up. To tell these fans, tough, this is the way I want it is arrogant and disrespectful to them. Much, the way colorization of B/W movies in the late '80s/early '90s.
Lucas' Star Wars was shaped in large part, by the Sci-Fi movies and serials he saw growing up. He speaks of them with great affection and nostalgia. It seems unlikely that a colorized version of a "Flash Gordon" serial would enhance his fond memories of them.
Targeting Tel Aviv
Yet another attempt to kill civilians by Palestinian terrorists in and around Tel Aviv. This time with a car. It is unclear whether there were explosives on board or not. This time the target was a dance club called "Barbies" "packed with mostly teenaged revelers."
No one was killed (other than the driver), but 3 people were injured. The driver was shot dead by security as he was trying to ram into the front of the club. All of the recent attacks by terrorists have been in and around Tel Aviv.
This is just a kind of off center thought. Most countries keep their ambassadors and diplomats in and around Tel Aviv. Unless they are staying in their embassies at all times, they and their staff can't be feeling too safe right now.
Avenge We Will ... On Whoever We Decide Was a Collaborator
Whit-less Whitaker of The Guardian files his latest report from the Balata refugee camp outside of Nablus in the West Bank. He attended the funeral for Mahmoud Titi, a senior commander in Nablus of the Al-Aqsa baby killers brigade terrorist group, killed the other day by Israeli forces. This charming funeral procession story:
The flags of the brigades mingled with others from Islamic Jihad and Hamas as thousands of Nablus residents escorted the bodies from the hospital, past the gutted Palestinian Authority headquarters and the ruined prison, to Balata refugee camp on the edge of the town where the Al-Aqsa Brigades were born.
Gunmen fired in the air as bearers carried the bodies on open stretchers into the Ibad ar-Rahman mosque, past shops shuttered as a mark of respect. But suddenly the mood outside the mosque changed from grief to anger. An argument about collaborators broke out, because no one in Balata doubts that an informer in the refugee camp betrayed Titi to the Israelis.
"There will be cooperation between the Palestinian security services to find the collaborators," one of the brigades' leaders said. "The only punishment I see for them is being shot in front of everybody.
"Martyrdom operations will continue and escalate... to respond to the attacks by the Israeli forces against our leaders and other Palestinian fighters," he said. "The Al-Aqsa Brigades will retaliate for this dirty assassination swiftly."
Last night two Palestinians died and four others were seriously injured by an explosion at a house in the Balata camp. Sources in Nablus said it was an accident during the preparation of a bomb.
Does it concern Whit-less at all that yet another refugee is being used to manufacture bombs? That the Palestinians talk about finding "collaborators" and just shooting them? Terrorist groups openly calling for suicide bombing operations and at the same time working with "Palestinian security services"? Is the UNRWA doing anything to stop this? Judging from this piece, these are not issues of concern.
This is an analysis?
From The Guardian, so you know it will be a clear analysis. The intro, and some "highlights":
Yassar Arafat may have been released but peace in Israel still looks a long way off. Simon Jeffery explains how the Middle East arrived at this deadlock
...
How did the situation develop?
The Palestinian uprising erupted in September 2000 after peace talks between the Palestinian Authority and Israel broke down over the future status of Jerusalem. But what started as rioting in the aftermath of a visit by Mr Sharon, then the opposition leader, to a contested religious site, soon spiralled into killing that has to date claimed more than 1,200 lives - the vast majority on the Palestinian side.
WRONG!!! Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! Even Ehud Barak -- no friend of Sharon -- states in an interview the Guardian published the same day as this "analysis," that the claim of the rioting occurred spontaneously from Sharon's visit to the Temple on the Mound is a load of s**t. The event had been cleared with the Palestinian Authority security weeks in advance. That people outside of the Arab world keep buying and spewing that shit is remarkable.
The months before Israel's military incursion to the West Bank had seen an increasing use of suicide attacks by militant Palestinian groups such as Islamic Jihad, Hamas and the al-Aqsa Brigades. For its part Israel used helicopter gunships to assassinate militant leaders, put its tanks and armoured bulldozers in Palestinian towns and raided refugee camps. Civilians died on both sides.
Let's see, suicide bombers purposefully targeting civilians with explosives bought and smuggled = Israeli military strikes, using military equipment, to take out terrorist leaders hiding amongst civilians. See it's all morally equal.
What did the campaign involve?
It had two phases: firstly the confinement of the Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, to the basement of his Ramallah headquaters; and secondly the occupation of the other major Palestinian towns. Thousands of Palestinian men were arrested as the Israeli army hunted down - Palestinians allege summarily executed - militant fighters and Mr Arafat's policemen.
What? Palestinians "allege" summary executions, and this is printed without noting that there has been no evidence of this? The only summary executions of Palestinians at that time were by other Palestinians.
The fiercest fighting was in the Jenin refugee camp: 23 Israeli soldiers died and an as yet unknown number of Palestinian fighters and civilians. Amnesty International has called for an investigation into Jenin along the same lines as the Balkan war crimes inquiries.
"As yet unknown number"? I had to go back and recheck the date of this "analysis," because I could have sworn that I've seen some reasonable number had been pegged as between 52-56 for almost a month now, with most of them being terrorists not civilians. As for the calls for an investigation, by all means, one into the Palestinian war crimes of using civilian areas for terrorist bases, UNRWA complicity, and -- oh, wait, he means Israeli war crimes, doesn't he?
This short paragraph is one of the better crafted propaganda/biased pieces. By pretending the number of deaths on the Palestinian side is unknown and stating that it includes the terrorists and civilians, it makes it seem like the IDF went in guns blazing and killing indiscriminately. Then the second line about an investigation "along the same lines as the Balkan war crimes inquiries" is brilliant at making it seem not only like there was surely war crimes, but that they were on the same scale.
I'm going to skip a bit ahead, because my stomach won't let me do a full breakdown.
The conflict has developed its own logic of hate and anger that perpetuates the killing. On the Israeli side many fear the Palestinians want to drive them into the sea. Palestinians feel besieged by Israel and fear the Jewish state will, if not annex the West Bank and Gaza, deny the right of an economically and politically viable Palestinian state to exist.
Of course. Time for a reference to the "cycle of violence." What "analysis" would be complete without one? Fear the Palestinians want the whole of Israel? P'shaw! Why just look at a Palestinian designed map. It clearly shows... Uh, wait. Let's move on to "an economically and politically viable" Palestinian state. Yeah, that's what had been happening while the Palestinian Authority had control over the area.
Okay, let's get to the big finale:
Is peace possible with Mr Sharon and Mr Arafat in charge?
There is animosity between the two and Mr Sharon would probably rather not deal with Mr Arafat. He calls him a "murderer and a pathological liar" and, as Israel's minister of defence, led a campaign into Lebanon in 1982 to drive the PLO out of Beirut. Mr Arafat was allowed to flee to Tunisia but Mr Sharon said last year he wished he had "liquidated" the Palestinian leader when he had the chance.
On the Palestinian side, Mr Sharon is regarded as a war criminal for his part in the massacre by his Lebanese Christian militia allies of between 800 and 1,000 people, including many children, in two refugee camps.
Good balance on this one. Arafat is "called" a murderer and liar by Sharon (not the Israelis, but just Sharon). Sharon, however, is regarded as a "war criminal" by the Palestinians. The latter is especially good, since he leaves out what the role was, and that the massacre took place in Lebanon.
Well, let me thank Simple Simon for that nuanced, fair, and balanced analysis. I know things are a lot clearer for me.
Celebrity Boxing
I don't have the time or stomach to watch Celebrity Boxing. (the brief snippets I saw on ESPN was more than enough) Bill Simmons the Sports Guy, however, gets paid to do so. His real time diary during the spectacle is unbelievably funny. The best way to experience it without having to watch it yourself.
9:25 p.m. After one minute of Manute [Bol] and [William "Re]Fridge[rator" Perry] cautiously circling one another, followed by the bell ending Round 1, Rose says, "Fridge (looks) a little bit winded right now." And he's not lying.
(Speaking of Rose, I bet he wasn't sitting in a college classroom 10 years ago and saying to himself, "When I become a professional broadcaster, I just hope I get the chance to say the words, 'Let's go to Barry Williams, who's with Joey Buttafuoco!' " Well, that just happened. Can you even bounce back from a debacle like this?)
9:29 p.m. Rose and Mancini have this exchange after Round 2:
Rose: "(Perry) was content with just standing still."
Mancini: "And he was getting tired doing that."
...
9:31 p.m. After two and a half rounds of Manute and Fridge cautiously circling each other, the referee suddenly snaps, "You guys gotta box or you're not gonna get paid, either one of you, so come on now, let's box!" We won't be seeing that tirade in Fox's promos for "Celebrity Boxing III."
Condi Will be President
The future is at hand as predicted in the weekly Sun. Condolezza Rice will become President. If top psychics make these predictions, I have no further questions.
Wednesday, May 22, 2002
Local Campaign Finance Reform
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals found Constitutional, an Akron, OH ordinance that limited contributions to individuals running for city offices to $300 for mayoral and council-at-large candidates and $100 for ward council candidates. The 6th Cir. reversed the District Court that found them unconstitutional because the limits were too low. The case can be found here.
Basically the majority (2-1) found that the limits were not unconstitutional since:
On the surface, it is difficult to see how a restriction on political contributions to a hundred to three hundred dollars in a local election could significantly interfere with a donor's ability to "associate" with a particular political candidate. Limiting the amount of one's contribution does not perceptibly decrease the degree of association or restrict the contributor's ability to associate with the candidate of his choice. ... By limiting the amount that an individual may contribute to a campaign, the charter amendment does not foreclose that individual from freely associating himself with a candidate or participating personally in the campaign in any other way, including making expenditures on behalf of the candidate with whom he wishes to associate. ... Money buys many of the good things in life, but no one has cited any constitutional history suggesting that money is supposed to be the milk of politics or that large political contributions are a necessary ingredient of representative government protected by the Constitution. Constitutional history does not support the idea that laissez faire economics is embodied in the First Amendment to assure the right to make large campaign contributions.
Basically, the majority takes the position that uncoordinated expenditures are fine and now encouraged, but to give a candidate money directly to determine the best use is corrupting.
Right. This view encourages more appearances of corruption and investigations as to whether communications paid for by someone else were coordinated or controlled by the candidate or were actually independent. Rather than clearing the air of the appearance of corruption, it makes everyone look dirty.
Share the Laughter
Happy Fun Pundit posts on the subject of " Bike to Work Day," which was all of last week. Totally amusing. He also, though, provides one of the best definitions for an "Idiotarianism" I've seen:
But then again, isn't that what Idiotarianism is all about? Find something that emotionally seems kind of like a good idea at first glance, and turn it into, if not a moral crusade, at least a special day... then, now that you've got the thin end of the wedge in, you quietly extend it out to a week, and before anybody notices, the world has become a socialist paradise with justice and free tire patch kits for all.
How Print Publishing and their Web Sites Should Work
This article on Jonah Goldberg, and to some extent Rich Lowry and National Review Online (link via Instaguy, is a surprisingly positive piece (only a minor backhand slap or two at them). What interested me, however, was this near the end:
NRO has also benefited National Review in other ways: the Web site moved more than 8,000 new subscribers to the magazine last year alone, according to a National Review newsletter. The demographics of these subscribers showcased the difference between the print and online audiences. “We were finding that these new subscribers tended to be coastal and younger than thirty-five,” Goldberg says. “NR’s traditional subscribers are midwestern and, lets just say, older than thirty-five.” National Review claims more than 160,000 subscribers, more than The American Prospect (47,000), The Weekly Standard (65,000), The New Republic (85,000), or The Nation (112,000).
This to me, is why NRO is such a good site. It doesn't just give away or reproduce the magazine, it provides original content for free but helps to pay for itself by increasing the print version's sales and subscriptions. Short of paid online subscriptions (like the Wall Street Journal), this is probably the best way for a print medium to use the Web to increase its circulation.
For those of you, who don't know my secret origin (and that would be most of you) I am a lawyer/editor/writer for a small legal publishing firm outside of Cleveland. The company is a real niche market -- corporate counsel. One of my duties is the writing and editing of a monthly newsletter regarding Web sites --Web Site Review (hence, why I'm bouncing around on the Web so much). Usually covering several specific legal areas, and each site gets around a 100 word write-up. We probably have write-ups for about 30-50 sites a month. The product is profitable, but it has no real Web presence; because they can't afford to just give the product away. To me, though, it is embarrassing for a newsletter on Web Sites not to put anything on the Web. Not even a checklist of the sites (deep-linking concerns). I have been trying to get something on the web, just to help promote it. If the company dangled a little something extra, it just seems that it could benefit from an increase in subscriptions.
Summarizing Massacre-Reporting Hysteria
UPI has a three part series on the Euro-Media frenzy that followed Israel's actions in Jenin, and all the cries of a massacre (via Best of the Web). Very interesting and it very harshly indicts the so-called "pure state-owned media" (including a good swipe at NPR) for giving into its own biases versus the crass commercialized American Media. The parts aren't linked to each other, but they are collected below.
Part One, Part Two, and Part Three.
PA Govs Bush-Whacked
I have to wonder what the Bush family has against Pennsylvania Governors. Bush I, took the moderate Republican, popular, 2 term Gov. Dick Thornburgh (who for a while was considered to be a possible running mate); and somehow he became one of the most irrelevant US Attorney Generals. He's not been heard from since.
Now Bush II is doing an even more thorough job on Tom Ridge (again, a moderate Republican, popular, 2 term Gov., who was considered for the VP slot). As Director of Homeland Security he has been reduced to a joke.
Neither of these guys were popular with the Conservative Right (except in self-serving terms of pointing to the successful jobs done by Republican governors). Maybe there is some secret plot by the far Right. A vast right-wing...
Blogger Problems
I know I've only been doing this a short time, and I don't pay that much to have gone to Blogger Pro, but this is the second staight day with major posting problems. Today it was an "Error 505" statement that kept anything from posting all morning. All you can do is log out, log in and repost.
Mistakes were made
I feel something like the unknown butterfly who causes the tidal wave.
A couple weeks back, I sent an e-mail to Eric Olsen at Tres Producers, complimenting him on a particular post. I added some comments including the reference to " fact-check your ass," but mistakenly attributed it to Matt Welch since I didn't go looking in anyone's archives for "a throwaway line" in an e-mail. Eric reprinted the part of the letter at his site which included the misattributed quote.
[Quick aside to explain how I made the mistake:
1. When I do my blog reading, I usually read Blair, Welch, and Layne in some consecutive order which can cause some blending of who said what; and
2. Welch provided my favorite example of fact-checking someone's ass, was the Welch inspired drive to Googlesearch the signers of the free-Slobodan Milosevic petition, and the overall fact-checking he did on some ugly op-ed pieces defending Slobo.]
Which then led to some pointing out that he had the wrong person attributed (even though it was me through an e-mail he posted on his site -- which, I know makes it somewhat his responsibility, but it wasn't unreasonable to believe it was accurate -- but I digress), for which Eric, somewhat unnecessarily, apologized.
Then the Guardian Media misattributes it to Prof. Instapundit, which is corrected by Insta, and acknowledged by Layne with some embarrassment about how his one line that he did not think much of, has become something of a mantra in the blogosphere.
Any how, sorry to Eric, Matt, Ken, and perhaps the guy at the Guardian and Glenn if my mistake somehow led to that misattribution.
Tuesday, May 21, 2002
The Difference
I haven't seen a lot posted within the blogosphere on this, but Sharon may end up forcing an election in Israel within six months if the coalition government folds. Israel will hold peaceful elections while a crisis of terror, suicide bombers and IDF troops may need to go in West Bank and Gaza periodically continue.
The Palestinians, by contrast, cancelled their last elections scheduled for 1999, and claim they can't hold new elections unless the IDF pulls back to where they were in September 2000. And then, not for at least six months afterwards.
Why people even give Arafat and the Palestinians the ink or bytes to make their claims without challenging them sometimes escapes me.
Bush would nominate a moderate?
The New Republic has an interesting profile on the man who is rumored to be GWBush's pick for the next Supreme Court vacancy, Alberto Gonzales.
It's not hard to figure out why Gonzales shows up at these conservative-themed events. Everyone assumes he's on Bush's shortlist for the next vacancy on the Supreme Court, and appearances like his speech before the CNP [Council for National Policy, an umbrella group of social conservatives] are a way to build conservative support for his potential nomination. And there's a reason conservatives need convincing: Everything in Gonzales's record prior to his arrival in Washington suggests he is a moderate jurist uncomfortable and unfamiliar with the kind of conservative judicial activism identified with Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. And that worries Washington conservatives who fear a replay of 1990, when Bush pere nominated David Souter--another state supreme court judge with an ambiguous record--to the high court, only to have him become a stalwart of its liberal minority.
But if "No More Souters!" has become a rallying cry among conservatives, Democrats are equally determined not to allow another Scalia, an Italian-American right-winger who won confirmation in part because Democrats didn't want to be seen as standing in the way of an ethnic milestone. And if Gonzales's record in Texas causes him problems on the right, his conservative stances as White House counsel--on judicial picks, on terrorism, on administration secrecy--raise red flags for Senate Democrats and their allies on the left. Alberto Gonzales, in other words, has the misfortune to be a potential Supreme Court pick at a time when the window of political acceptability--between being too liberal to be nominated and too conservative to be confirmed--is narrower than ever before. Michael Farris, a home-schooling advocate and influential social conservative, summarizes the dilemma: "Until Judge Gonzales starts saying some things publicly like, `I believe the president is right both politically and constitutionally on abortion, and I'm happy to defend him,' he's not going to be rehabilitated. The problem is that if you start doing that you become unacceptable to the left." No wonder Gonzales addressed the CNP. And no wonder he didn't win them over.
The piece does provide an interesting background on Gonzales as a jurist. I think it is a lot of rhetoric on both sides as they jockey for influence if a member of the Supreme Court finally retires (or dies). This may be cynical of me (may?). The Republicans will fall in line behind whoever Bush nominates. The Democrats can't stonewall on a hearing for the Supreme Court like they are doing in the lower courts; and I just don't see them having the "cojones" to not confirm the first Hispanic-American Supreme Court Justice (though that would be true affirmative action at work).
Daniel Pearl's Death
A lot of people have seen and/or are talking about the underground site that has the "Recruitment" video that was made using the late Daniel Pearl as the main attraction. No one has actually linked to it, and I believe they are right not to. I know how pissed and angry I was when I heard how he was killed and the tape that was sent. I saw red.
I don't have a link to it. I might look for it. I am of two minds about this tape and viewing it.
I don't want to see it. Purely selfish reasons. I fear it. I fear it haunting me, nightmares, the thoughts it may provoke. My daughter is due in less than six weeks. I do not want even an inkling of a chance that my thoughts could turn to the horrors people are capable of inflicting on each other -- whether it be out of a "cause," a belief, a sickness, pure evil; whatever -- when I see her being born, when I hold her for the first time. I do not want that.
I want to see it. I have to know. I want to see what these sick fucks did. I need to know and see how they filmed the murder of a man; to then use it as a recruiting tool to their evil. I want to see their evil and end any sympathy that might still reside in me for such creatures. I need to see it, because perhaps it will give me insight into them -- I might then be capable of their level of hatred. Hating them as much as they hate others.
Light Day
With the major downtime of Blogspot today (hey, it happens), the network at work crashed for awhile (just to add to the slowdown), a doctor's appointment in a little while (not for me, but the wife requires my presence since she blames me for the ever-enlarging creature inside of her), finally topped off by the childbirth class -- well, I'll probably try to post something later tonight, but I wouldn't bet on it.
Historic Blasting
Don't f**k with Victor Davis Hanson when in comes to making analogies to history. He absolutely blasts away at Palestinians for trying to compare their actions to the American Revolution. He then rips the Palestinians and the Arab world a new one for comparing Jenin to Stalingrad, and Israel to the Nazis.
Nothing to Fear
While no one knows where the 13th Cyprus/Church terrorist is going yet, the countries taking in the other 12 have nothing to fear:
"Our new countries should have no fears. We are normal, civilised people," said Abdullah Daoud, who was Yasser Arafat's intelligence chief in Bethlehem.
"We will respect the law in each of those states. They are democracies which respect human rights. Why would we have anything against them?" he told Britain's Guardian newspaper.
Now, I know Daoud is practiced at keeping a straight face when he says things like this, but I just don't know how he could he could spout that line without at least some of the press doubling over in laughter. I mean, where to start on this.
Elie Abboud Update
Last week I posted on Elie Abboud, who is charged with a major check-kiting scam, of around $280 million dollars. Abboud also created the National Arab American Business Association, or NAABA, and serves as the president.
Well he has returned from a trip to Lebanon, and has been charged and released (though he did have to surrender his passport and promise not to travel outside of Northeast Ohio). Turns out his financial troubles also includes a lot of unpaid taxes.
The couple owe nearly $10,000 in delinquent real estate taxes on their $2 million home, according to Medina County records.
...
But records filed in U.S. District Court show that Elie and Ruth Abboud haven't paid federal taxes since 1998, and that their property is encumbered with $5.1 million in liens.
Michel and his wife, Katia, who live in North Randall, haven't filed federal income tax forms since 1999, records show. Two of the brothers' businesses, Aurora Market and Majnoon Inc., haven't filed corporate returns since 1995.
It also appears that his bank may have been helping him cover up the check kiting.
Abboud is pleading not guilty, saying it is all just a cash flow problem. NAABA has no comment on the site, actually, a review of the site fails to list a single member, officer, or board of trustee member.
Monday, May 20, 2002
Remember, this didn't come from the Onion
This article, via NRO's Corner, has to be read in its entirety to be properly enjoyed. It's one of those P.C. stories.
Critics say 'Clones' has racial stereotypes
The problem is, they can't agree what the stereotype is.
Modeled on bounty hunter Jango Fett, the clones, we're told, are genetically modified for docility and obedience. The breeding project, conducted by long-necked aliens who look like refugees from Close Encounters of the Third Kind, takes place on the planet Kamino -- soundalike for the Spanish word "camino," which means "road" or "I walk."
Temuera Morrison, the actor who plays Jango, is a New Zealander of Maori descent. But that didn't get in the way of some members of an eight-person Detroit News panel assembled to review the film.
"He looked totally Latino," says Martina Guzman, a Detroiter who's managing a State House election campaign.
"And his kid," says Wayne State history professor Jose Cuello, referring to the young Boba Fett, "looked even more Latino."
...
If the planet name "Kamino" caught some Latinos' attention, three Arab-Americans on The News' panel seized on the fact that Jango's son calls him "Baba."
"I frankly think the bounty hunter is Arab," says college counselor Imad Nouri of Royal Oak.
"He's basically a terrorist," explains Nouri, "and 'baba' is Arabic for 'father.' "
Basically, what you have is a man with dark skin, not black, but just dark skinned. These people still saw racism, but couldn't agree against whom.
Not Getting The Connection
This article about Hamas and Palestinians in Gaza, focuses on the willingness-- eagerness-- to continue the suicide bombings and fight Israel. The population, though complains of unemployment.
Abdel Karim, a 40-year-old marine engineer, said he had not been able to find work for months. Khalil Abu Warda chimed in that nobody had been finding any work — not in a place where the labor force is blocked from travel into Israel and more than two-thirds of workers are unemployed.
No s**t. And somehow it is going to get better by continuing the violence?
For argument's sake, let's say tomorrow, Israel pulled out of the West Bank and Gaza; pulled out the settlements; had a two way transport established to shuttle people back and forth from Gaza and the West Bank; set up a patrolled border zone; and said, "okay Palestine here's your state, but you can't cross into Israel." What changes for the Palestinians? The Palestinians for the most part have set up no industry in their own lands. They are entirely dependent on Israel for providing any employment, and foreign aid for surviving with basics. Israeli industry may suffer a bit for loss of some cheap labor, and a tighter employment market, but they have a legitimate economy. Palestine has nothing. They have established nothing.
"Give me one reason why the Palestinians should give up armed struggle" demanded Dr. Zahar, a surgeon. "The peaceful methods, democracy and negotiation, have failed."
Yes they see only the suicide bombings as their only way, not because of desperation; but because they don't want a peaceful coexistence with Israel, they want all of Israel. They can pretend all they want to just want a peaceful solution, but their actions speak differently.
Oh, and remember those Hamas terrorists Arafat "arrested" a couple weeks ago, to try and forestall an IDF strike in Gaza,
Dr. Rantisi added that he was unperturbed by the prospect that the Palestinian authorities might again crack down on Hamas and other Islamic militants.
Of at least 17 men said to be Hamas militants who were arrested by the Palestinian authorities after the last suicide bombing inside Israel on May 7, he said, none were actual members of the group and most of them had already been freed.
What a surprise.
All in Moderation
Eugene Volokh takes Mary McGrory apart on gun restrictions. He compares what she writes about Ashcroft and guns with what would happen if someone wrote a similar piece with Reno and abortion.
I have friends who are rabidly pro-abortion and pro-gun rights. I'm more moderate on both. I see no problem with a brief (say 24-72 hrs) waiting period for either.
If you've ever heard the arguments from pro-gun people and pro-abortion people, regarding "reasonable" restrictions; their arguments are virtually the same. It is just the first step by the anti-gun/abortion crowd to completely outlawing guns/abortions.
You know what? They are both right.
Of Course He Did
The story about the failed suicide bomber in Israel this morning is not exactly news. What struck me, so to speak, was the title of the story
Suicide Bomber Blows Himself Up
Think about it for a moment.
That IS what they do. They blow themselves up. The story was, that this guy failed to even injure anyone.
He Must be Bored
When Guardian, Jerusalem Dispatch journalist, Brian Whitaker, writes it is usually quite lousy. Today he doubled down with lousy and pointless. Well, not exactly. He was whining about the checkpoint lines. between Israel and the West Bank. He doesn't seem to think the checkpoints are there for any other purpose but to embarrass the Palestinians and keep them down:
But the whole point about Israeli bureaucracy, at least where Palestinians are concerned, is that it is designed to be inefficient, with the rules changing frequently, so that nobody can ever be quite sure where they stand. That way, the Israelis show who is boss.
The theory, I suppose, is that eventually this will produce a cowed, docile population who are willing to do whatever they are told. But a lot of the time it just makes them more angry.
Since Whit-less doesn't have a clue about the checkpoints, let me set out some simple explanations:
1. There's this thing that keeps happening where Palestinians enter Israel and blow themselves up trying to kill as many civilians as possible. Let's call them suicide bombers.
2. To reduce the chances, all people coming from the West Bank need to pass through the check point to verify what their business is, where they are going, and to hopefully intercept anyone who might be trying to kill women and children.
3. They frequently change the procedures to keep the suicide bombers from picking up a pattern and makes it more difficult.
4. It's a lousy, dangerous, tedious job, that I don't think any member of the IDF volunteers for, so I can't see them being too cheery.
To illustrate the horror of the checkpoint Whit goes through he relays his terrifyingly personal account (my comments in bold).
One day, the soldier who greeted me from behind the sandbags was an overweight man with dark glasses - so dark that you could not look him in the eye. [cue ominous music]
"Good morning," he said, affecting an American drawl. "How are you today?" That is the dreadful moment when you are tempted to say something rude, but you know that he has the power and - if he wants to - he can keep you there for hours. [Especially if he actually reads your column]
"I'm fine," I replied meekly, "but rather delayed". [I believe he responds rather meekly to anyone]
A smirk flickered behind the sunglasses and he waved me on.
"Have a nice day," he said. [Man, what a bastard.]
Wary Liberals
An Op- ed piece in the LA Times warning of the dangers of American Jews accepting the support from the Christian Right. Her alleged fear is that the CCs view Jews as eventually being converted and saved. I've got a newsflash for her: CCs see everyone as being eventually converted and saved. It doesn't mean it's going to happen.
Sunday, May 19, 2002
Prophecy and the EU
Douglas Adams knew much of what was to come in Europe. The evidence can be found by explanation of the most vile word in the universe. That word of course is...
Belgium.
Truly Mr. Adams was a man far ahead of his time.
Of Jews, Conservative Christians and Israel
For many Jews, Christian Conservatives (CCs)are an extremely difficult subject. As someone who would be classified as a Secular-American Jew, I am going to try to give my views about it. I hope and expect some disagreement.
A fair amount has been written in the last couple weeks about:
1) Secular Jews, a traditional Democrat voting block, possibly going over to the Republican side;
2) The support for Israel by many CCs; and
3) The “odd” coalition growing between CCs and Jews, especially on the subject of Israel.
(The Peter Beinhart article in “The New Republic” made me think about this. He is against accepting CCs support for Israel. He argues they misconstrue Zionism for their fundamental Christian views, but I feel he is just looking for ways to reject support he is clearly, personally uncomfortable with.)
The first point I can’t speak to. I am a registered Republican (though hardly a conservative), from Pennsylvania. If you have to classify me, I am a moderate. I always put myself as a moderate libertarian. “Liberal” on social issues like civil liberties - abortion, gay marriage, drug legalization, etc. “Conservative” when it comes to gun control, government involvement, economic issues, defense, school choice. I am hardly with knowledge on this issue, though I will concede I’ve always had discomfort with the Religious Right. This discomfort with the Religious Right is part of what has kept Jews firmly in the Democratic block, at least in federal elections.
I grew up Lebanon, PA (pop. about 25,000), about 12 miles east of Hershey, in Pennsylvania Dutch country. A very rural area. I don’t view Amish carts as a cute quaint thing, so much as a damn annoyance to get past when driving. In my high school graduating class of around 250, I was one of two Jews. I grew up during a time when my Jewish Community was at its smallest in years. In recent years, it has been growing as a commuter zone because of the area’s proximity to other cities (approx. 45 minutes from Harrisburg, Lancaster and Reading).
I do not “look Jewish,” nor do I have a “Jewish sounding” name; but whether I wanted to or not, I’ve always been very aware of my Jewish identity. Since that time, I’ve lived in Pittsburgh, Chicago, Youngstown, and the Cleveland area. All areas with strong, vibrant Jewish communities.
Forgive any over generalizations, this will be a more personalized and anecdotal post. It is based on my feelings and thoughts, and what I have heard and discussed over the years with family and friends.
That CCs support Israel is nothing new. Bill Graham has been a long vocal supporter of Israel and the Jewish state. This has been echoed by other name CCs like Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed, and Jerry Falwell. Nonetheless, most secular-American Jews do not trust/have not trusted them.
Why? We do not trust their motives.
There is a sense that a CC supports Israel for 2 reasons:
1) As a place to send all the Jews eventually (paranoia); and/or
2) An Israel run by Jews lets Christians be, does not restrict access to Christian sites and respects them; unlike what would happen if Arab-Islamists ran the area (pragmatic).
Send all the Jews to Israel
This is the paranoid view. This idea is not viewed as a plot to exterminate us, so much as get the Jews out of the US to allow it to be a White Christian nation. CCs often argue that this country is a Christian country founded on Christian values. Yes, I am aware of how silly that may seem as this country has more and more non-Whites and non-Christians living in this country, but paranoia is not very rational at times.
Jesus is a damn hard sticking point to get past. We don’t accept him as anything more than a teacher – not the son of god. CCs stress the need to be born-again, about embracing Christ as your savior and salvation. Without such an embrace to them, there is no admittance to Heaven. I grew up with kids of fundamentalists, they could not comprehend the idea of non-Christians in heaven (apparently there was a grandfather clause in Heaven for those who lived before Jesus). You must be saved, or no entry no matter how good a life you led. This belief and the history of missionaries in Christianity to convert, is also seen as part of the threat to Jews. Seeking to “save” is a direct threat to the Jewish identity.
The recent upsurge of anti-semitism in Europe, brings out many fears and talk of Europe’s past behavior to Jews. America’s history is far better, but it is not non-existent or that far in the past. It was the trial of a Jew in Atlanta that led to the resurgence of the KKK in the early part of the 20th century. The fear of a CC persecution from the first half of the 20th century is captured best in Upton Sinclair’s “It Can’t Happen Here.” Some of the greatest American innovators/inventors have been notorious anti-semites, like Henry Ford and Thomas Edison. How long ago was it really, that a priest or minister would speak at Easter services of how the Jews killed Jesus? This is part of the history a Jew learns growing up in the US.
Myths die hard. My hometown rabbi, is very active in communicating with the various priests, ministers and reverends in the area. A couple years ago, one of the ministers invited him to speak to couple of classes of 3rd and 4th grade students at a religious school about Judaism. These were not large classes. As the rabbi spoke, one of the children just kept staring at his head intently, curiously. The minister noticed, and asked him what he was looking at. The child grew quiet and embarrassed. My rabbi asked if it was the yarmulke on his head. No. Then, he asked, “Are you looking for my horns?” Yes. The minister was mortified. He did not know such stories still were told or believed; that such ignorance remained. Sadly, as we’ve seen in the last year, they are. Be they blood libel, conspiracies, or physical markings; myths endure.
An Israel Controlled by Jews is Better than if Arab-Islamists were in Control
This is bit easier to understand, as more information is distributed about the religious repression that goes on in Arab countries. Saudi Arabia doesn’t allow, and comes down hard on anyone who shows outward signs of being of a different faith. The Taliban’s actions in Afghanistan from blasting away at Hindu statues that predate Islam, to the ban of music. Iran’s fierce religious controls. Nigeria enforcing “Sharia” to sentence to death alleged converts to Christianity. And so on.
Before Israel moved against Palestinian terrorists in the West Bank, Arafat and the Palestinians had actually made noises about how the site should be a Muslim site, that it wasn’t really a holy Christian site. Of course once some of the terrorists broke into the Church of the Nativity to hide from the IDF, knowing they would actually respect another religion, the story got forgotten.
Meanwhile, back in Israel, toleration and respect is shown from the government and all the Jews (excepting a very small radical freak show contingent) in Israel of all peoples and religions practiced. There is no second class citizenship for Muslims or Christians living or practicing their faiths.
The Growing Alliance
So what has changed in the last decade or so, that makes it seem less a problem (at least to me) to accept and appreciate the support of Israel from CCs? First, less political clout in the Republican party. Liberals don’t want to acknowledge this. They argue they are just lying low, behind the scenes. They still hark back to the 1992, Republican convention when Pat Buchanan insured that just about every center-right and center-left voter would go to Clinton. Yes they can be key to grass-roots campaigns and a vital voting block, but their actual policy influence is limited. Most view the CCs in terms of their leadership, and lets face it, their leadership is not that strong anymore. If their base was so vital, would McCain have targeted them in his campaign (I know he lost, but the fact that he felt safe going after them should suggest their lowered importance)?
Second, they no longer receive the exposure they had in the 70s and 80s, when televangelists seemed to dominate the airwaves. Reality, is there are the same amounts on TV, but there are more choices to flick to, and this marginalizes their apparent influence.
Third, they have been mocked, satirized, and exposed too long to be taken seriously. Their hypocrisy and greed exposed by scandals. Oral “God will call me home” Roberts, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson ensured their permanent lower tier status after 9/11. The condemnations they received from the Republicans and the Right, was damning and exposed their lower level of influence.
Sorry about the length, but a pithy one-liner doesn’t seem sufficient. Honestly, even this doesn’t seem a fully sufficient explanation.
Early Challenger
Let's meet the first announced opponent to Arafat for elections this is the BBC version:
Abdel Sattar Qassem, 53, is a Palestinian political scientist and dissident. He has been jailed both by Israel and latterly by the Palestinian security forces for his outspoken criticism of Mr Arafat and previous calls for elections.
He said he would run on an anti-corruption platform.
Mr Qassem is Western-educated and secular, but sympathises with Islamic militant groups and supports suicide attacks against Israeli civilians, the Associated Press reports.
He does not recognise the state of Israel and opposes the interim peace agreements Mr Arafat has made with Israel, the news agency says.
He seems nice. This is why the elections are so important. We really do not know whether the Palestinians are truly seeking peaceful coexistence with Israel. An election will help show what the populace wants. Do they want their own country next to Israel, or do they want to destroy Israel? Arafat and his terror-security-goons, along with countries like Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, and Iran have so mucked everything that it is just unclear. I have my hunch, and many have their own opinion based on events and words; but until the people have an actual chance to vote, it is mere speculation.
Smoking Gun?
I'm having a hard time getting worked up over what the President may or may not have known from a report he was briefed on in August about a potential 9/11. It seems to me, and probably to a lot of regular people, that this is more of a partisan attack on Bush. No issue that Bush's crew has responded poorly. They were very unprepared for the accusations of cover-up, and acted like they did have something to hide. To claim that no one could have envisioned such a scenario of a plane ramming into a building on purpose is a joke. This was used in the Spring 2000 pilot episode (no pun intended) of the brief "Lone Gunmen" TV show.
The reports were issued starting in 1999. Bush had been in office less than 9 months when the attacks actually came (and let's not forget he had some delays in getting the whole transition going). The reports also went to the Senate and House Intelligence Committees, and there didn't seem to be any noise from them to respond differently. Hell, the reports were in the public domain.
The problem, once again, is with the federal government's information gathering bodies. The inability to share information, even within the same bureau makes it hard to see a clear and immediate threat. Hard to see where the attack could originate; hard to see the pattern when the pieces can't be put together.
|
|
 |
|
 | |
