SADDAM AND THE BOMB

The New York Times article seems to imply that Saddam had nuclear technology that would lead to the creation of nuclear weapons.

Last March, the federal government set up a Web site to make public a vast archive of Iraqi documents captured during the war. The Bush administration did so under pressure from Congressional Republicans who had said they hoped to “leverage the Internet” to find new evidence of the prewar dangers posed by Saddam Hussein.

But in recent weeks, the site has posted some documents that weapons experts say are a danger themselves: detailed accounts of Iraq’s secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war. The documents, the experts say, constitute a basic guide to building an atom bomb.

Last night, the government shut down the Web site after The New York Times asked about complaints from weapons experts and arms-control officials. A spokesman for the director of national intelligence said access to the site had been suspended “pending a review to ensure its content is appropriate for public viewing.”

Note my italics in the second paragraph. Saddam would appear to have the technology to build a bomb. If so can you make the argument that Bush was right on--if he didn't go into Iraq, it would have had nuclear weapons along with Iran and North Korea.

ANOTHER FALLEN PASTOR

A noted Christian pastor and leader of the National Association of Evangelicals has evidently been caught in a homosexual affair. It is very disappointing, but I like the post at La Shawn Barber's Corner, "Christians Can Be Perverts, Too."

Hypocrisy is mightier than the sword. When you preach/teach/nag against something and people find out you’re doing the thing you preach/teach/nag against, you are a hypocrite who deserves ridicule, especially if you’re high profile.

Christians constantly are being watched, and rightly so. Any little thing we do that appears hypocritical, unbelievers jump on it. To justify their own sin and rebellion, they “expose” ours and say, “See? The self-righteous hypocrite!” They rejoice when they “discover” we’re human, too!

But I’m glad they’re watching me. I defy the stereotype of what a Christian should be. Remember the car commercial catchphrase, “This ain’t you daddy’s Oldsmobile”? Well, I ain’t your momma’s Christian.

2006 ELECTION, II

I have been perusing a number of polls today, mostly on conservative blogs. It looks like Republican control of the Senate may be at stake. The only race showing a Republican lead was in Tennessee. Obviously several races are still within the range of error. Rush is on the radio now heralding a Republican trend, but it looks to me like things have gone the other way. Obviously this is not Tuesday, but I am no longer sure the Republicans will hold on to the Senate. It appears that Rush and some Republicans are dismissing many of these polls, but I don't think we can. Some of the percentages separating candidates are well beyond a margin of error or simply a mistake.

Also Franky Schaeffer (son of the famous theologian-cultural warrior Francis Schaeffer) had an op-ed piece the other day in the Dallas Morning News announcing he was fed up with Senator Allen's (R) campaign in Virginia and was changing his registration to Independent. I have not kept up with Franky's career, but he was on the far-right of most evangelical circles. Either something is happening in his life or the Republican Party.

2006 ELECTION

This post is a bit delayed -- for some reason I could not get in to my account.

I have been trying to keep up with the 2006 elections, but I have to admit it that I have let some races slide as responsibilities have interfered. Also for us in East Texas, not much is happening. Louie Gohmert (R) should cruise to a win for the district's congressional seat--his Democrat opponent has had media problems over some sort of arrest in Florida. Surely the Democrats are capable of finding someone better. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R) should cruise to reelection. The Governor's race has been a bit more lively with Kinky Friedman making his one-line quips--his only problem is that some have racial overtones. I think Rick Perry (R) should be reelected, although no one is excited about him.

A month or two ago it looked like Democrats would easily take over the Senate and House, but it has been getting increasingly more competitive. Michael Barone projects a slight Democrat majority in the new House. Larry Sabato sees a nip and tuck race for Senate control. You also have to consider governor races if you are looking ahead to redistricting. Dick Morris seems to change his projections weekly as he follow polls like a large-mouth bass following a minnow.

Putting all this together on this particular day, it looks like the Democrats should take control of the House, but the Senate--that will be close. However, I have noticed a number of conservative Democrats leading their Republican rivals in some House races. Some of them sound like Republicans even on social issues--last night CNN had a clip on a race in North Carolina where liberals were bemoaning how conservative the Democrat candidate was (Heath Schuler, 11th congressional district). Schuler sounded like he was on the Religious Right. Also more recently Harold Ford, Democrat running for the Senate in Tennessee, is using religous language in his campaing.

There may be a resurgence of moderate Democrats if a number of these candidates win. It is hard to say if they will all carry their convictions into office, but if they do I would presume that it would create problems for Nancy Pelosi and the left-liberal wing of the party.

HOW MUCH IS A COLLEGE DEGREE WORTH?

An extra $23,000 a year according to a CNN report. Also Chester Finn, president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute in Washington, said too many high school graduates are unprepared to succeed in college.

MORE FRENCH RIOTS

Politics Central has an interesting entry on "France Prepares 50,000 Riot Police for Muslim Attacks." Actually I enjoyed reading some of the comments to the entry even more! The anti-French pundits are alive and well. Also watch the video interview with the reporter from the Brussels Journal.

PAGLIA INTERVIEW

Slate has an interview with Camille Paglia. Some would consider her a noxious liberal, but I enjoy reading her reflections on the contemporary political situation because she doesn't give the typical spin of many on the left. Also I may agree with her assessment more than I disagree (am I becoming "noxious?")--I especially liked her critique of the Foley affair.

CONNECTED TO GOD

Iran President Ahmadinejad: 'I Have a Connection With God, Since God Said That the Infidels Will Have No Way to Harm the Believers'; 'We Have [Only] One Step Remaining Before We Attain the Summit of Nuclear Technology'; The West 'Will Not Dare To Attack Us'

SAVE THE EARTH - IT'S THE ONLY PLANET WITH CHOCOLATE !!!!

DOUBLE STANDARD???

Article at Investor's Daily on whether Republicans are judged more harshly and held to higher standard of conduct than Democrats.

CLINTON, BUSH, AND THE WEALTHY

The rich got a better break under Clinton than they have under Bush. Also the same point was made in today's Dallas Morning News business section in a column by Scott Burns. I wonder why Republicans aren't using these graphs in their 2006 campaigns?

ARMEY ATTACKS DOBSON

Richard Armey, retired Republican Hous Majority Leader, has written a letter accusing James Dobson of being power-hungry, manipulative, and just plain wrong on policy. I am sure there will be a Dobson response.

ANOTHER US INTELLIGENCE FAILURE

This is getting worrisome--another possible US intelligence failure with regard to North Korea. This failure, combined with Middle East failures, raise a number of questions about whether any president can make decisions if the intelligence is flawed.

NORTH KOREA

Strategy Page has a very interesting article on "China's Moment of Choice." While the article focuses on how Kim Il-Sung's policies are making things difficult for China, I found his comments about the impact on South Korea and the US most interesting. If Kim did attack South Korea, it would have a major economic impact on the US. The reason is that there is extensive South Korean investment in the US--if something happens in South Korea there will be plant closings and other financial ramifcations for Americans. Globalization is a reality.

RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS

Neil Gross and Solon Simmons have an interesting working paper on "How Religious Are America's College and University Professors?"

FAIRY TALES

OCTOBER 5th, ANTI-BUSH DAY (NO SCHOOL)

LITERARY PERSONALITY

My literary personality. . .???? I am not so sure. (compliments of Jonathan). Take the test yourself.

You scored as A classic novel. Almost everyone showers praise upon you for your depth and enduring relevance. According to your acolytes, everything you say is timeless, erudite and meaingful. Of course, none of them actually listen to you. Nobody listens to you at all, but it's fashionable to claim you as a friend. Fond of obscure words, antiquated notions and libraries, you never have a problem finding someone to hang out with. The fact that they end up using you to balance their kitchen tables is an unfortunate side effect, but you're used to being used for others' benefit. Oh the burden of being Great. A classic novel 68% A coloring book 50% An electronics user's manual 50% The back of a froot loops box 46% A college textbook 46% Poetry 43% A paperback romance novel 36%

IRAQ INTELLIGENCE

Every time I have listened to Fouad Ajami on C-Span, he has always made very thoughtful comments about the Middle East. Now he has a piece in the Wall Street Journal and it looks like he is leaning a bit more toward the Bush position on the intelligence issue.

Intended or not, the release of the Senate report, around the fifth anniversary of 9/11, has been read as definitive proof that the Iraq war stands alone, that the terrors that came America's way on 9/11 had nothing to do with the origins of the war. Few will read this report; fewer still will ask why a virtually incomprehensible Arab-Islamic world that has eluded us for so long now yields its secrets to a congressional committee. On the face of it, and on the narrowest of grounds, the report maintains that the link between the war on terror and the invasion of Iraq cannot stand in a Western court of inquiry.

But this brutal drawn-out struggle between American power and the furies of the Arab-Islamic world was never a Western war. Our enemies were full of cunning and expert at dissimulation, hunkering down when needed. No one in the coffeehouses of the Arab world (let alone in the safe houses of the terrorists) would be led astray by that distinction between "secular" and "religious" movements emphasized by the Senate Intelligence Committee. They live in a world where the enemies of order move with remarkable ease from outward religious piety to the most secular of appearances. It is no mystery to them that Saddam, once the most secular of despots, fell back on religious symbols after the first Gulf War, added Allahu Akbar (God is great) to Iraq's flag, and launched a mosque-building campaign whose remnants--half-finished mosques all over Baghdad--now stand mute.

ALTHOUSE ON "IDEOMENO"

Althouse: "Our avant-gardist artistic establishment... prefers to exercise its anti-bourgeois animus within the coddled purlieus of bourgeois security."

RELIGIOUS RIGHT AND THEOCRACY WATCH

The Rise of the Religious Right in the Republican Party is a new web site I just discovered. I haven't looked at it in detail, but I want to come back to it in the future. It seems to have a fairly wide selection of information and it also claims to be affiliated with Cornell University. However, the person who recommended it seems a bit dogmatic and simplistic in his statements so I am not sure if this is the best web site critics of the religious right can come up with.

SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE REPORT

Christopher Hitchens has an article on the Niger affair and is critical of the Senate Intelligence Committee report.

To summarize: The Senate report gives two versions of Zahawie's name without ever once mentioning his significant background. It takes at face value his absurd claim about the supposedly innocent motive for his out-of-the-way trip. It accepts similarly bland assurances made by the government of Niger. It is unaware of the appearance of A.Q. Khan in the narrative. It does not canvass the views of our allies, or of tried-and-tested experts like Ambassador Ekeus. It offers little evidence and no argument in support of its conclusions. It is a minor disgrace, but a disgrace nevertheless.

THE POPE AND ISLAM

Der Spiegel has an interesting opinion piece on Muslim reactions to the Pope's recent comments about Islam. I have not followed the controversy closely, but I feel the Pope's remarks have been taken out of context.

One thing should be kept in mind, however: The often violent protests that erupted in the Muslim world in the wake of the cartoon controversy have often been manipulated and fuelled by Islamists. The bile currently being flung at the pope is no different.

But the attacks against the pope are especially grotesque. The severe criticism -- often coupled with threats of violence -- directed at the speech held last Tuesday by Benedict XVI is not just an attack on the head of the Catholic Church. The malicious twisting of the pope's words and the absurd allegations made by representatives of Islam represent a frontal attack on open religious and philosophical dialogue.

ISRAEL: A TRUER ALLY

Saw this today on The Corner. A study attempts to show that while, since Eisenhower, Washington has tried to develop closer relations with the Arab world, Israel has remained a "truer ally." It is not the impact of the Israel Lobby on US policy that caused this, but the failure of Arab countries to remain reliable "partners." I am sure this will be a controversial item for debate.

1946 INTELLIGENCE ESTIMATE

This is a fascinating analysis done by the Defense Department in 1946! It noted that radical Islam would be a force in the future. I wish the CIA were as capable today of such forsight.

The first of these urges originates within the Moslems' own sphere. The Moslems remember the power with which once they not only ruled their own domains but also overpowered half of Europe, yet they are painfully aware of their present economic, cultural, and military impoverishment. Thus a terrific internal pressure is building up in their collective thinking. The Moslems intend, by any means possible, to regain political independence and to reap the profits of their own resources, which in recent times and up to the present have been surrendered to the exploitation of foreigners who could provide capital investments. The area, in short, has an inferiority complex, and its activities are thus as unpredictable as those of any individual so motivated.

JESUS CHRIST AND THE AMERICAN GI

I saw this today and it bothers me. What do you think?


ONLY TWO DEFINING FORCES HAVE EVER OFFERED TO DIE FOR YOU:



1. JESUS CHRIST

2. THE AMERICAN GI


ONE DIED FOR YOUR SOUL, THE OTHER FOR YOUR FREEDOM.

"STOP BLAMING AMERICA FOR TERRORISM"

Anne Applebaum's take on this.

MUSLIM EXECUTIONS

The fall 2006 edition of the Middle East Quarterly has an article on "Why Do Muslims Execute Innocent People?"

While often ignored in the Western media, human rights abuses in the Islamic world are a daily occurrence. Both Muslim states and ad hoc religious courts order mutilation and execution, not only of criminals but also of individuals—mainly women—who have not committed anything which would be considered a crime in other societies. In some cases, Shari‘a (Islamic law) tribunals issue death sentences for those acquitted in regular courts.[1] In other cases, religious leaders invoke religion to sanction non-Islamic practices such as honor killings and female genital mutilation.

Original Islamic jurisprudence, however, does not necessarily mandate such severe punishments. In the early twentieth century, it even seemed that the introduction of modern legal codes in Muslim majority countries might ameliorate regular Shari‘a punishments, but in recent decades, traditionalists have pushed a back-to-basics program which has augmented application of Shari‘a punishment. Rather than modifying Islamic practice, many self-described Islamist reformers make matters worse by advocating retrenchment rather than reform.

LOGICAL FALLACIES

A list of logical fallacies.

RUMMY SOUNDS LIKE CHAINSAW AL

An interesting comment on Rumsfeld--if it is true, he should be fired.

A MUSLIM AMERICA

30 Amazing Things That Will Happen When America Becomes Part of the Caliphate.

RISING ANTI-SEMITISM IN GREAT BRITAIN

A British parliamentary report on anti-semitism has been issued. It is interesting to see the differences in coverage and interpretation.

The London Times: A sinister alliance has developed between far-Right groups and Islamist extremists who are united in their hatred of Jews, Israel and Zionism and are contributing to increasing anti-Semitism in Britain.

Haaretz has a slightly different view: The panel attributed the escalation to flare-ups in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict (but did not specify a direct connection), as well as the "anti-Semitic discourse" being held openly among Muslims, the extreme left and, to a lesser extent, the extreme right.

The London Times, for some reason is ignoring the panel's inclusion of the left in the rise of anti-semitism.

ENDLESS ISLAMIC TERROR

I thought this was an interesting article by a "disillusioned (???)" liberal regarding Islamic terrorism. In spite of what other liberals are saying, she believes terrorism is unrelated to the war in Iraq. Her rationale is that if Islamic terrorism was spawned by the war in Iraq then why, for example, are Islamic terrorists bombing places like Bali, which has nothing to do with the war in Iraq.

MEDIA SHOULD APOLOGIZE TO ROVE

This demand comes from the respected journalist David Broder! He castigates the media for how it handled the Wilson-Plame affair, choosing to see some Rove master-mind behind it all.

Conspiracy theories flourish in politics, and most of them have no more basis than spring training hopes for the Chicago Cubs.

Whenever things turn dicey for Republicans, they complain about the "liberal media" sabotaging them. And when Democrats get in a jam, they take up Hillary Clinton's warnings about a "vast right-wing conspiracy."

For much of the past five years, dark suspicions have been voiced about the Bush White House undermining its critics, and Karl Rove has been fingered as the chief culprit in this supposed plot to suppress the opposition.

Now at least one count in that indictment has been substantially weakened -- the charge that Rove masterminded a conspiracy to discredit Iraq intelligence critic Joseph Wilson by "outing" his CIA-operative wife, Valerie Plame.

He ends his article with: These and other publications owe Karl Rove an apology. And all of journalism needs to relearn the lesson: Can the conspiracy theories and stick to the facts.

ANTI-SEMITISM ON THE LEFT

I have been watching the rise of anti-semitism in the American left since early summer. Usually people expect right-wing conservatives to be anti-semitic, but the right, except for skinheads, has been silent on this issue. It is the liberal, left that seems to have taken over this anti-Jewish rant. It is hard to understand because the Jewish community has voted overwhelmingly Democrat for decades. I think with Iraq and the Lamont-Lieberman contest in Connecticut some on the left have been carried away with their rhetoric. I follow a Democrat blog, Bull Moose (sponsored by the Democratic Leadership Council), which has recently challenged fellow Democrats and liberals on this issue.

For months, the Moose has observed that if you seek anti-Semitic and anti-Israel filth on the internet, look to the left side. Comment threads and diariists regularly rant against Jews and the Jewish state. What is striking is the degree to which it is tolerated and the "respectability" these sites receive from the Democratic establishment.

WHAT IN THE WORLD?

What kind of business is this?

BUSH WHITEHOUSE VINDICATED

The Washington Post column on September 1, 2006 is titled: End of Affair. It was not Karl Rove or some other Bush loyalist that leaked Valerie Plame's name to Robert Novak -- it was Richard Armitage who was opposed to much of Bush policy.

Mr. Armitage was one of the Bush administration officials who supported the invasion of Iraq only reluctantly. He was a political rival of the White House and Pentagon officials who championed the war and whom Mr. Wilson accused of twisting intelligence about Iraq and then plotting to destroy him. Unaware that Ms. Plame's identity was classified information, Mr. Armitage reportedly passed it along to columnist Robert D. Novak "in an offhand manner, virtually as gossip," according to a story this week by the Post's R. Jeffrey.

It follows that one of the most sensational charges leveled against the Bush White House -- that it orchestrated the leak of Ms. Plame's identity to ruin her career and thus punish Mr. Wilson -- is untrue. The partisan clamor that followed the raising of that allegation by Mr. Wilson in the summer of 2003 led to the appointment of a special prosecutor, a costly and prolonged investigation, and the indictment of Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, on charges of perjury. All of that might have been avoided had Mr. Armitage's identity been known three years ago.

Bush and his advisors may be guilty of other failures, but this is not one of them. I can't get over how much media type and Democrat hype was spent on this issue. My early thoughts of this affair was that it was "much ado about nothing." I am sure most people in the Plame-Wilson social circuit knew she was CIA--most of the time where you work is common knowledge so hundreds of other people may have know.

BOEING

I was sent one of those group emails and someone was visibly upset with Boeing building a regional repair facility in India. To them it was just another indication of the failure of America to remain competitive and one more step in "outsourcing." How many more jobs and industries can America outsource? Where is the nation's wealth being created? I don't think this is a left or right issue, although each political faction may have a different explanation. Occasionally I see Lou Dobbs on CNN and he has really been hitting this issue. Also someone sent me Newt Gringrich's response. I am not a big fan of Newt for many different reasons, but it appears to be a very well thought out response which I intend to read carefully.

Outsourcing is not necessarily the problem if America's creative juices are flowing. However, if the flow of computer jobs to India and China continues, America needs to be moving to the next generation of whatever creates wealth and maintains a standard of living. In the past we have seen the textile industry move out of America, but with new technologies and ways of creating wealth, I don't think anyone has missed it. I know in the short-term it created problems for workers, but the transition was made. It is being made in the automobile industry now--the days of Ford and GM are finished (Chrysler is already German owned).

But if America is complacent, we face big problems 10 years from now. But also I read that Japan and European countries such as Germany are also experiencing outsourcing. Volkswagen has a major production facility in Bratislava, Slovakia

I found this person's frustration typical, when I asked for a response. My only problem, and probably yours, is that we are not 69! And some of you may have a different eschatological view! Also some American cars have more foreign parts than a Toyota or Honda.

Good question, I could expound on it for hours but the bottom line is that we are pricing ourselves out of the market. We can't just keep increasing wages without there being a corresponding increase in performance, i.e. productivity, quality, service etc... . Government is talking about a higher minimum wage which is raw inflation. It doesn't just raise the wage for those at the bottom, the whole scale is jacked up a notch. If you move the new guy from six dollars an hour to seven dollars, the guy that was getting seven is going to be angry unless he gets eight dollars an hour. Union people like it because the whole scale goes up and the union dues are based on the wage rate.

In agriculture where they are competing with Mexico and Central America, they can't raise the sale price of their product because of the competition. Their only chance is to find low wage labor or some type of mechanized more efficient way to do it.

In 1978 I was plant superintendent of a plant building work-over rigs in Victoria Texas. There was such a demand that our normal suppliers couldn't meet our needs. For example we were getting the draw works brake wheels made of cast steel from Latrobe Pennsylvania. They started giving us lead times like 6 months that we could not live with. We went on a world search and got a bid from Japan for 30 day deliver air shipped and at a cost significantly lower than Latrobe. We were afraid of quality but we had no choice but to try them. To our surprise they were much better than the Latrobe product. Do you think we ever went back to Latrobe. But we didn't tell our competition where we were getting them but the found out soon enough.

I was a Ford and GM man having had Fords, Chevy's, Pontiac, Oldsmobile's and seemed to always have problems with the service departments. The problems weren't that bad but I just couldn't get them fixed and sometimes I would get the car back with the problem fixed but something else was wrong and that was the last straw with Olds. I bought a 1983 Maxima and put nearly 200,000 miles on it in 10 years. But I don't know anything about Nissan service since nothing ever went wrong with the car. I finally sold it because I wanted something newer and would have got another Maxima except the I got a deal on a 93 Camry that I couldn't turn down. I'm still driving the Camry today with nearly 200,000 miles on it and currently have no need to sell it unless I want something for show. I still have the original exhaust system on it. I took it in to be checked at about 70,000 miles since I had never had a muffler that lasted that long. The mechanic looked at me like I was joking and said that system will outlast the car, it's all stainless steel. It's beginning to look like it might even outlast me.

I had a friend that got a Tarsus at the same time I got my Camry. He had more glitz and bells and whistles and liked to rub it in and couldn't understand why anyone would buy a plain Jane Camry. Three years later he was having major problems, radiator, transmission, alternator, etc, not cheap little things. Seven years later the Tarsus was junk. I've been driving my Camry for 13 years with no major repairs and I'm still getting over 30 MPH on the highway and above 26 in town. A couple of weeks ago I was riding with a guy with a relatively new Chrysler which was beautiful but I was irritated by the road noise.

I was watching CNBC one morning and they were interviewing a GM big wig. They asked him what they were going to do to get back on track. He started talking about there new styling and a bunch of glitz which really shot my adrenalin up. I fired in an e-mail and said forget the glitz and work on quality. Since the interview was still going on they asked him about more quality and less on the styling and he said no it's styling we need, we have to sell cars in California. I fired back another e-mail asking how explained the Camry success, which was about as plain as you can get but pure quality. By that time the interview was over so I didn't get any answer from the GM guy but CNBC e-mailed me back and basically said, good point.

When Ford was competing with GM and Chrysler, quality wasn't a big thing since they were all equally bad. For some reason they still haven't recognized that it isn't business as usual. Toyota has been around for nearly 50 years, then there is Honda and Nissan that came later and the big three still haven't figured it out. And now we have Hyundai from Korea that is getting better quality and overall value ratings than US cars of the big 3. I think we are our own worst enemy.

Lincoln is bragging that they are now giving a 70,000 mile warrantee for the power train, Hyundai's is 100,000 for the power train and 60,000 bumper to bumper. Lincoln is a Joke!!! Lincoln is bragging about something they should be ashamed of.

We may have to have a depression to get things back on track.

We are falling into a trend of Socialism which will bring us to an end that won't be pretty.

In 1992 my company sent me and another plant manager to Europe to look at labor saving equipment. In Europe if you hire a new employee you usually have to keep him for the rest of his life. For them if they can find a machine that will keep them from having to hire that person and the machine costs less than $200,000 it's a no brainer, you get the machine if you can afford it. Of course you see unemployment rates of around 12% or higher. I think in places in France unemployment may be over 20%. In our case we came home with all the numbers and started working on ROI studies. In about every case we were at a break even situation. If the union forced increased wages, we would automate.

You have to compete to stay in business and if you can't do it in the US, you find someplace else where you can or you close up shop.

A significant increase in the minimum wage could send millions of jobs overseas. There is no free lunch and we are living off borrowed time.

But I'm not worried at 69 I think I can take what ever comes but I'm glad I don't have to depend on a job. Actually I'm listening for the Trumpet and watching for Christ on the cloud. I'm ready for the Rapture. That's my exit strategy.

A THINNER COURIC

I love this. CBS made Katie Couric look thinner! Too bad they couldn't make Dan Rather look younger.

JOE WILSON & PLAMEGATE

Christopher Hitchens has an article on the Valerie Plame controversy at Slate. He is reacting to a recent book, Hubris, written by David Corn and Michael Isikoff examining the affair. Needless to say he has no use for their hypocrisy and incorrect cclaims throughout the affair. It was Richard Armitage who leaked Plame's name, not someone in the Bush White House.

What does emerge from Hubris is further confirmation of what we knew all along: the extraordinary venom of the interdepartmental rivalry that has characterized this administration. In particular, the bureaucracy at the State Department and the CIA appear to have used the indiscretion of Armitage to revenge themselves on the "neoconservatives" who had been advocating the removal of Saddam Hussein. Armitage identified himself to Colin Powell as Novak's source before the Fitzgerald inquiry had even been set on foot. The whole thing could—and should—have ended right there. But now read this and rub your eyes: William Howard Taft, the State Department's lawyer---I will let those interested read the rest of the story.

"DON'T BLAME KATRINA"

The Dallas Morning News had an excellent article by Michael Grunwald (Washington Post) this past Sunday on the Katrina disaster. It describes the failed engineering, but also the political incompetence or corruption that led to many of the post-Katrina problems. The Army Corps of Engineers does not come off well. Louisiana politicians will probably never be held accountable.

FORCED CONVERSION TO ISLAM

This blogger seems to have a lot of information on how the FOX reporters were released. In addition to a publically stated "conversion" to Islam, an amount of money was exchanged and an anti-American video was made. The problem with the reporters' conversion to Islam is that if they renege or renounce it, radical Islamists will kill them if they are ever captured again for being apostates.

IRAQ, JUST WAR, AND THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH

I haven't checked all of the following out, but I think this comment on H-Diplo represented a good summary of not just the position of the Roman Catholic Church on Iraq but also the issue of "just war."

In September 2002, in a letter to President Bush, the U.S. Catholic Church discussed the concept of just war vis-a-vis Iraq. There are three commonly accepted principles for just war. These are 1.) Just cause 2.) legitimate authority 3.) probability of success and proportionality. According to the Catholic bishops, did the United States have just cause to wage war against Iraq in 2003? The bishops wanted direct evidence of either Iraq's complicity in the September 11th attacks or of an "imminent attack of a grave nature." On this count, the Bush administration had no such evidence and a war against Iraq was not just.

Did the United States have "legitimate authority" to go to war against Iraq? The bishops required broad public support and approval from the United Nations. In March 2003 Bush had Congressional authorization and a majority of support in U.S. public opinion. However, the U.S. clearly did not have the support of the United Nations. In fact, Kofi Annan declared the war illegal.

Finally, a just war should have a "strong probability of success and proportionality." Regarding this issue, the Bishops asked the following rhetorical questions of President Bush: "War against Iraq could have unpredictable consequences not only for Iraq but for peace and stability elsewhere in the Middle East. Would preventive or preemptive force succeed in thwarting serious threats or, instead, provoke the very kind of attacks that it is intended to prevent? How would another war in Iraq impact the civilian population, in the short- and long-term? How many more innocent people would suffer and die, or be left without homes, without basic necessities, without work? Would the United States and the international community commit to the arduous, long-term task of ensuring a just peace or would a post-Saddam Iraq continue to be plagued by civil conflict and repression, and continue to serve as a destabilizing force in the region?... Would war against Iraq detract from our responsibility to help build a just and stable order in Afghanistan and undermine the broader coalition against terrorism? "

Bishop Wilton D. Gregory, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Office of Social Development & World Peace, Letter to President Bush on Iraq, September 13, 2002.

In hindsight, it is clear to me that the United States failed the third criterion for just war in a very convincing way. The leadership of the U.S. Catholic church clearly believed the war against Iraq was not a just war. Finally, the Catholic bishops, like the prominent political scientists and historians, predicted a disaster in Iraq some six months prior to the start of the war.

CONSERVATIVE CRITICISM OF BUSH

It may have already happened and I have missed it, but I just saw the first critical comments about Bush and Iraq from a conservative Republican. Bush may be in bigger trouble these next two years than he realizes.

Rumsfeld has not only sunk the Bush ship, he has sunk the Republican ship with his stagnation in Iraq for the last three years.

Bush could have been a great president but the cloud of Iraq will destroy him like Vietnam did Johnson.

Rumsfeld abdicated to his generals, continually saying I'm doing what my Generals tell me what to do.

If the Generals were calling the shots and obviously not getting the job done, they should have been fired along with Rumsfeld but Bush didn't have the brains or guts to do it.

This separates Bush for presidents like Lincoln and even Truman, who fired generals until they found the ones that would get the job done.

But for Bush to watch this fiasco go on for 3.5 years is totally inexcusable.

I'm a conservable republican that has never voted democrat and a retired LtCol but this type screw up is totally without excuse. Brain Dead stupid.

Bush is going down and he is taking the whole republican party with him. What a tragic end to what started out to be such a brilliant presidency.

SOLDIERS IN IRAQ PICTURES

I was sent an email with a presentation of pictures of soldiers in Iraq accompanied by music. Some of the things I have been sent have been very "sappy" and the picture collections not the best. I think this one has some of the best pictures I have seen--I am not familiar with the music. If anyone knows of a good online collection of Iraq or Afghanistan pictures, let me know.

CONNECTION BETWEEN AL QAEDA AND SADDAM

I often hear liberals and Democrats on talk shows attacking Bush for invading Iraq and using the rationale that somehow Saddam and al Qaeda were cooperating. They use the 9/11 Commission report as the proof that Saddam had nothing to do with al Qaeda. Actually what the 9/11 Commission said can be found on page 22 of the report (pdf version). There was communication between Saddam or his officials and al Qaeda, but it did not reach the level of planning joint operations (according to the report).

According to the reporting, Iraqi officials offered Bin Ladin a safe haven in Iraq. Bin Ladin declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in Afghanistan remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative. The reports describe friendly contacts and indicate some common themes in both sides' hatred of the United States. But to date we have seen no evidence that these or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship. Nor have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States.

WHAT THE GOVERNMENT NO LONGER WANTS US TO KNOW?

I can't figure this one out. It is probably one reason why liberals and Democrats are so suspicious of the Bush administration (although I am sure President Bush had nothing to do with this example, because it is an example from the Clinton administration). Actually even conservatives would buy into big brother in Washington trying to control information as well.

I can remember reading from the 1960s on charts in newspapers and news magazines comparing the nuclear strength of the US vs. the USSR. Now an example of government "over-classification" of what everyone can see if they go back to an old issue of US News & World Report or some other public publication. 1971 vs. 1996

THE PALESTINIAN CASE

I have been trying to find out some information on Efraim Karsh, who's recent book was reviewed by the Philadelphia Inquirer (see previous post). He has written an article refuting Palestinian claims and presenting the case for Israel's control of Palestine.

Whatever the strengths and weaknesses of the Palestinians’ legal case, their foremost argument for a "right of return" has always rested on a claim of unprovoked victimhood. In the Palestinians’ account, they were and remain the hapless targets of a Zionist grand design to dispossess them from their land. In the words of Mahmoud Abbas (a.k.a. Abu Mazen), Yasser Arafat’s second-in-command and a chief architect of the 1993 Oslo accords: "When we talk about the right of return, we talk about the return of refugees to Israel, because Israel was the one who deported them." The political activist Salman Abu Sitta has put it in even more implacable terms:

"There is nothing like it in modern history. A foreign minority attacking the national majority in its own homeland, expelling virtually all of its population, obliterating its physical and cultural landmarks, planning and supporting this unholy enterprise from abroad, and claiming that this hideous crime is a divine intervention and victory for civilisation."

The claim of premeditated dispossession is itself not only baseless, but the inverse of the truth. Far from being the hapless victims of a predatory Zionist assault, the Palestinians were themselves the aggressors in the 1948-49 war, and it was they who attempted, albeit unsuccessfully, to "cleanse" a neighbouring ethnic community. Had the Palestinians and the Arab world accepted the United Nations resolution of November 29, 1947, calling for the establishment of two states in Palestine, and not sought to subvert it by force of arms, there would have been no refugee problem in the first place.

A CULTURE ROOTED IN WAR

I came across an interesting book review in the Philadelphia Inquirer by its book critic, Carlin Romano. He reviewed Islamic Imperialism. A History by Efraim Karsh, a professor at King's College in London. Karsh has studied earlier Islam and all of the violence involved in its origins. Romano says it sounds like Baghdad today. Among the comments:

It sounds like yesterday's newspaper:

Growing lawlessness... led to the formation of citizen organizations for defense and reprisals... . Notable among these were... thugs drawn from the lower reaches of society... .
Ready to sell their services to the highest bidder, groups... competed against each other to serve the rival Shiite and Sunni camps in their incessant squabbles...

Yesterday's Financial Times on today's Iraq? No, Efraim Karsh on eighth-century Baghdad. Forgive yourself if "the more things change, the more they stay the same" comes to mind.

************************************************************************************************

In his nervy, tightly documented Islamic Imperialism, Karsh challenges scholars and Muslim leaders to refute his own picture of Islam: an imperialist seventh-century Arabic movement that forced itself on neighboring lands such as today's Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Egypt for secular colonialist payoffs - money, booty, territory.

According to Karsh, Muhammad, by claiming Allah's authority to act as both a political and religious leader, was able "to cloak his political ambitions with a religious aura" and "channel Islam's energies" into geographic expansion.

************************************************************************************************
Anyone not expert on early Islam will need a scorecard to follow the innumerable murders, impalings, decapitations and dismemberments that marked the early Islamic caliphates and Shiite/Sunni split. You think what's happening in Iraq is new? So many severed heads get sent from one leader to another in Islamic Imperialism, you wonder why "Fed Head" didn't get off the ground as a Meccan firm.

From Muhammad's farewell address in 632 ("I was ordered to fight all men until they say, 'There is no God but Allah.' "), to Saladin in 1189 ("I shall... pursue them until there remains no one... who does not acknowledge Allah"), to Osama bin Laden in 2001 ("I was ordered to fight the people until they say there is no god but Allah..."), Karsh finds Islam's outward imperialism consistent.

RELIVING MUNICH

I am not optimistic about the recent cease-fire in the Middle East. I saw that Pat Robertson was being criticized for his negative comments about the peace resolution--this is probably one time I would agree with him. If the French don't want to commit forces to the peace-keeping team, I am not sure they even have bought into it.

Arthur Herman, a historian, has published a column in the New York Post, "The Mideast's Munich. War with Mullahs is Coming," which is extremely pessimistic about the future. But I think he raises some legitimate questions. This conflict may be just a warm-up for a bigger one.

HISTORIANS will look back at this weekend's cease-fire agreement in Lebanon as a pivotal moment in the war on terror. It is pivotal in the same sense that the Munich agreement between Adolf Hitler and Neville Chamberlain was pivotal in an earlier battle against the enemies of freedom. The accord in October 1938 revealed to the world that the solidarity of the Western allies was a sham, and that the balance of power had shifted to the fascist dictators.

MEL GIBSON

I love this blogger's statement about the Mel Gibson escapade: My biggest gripe about the Mel Gibson brouhaha is that he's being crucified for saying something drunk that much of the rest of the world is saying sober: That Jews start wars, like the one in Lebanon.

AMERICAN TERRORIST ARRESTS?

Obviously this morning the news sources are focused on the situation in London, but I keep wondering if problems are brewing in our own country. I haven't seen the media covering many of these issues, but I came across a strange arrest situation in Ohio that is reminiscent of 9/11 planning.

Investigators in southeast Ohio said they were working to unravel how two Michigan men charged with supporting terrorism came to have airplane passenger lists and airport security information.
Osama Sabhi Abulhassan, 20, and Ali Houssaiky, 20, both of the Detroit suburb of Dearborn, were being held at the Washington County jail on $200,000 bond each, which could be raised at a Thursday afternoon court hearing. Each was charged Wednesday with money laundering in support of terrorism.

IRANIAN THREAT

MEMRI has an interesting translation of a part of a press conference by the Iranian official Ali Larijani: Our Response To Sanctions Will Be Painful To the West And Will Make it Shiver With Cold.

Also check out the Bernard Lewis article at the WSJ, "August 22. Does Iran Have Something in Store?" What is the significance of Aug. 22? This year, Aug. 22 corresponds, in the Islamic calendar, to the 27th day of the month of Rajab of the year 1427. This, by tradition, is the night when many Muslims commemorate the night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq, first to "the farthest mosque," usually identified with Jerusalem, and then to heaven and back (c.f., Koran XVII.1). This might well be deemed an appropriate date for the apocalyptic ending of Israel and if necessary of the world. It is far from certain that Mr. Ahmadinejad plans any such cataclysmic events precisely for Aug. 22. But it would be wise to bear the possibility in mind.

LIBERAL MCCARTHYITES

Lanny Davis, a liberal, has written an article at the WSJ on "Liberal McCarthyism." His examples tend to come from the Lamont-Lieberman race in Connecticut and I sense a liberal having self-doubts about how so-called liberals of today are behaving. He states: The far right does not have a monopoly on bigotry and hatred and sanctimony. He goes on to give some examples. This a a phenomena I have been thinking about for some time, because when I was in school liberals were considered to be thoughtful people who were separate from the radical left of the SDS or Chicago Seven. Liberals did not all have to walk lock-step ideologically. Liberals at that time probably had a smug sense of superiority that they were behaving at a higher level in their political conversation than the conservative right. Liberalism has shifted its ideals . . .or maybe it has been silenced by the new radical left.

REPUBLICANS MORE PRO-ISRAEL THAN DEMOCRATS

See Michael Barone's comments on the Los Angeles Times poll. Republicans favor continuing to align the US with Israel by a 64 to 39 margin. Democrats favor neutrality. This will be an interesting trend to watch, because traditionally American Jews have supported the Democrat Party. Democrats favor a more neutral US position in the Middle East.

SENATOR LIEBERMAN

I have casually watched Ned Lamont's liberal, anti-war challenge of Senator Joe Lieberman (D, Connecticut). As a qualifier to all that I say, I probably have disagreed more with Senator Lieberman over the years than I have agreed with him. However, I have always had the sense that he is an honorable man and willing to speak more honestly about his positions than most politicians irrespective of party affiliation and ideological commitment.

A blogger of the liberal anti-war left in the Democrat Party has recently painted Senator Lieberman with a black face. I can't say that the African-American community rose up against this stereotyping from all that I read. Maybe it is not considered as terrible as Governor Mitt Romney's (R, Massachusetts) use of the word "tarbaby."

I just stumbled across some other pictures posted on a liberal blog that are really distasteful to me (some examples). Something has happened to the Democrat left over the last decade or two and it has not been good. Liberals used to pride themselves on dealing with issues in a less infantile way than the radical right. However, if this is the trend in the Democrat left, they will make Republican right-wingers look sensible and even moderate. Is this how Democrats should be treating an elder statesman of the party? I think not.

NORTH KOREA HELPING IRAN BUILD MISSILES

This is not a good sign. Reuters Report.

North Korea has been working closely with Iran to develop its long-range ballistic missiles, possibly using Chinese technology, and is building large bases to prepare for their deployment, a South Korean state-run think tank said.

CHRISTIANITY LED TO FREEDOM AND CAPITALISM

Rodney Stark’s book, The Victory of Reason, describes how Christianity shaped western civilization and the world we live in today. Some of his ideas have been raised by other writers (for example, the medieval period was not a “dark” age), but he succinctly pulls together a thousand years of history to build his case that no other religion has been able to bring progress and freedom to individuals like Christianity has been able to do.

Some ideas:

Typical intellectual controversies among Jewish and Muslim religious thinkers involve whether some activity or innovation. . .is consistent with established law. Christian controversies typically are doctrinal, over matters such as the Holy Trinity or the perpetual virginity of Mary. (8)

Jesus wrote nothing, and from the very start the church fathers were forced to reason as to the implications of a collection of his remembered sayings. . . (9)

Real science arose only once: in Europe. China, Islam, India, and ancient Greece and Rome each had a highly developed alchemy. But only in Europe did alchemy develop into chemistry. (14)

Whitehead ended with the remark that the images of gods found in other religions, especially in Asia, are too impersonal or too irrational to have sustained science. (15)

Chinese intellectuals pursued “enlightenment,” not explanations. (18)

Plato’s focus was on the polis, not the citizen. (23)

. . .the Christian stress on individualism is “an eccentricity among cultures.” (24)

Medieval Christianity ended slavery which led to an economic and technological revolution that Greece and Rome were incapable of having because slavery in those societies retarded technological development. He makes the case that Christian theology was opposed to slavery unlike Islam where the founder, Mohammad, had slaves and sanctioned slavery.

Max Weber’s Protestant Ethic stressing that capitalism and the notion of hard work and frugality grew out of the Reformation ignores the rise of capitalism in late medieval Roman Catholic Italy. Christianity does not look down on work as many traditional societies do.

Despotic states discourage and even prevent progress. (37) Despotic states produce universal avarice. (71)

People actually lived better in the medieval period than in ancient Rome and Greece.

Money. . . lies dead [when] converted into vanities. (122)

“Indolent state churches” are destructive to a society. Latin America is his example.

HUMAN CHANGE

The July 30th Dallas Morning News had an article “Humans today hardly resemble ancestors.” People today are taller and live longer than humans from the 1800s. It strikes me as hardly news.

The biggest surprise emerging from the new studies is that many chronic ailments such as heart disease, lung disease, and arthritis are occurring an average of 10 years to 25 years later than they used to. There is also less disability among older people today. . . . Bodies are simply not breaking down the way they did before. Even the human mind seems improved. The average IQ has been increasing for decades.

Improved medical care is only part of the explanation; studies suggest that the effects seem to have been set in motion by events early in life, even in the womb, that show up in middle and old age.

American men are nearly 3 inches taller than they were 100years ago and about 50 pounds heavier.

MIDDLE EAST, JULY 25

It has been hard for me to comment on the Middle East situation for a number of reasons, but it has been fascinating and disturbing to see how things have unfolded. Let me make a number of random comments:

1. I believe the vaunted Israeli military and intelligence forces have shown some serious limitations dealing with both Hamas and Hezbollah. Hezbollah is much stronger than I think anyone expected. It became clear that Israel could not do this quickly several days ago. Naturally the longer it takes and the greater force Israel must use beyond southern Lebanon risks international reaction. Also it is very possible that we have not seen Hezbollah's complete arsenal. Israel is in an extremely vulnerable situation--from the news reports, I cannot tell if the average Israeli understands their vulnerability.

2. Bill O'Reilly had an interesting commentary tonight basically saying the West (and Americans) do not have the will to defeat terrorism. "Terrorists are not selfish, we are." Americans are pursuing "happiness and gratification." See the video clip I don't see the West, and maybe even Israel, having the same commitment to democracy as radical Islamicists have to their cause. We do enjoy the good life.

3. The UN has been ineffective. NATO involvement is an interesting possiblity. But other countries have been very reticient about offering troops to patrol the Lebanese-Israel border, although they have been critical of Israel in many instances. Either they see this as a "no-win" situation" or they do not want to face the potential cost(s). I don't see any world leader eagerly jumping into this situation--the possiblity for failure is much greater than the possibility for success.

4. The potential for a more serious crisis lies with Iran and Syria. One interesting item is that for the first time moderate countries in the Arab world are distancing themselves from radicals like Hezbollah and Iran. Obviously they do not want to appear pro-Israel, but they also have something to fear from Iran and the radical Islamicists. In fact, they may have more to fear from their Islamic brothers. If the crisis is resolved, I see the moderate Arab regimes as the critical linchpins in any settlement.

5. In watching CNN and FOXNEWS, I vote for Amy Kellogg(FOX) as my favorite in-the-field correspondent! She had the presumption to correct someone at the FOX anchor desk who I think was hyping and misrepresenting a particular situation.

CONSERVATIVE, LIBERAL, LIBERTARIAN. . .

Check out http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html to see where you are on the political spectrum from left to right.

MAPPING RELIGION IN AMERICA

I just discovered a very interesting set of maps showing religious affiliation in the continental 48 states at the "Regions of the Mind" blog. http://regionsofmind.blog-city.com/mapping_religion_in_america.htm I am not sure there is anything one probably cannot already assume, except I was surprised at the low number of relgious affiliations in the Southeast US which is considered part of the Bible Belt.

HEZBOLLAH IN AMERICA

For Hezbollah activity in the US see the Counterterrorism blog: http://counterterrorismblog.org/2006/07/hizballah_activity_in_north_am.php

Also see http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2006/07/hezbollah_usa.html about Hezbollah in Detroit, Michigan. But in the Detroit area--the heart of Islamic America--it's a different story. Hezbollah supporters connected to Iran are feted by top federal officials.

DON'T BLAME BUSH!

Slate, a generally liberal online magazine and certainly not pro-Bush, has an article on reasons not to blame Bush for the war in Lebanon http://www.slate.com/id/2146145. I think Democrat liberals do have a problem: everytime a problem occurs they blame Bush--I think this is getting old and could backfire on them. I even saw one Democratic spin meister blaming Bush for the slow response of the American embassy in Beirut. He also sets a bad example for young children with regard to table manners--he talks with his mouth full of dinner roll (video of the G8 Conference banquet in Russia).

The author of the article noted: You can blame Bush for a lot of mistakes, and I do, but not for the latest turn in the seemingly eternal and eternally depressing Arab-Israeli conflict.

MUSLIM MORAL SUPERIORITY????

Mary Ann Sieghart questions Muslim moral superiority at the London Times: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1071-2276983,00.html

Rarely does a news story bring tears to the eyes. But when I read the account last week of the murder of Samaira Nazir in an “honour killing” (surely an oxymoron), I nearly wept. Here was a bright, articulate graduate who had her throat cut, was stabbed 18 times by her brother and cousin because she wanted to marry a Muslim man whom her family had not chosen.

This is happening more often than Europeans and Americans want to admit. She goes on to write: Broadly, with only a few exceptions, ours is a law-abiding society in which we tolerate difference and get on with our lives while trying to behave well towards each other. So why, in that case, are Muslims so negative towards us? We hear a lot about Islamophobia, but to judge from a survey conducted by the Pew Global Attitudes Project, British Muslims are far harsher on the rest of us than we are on them — and they are far more critical of us than are Muslims living in Germany, France or Spain.

Read the article to see the Pew survey results. Very interesting. . .and troubling.

MIDEAST OPTIONS, Week 1

An interesting article by Victor David Hanson http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/07/patience_is_wearing_thin.html on the current impact of the Israeli attack on Hezbollah and Israel. The US has very limited choices. Also see Steve Huntley's column at the Chicago Sun Times http://www.suntimes.com/output/otherviews/cst-edt-hunt20.html

The Democrats want Secretary of State Rice to go to the Middle East and solve everything, but I am not sure that she, or anyone, can solve the problem. She can't negotiate with Hezbollah because that would imply defacto recognition of a terrorist paramilitary organization. The US has little leverage with Damascus or Teheran. If she or Bush fails, I am sure if will be an election issue in November.

One option she may have is to see if more moderate Middle Eastern governments can lean on Damascus. But I am not sure they would have any impact on Teheran.

OH, THOSE HISPANIC ITALIANS

Recently overheard: Why did this Italian check the "white" box on this form and not "White Hispanic?"

THE LURE OF COMMUNISM

For some time I have been considering the issue of why educated, intelligent people turned to communism after World War II in Czechoslovakia. By the late 60’s many had become disillusioned and began to question what caused them not to ignore the flaws in communist ideology until it was too late. Maybe my interest is a result of meeting some of these people who, after 1968, were questioning themselves.

Under a Cruel Star: A Life in Prague, 1941-1968 by Heda Margolius Kovaly describes her story from Nazi concentration camp to wife of a Czech communist who was purged in the early 1950s during the Slansky Trials. After her husband was purged (and later killed) from his leadership position in the trade ministry, she became a pariah and struggled to keep herself and her small son alive when everyone and everything seemed to be turned against her. It is a fascinating and troubling story. While there were good people who tried to help in small ways without endangering themselves or their families, more appeared to be hurtful to her as they fell in with the party line. Or maybe they were "small" people who had bec0me taken with their new found power over people.

Some quotes:

For many people in Czechoslovakia after the war, the Communist revolution was just another attempt to find the way home, to fight their way back to humanity.

I have often thought that many of our people turned to Communism not so much in revolt against the existing political system, but out of sheer despair over human nature which showed itself at its very worst after the war.

The Communists at that time kept stressing the scientific basis of their ideology, . . .

Our conditioning for the revolution had begun in the concentration camps. Perhaps we had been most impressed by the example of our fellow prisoners, Communist who often behaved like beings of a higher order. Their idealism and Party discipline gave them a strength and an endurance that the rest of us could not match.

The most eagerly embraced belief of the time was that no national or racial oppression could exist under communism.

Why did some Communists continue to believe after the purges of the 1950s? For them, the struggle for the ideal took on the meaning of a struggle for personal redemption. . . . To give up this ideal would be to disclaim the meaning of one’s whole life.

Membership in the Communist Party was very much like belonging to a religious order.

"SADDAM'S SECRETS"

I just finished reading a very interesting book by one of Saddam’s air force generals who was also a Christian, Georges Sada. He was more involved with Saddam in the 1980s and early 1990s. It is clear that Saddam was ruthless and in many way very short-sighted. I want to read some of the reviews of the book—I understand it was on the NYT’s best seller list earlier this year.

Some of the author’s points:

1. He believes the use of military force against Saddam was justified.
2. Saddam was like Stalin—he had a genius at doing evil.
3. Saddam seldom based his military strategy on logic, national interest, or least of all, genuine national defense. As in everything else, his tactics were centered on whatever would benefit him personally or exalt his reputation and authority in the region.
4. Saddam’s WMD were moved to Syria.
5. He had arranged for Chinese nuclear scientists to build his atomic weapons so that UN inspectors would not find atomic research facilities in Iraq.
6. Saddam’s operation centers were built below the underground bunkers where civilians took refuge forcing America to kill civilians if operation centers were to be destroyed in the 2003 war.
7. The UN oil for food program was corrupted by Saddam through bribery.
8. During the invasion the US failed to make use of many Baathists who were forced by fear to serve Saddam.

TERRORISTS FREED IN YEMEN

A judge in Yemen has freed 19 Al Quaida because "Islamic law permits holy war against occupiers." http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/06/front2453927.0680555557.html

BUSH'S FOREIGN POLICY

For some time I have been thinking about Bush’s foreign policy as it relates to larger themes in American foreign policy. Because of Iraq it is difficult to deal with this issue because the left castigates Bush and his decision while the neocons praise his resolution The left would have us believe that Bush has unilaterally sent America down a new path introducing such policies as preemptive war and having this idiotic idea that somehow America can bring democracy to the world. I have begun to think that Bush may have more in common with the Democratic President Woodrow Wilson, who at the end of WWI also had this idea of creating a new world order and saw a political messianic mission for the USA.

I just finished an excellent article in Diplomatic History, “Woodrow Wilson and George W. Bush: Historical Comparisons of Ends and Means in Their Foreign Policies” (June 2006) by Lloyd E. Ambrosius which tries to assess this same problem. He surveys of number of scholars and journalists who have written on both sides of this debate. As with all discussion of parallels nothing is ever exact and one can find similarities and differences. In his concluding remarks Ambrosius stated: Appealing to the old American hope of “freedom just around the corner,” both Wilson and Bush proclaimed American ideals to justify their new foreign policies. Whether in 1917 or 2001 or 2003, they led the nation into war, promising to protect traditional values and institutions at home and to explain these abroad, thereby making freedom and democracy the foundation for world peace.

Later he writes: After World War I, Wilson failed to make the world safe for democracy. His experience suggests that fighting wars to spread democracy and thereby attain perpetual peace is more likely to result in unanticipated costs and unintended consequences.

Yet the comparisons go deeper and may become even more confusing. While one can find a number of parallels between Bush and Wilson, it appears to me that Wilson was much less willing to use force after getting the US into WWI. For example, he did not send American troops in to stop the Turkish massacre of Christian Armenians. Yet I am not sure Bush would have either in that case. Also Wilson was much more willing to use international organizations to complete his vision (the League of Nations). However, Bush may also be in the process, especially with Korea, of limiting US unilaterial involvement.

It’s hardly fair to summarize an article into these few words, but it is worth the read because I believe Ambrosius has done an excellent job of summarizing the issues (much better than the talking heads on CNN and Fox).

WORLD WAR III

Michael Goodwin's column in the New York Daily News caught my attention: "It's World War III and the US is Out of Ideas." http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/433715p-365242c.html He argues that "World War III has begun."

The feeling that the wheels are coming off the world has only one recent comparison, the time when America's head-butt with communism sprouted hot spots from Cuba to Vietnam. Yet ultimately the policy of mutual assured destruction worked because American and Soviet leaders didn't want their countries hit by nuclear bombs.

Such rational thinking is quaint next to the ravings of North Korean nut Kim Jong Il and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. They both seem to be dying to die - and set the world on fire. And don't forget Osama Bin Laden's declaration that it is the duty of every Muslim to acquire a "Muslim bomb." Is there any doubt he would use it if he had it?

Goodwin admits to being a pessimist. I don't know his politics, but he is critical of both Democrats and President Bush. No one seems to like pessimists, but the times don't seem to reinforce those inclined to be optimistic.

Actually for some time now I have thought about similarities between the times in which we live and the war fears of the 20th century. Before World War I there were serious crises and active terrorist groups--anarchists and Slav nationalists. I know some would say the West is more like the appeasers of the 1930s, but, except for a few Churchillians, most people in the 1930s weren't thinking war was an actual possibility until it happened. Before 1939 terrorist groups were not active as in pre-1914 Europe. And obviously neither period had the weapons systems (nuclear, biological, and chemical) that we have today, but, especially in the case of World War I, this did not prevent huge casualty rates from occurring. I don't think the current crisis are comparable to cold war crises--Soviet leaders were good materialists and recognized what nuclear war would do.

MARRIAGE

Attended another wedding so this AOL article on how you can tell if the odds favor a marriage lasting attracted my attention.

* Age matters: 25 is better than 18.

* Cohabitation before marriage increases the odds of divorce.

* The husband helps around the house.

* A second marriage increases the odds of divorce.

* Religious people try harder to stay married.

* Not being rich or poor, but somewhere in the middle.

* Owning a home rather than renting.

* Parents were divorced, especially an angy divorce.

* The bride and her father are not tense walking down the aisle, but are relaxed with each other.

STALIN

I finished reading Robert Service's recent biography on Josef Stalin and have drafted my book review and will start editing it. When I first received the book, I thought: "Not another biography on Stalin." However, Service's study will be the biography to read for years to come (unless some new archival sources open up in Moscow). It is an excellent study of the life and times of the vozhd.

It is fascinating to see how the private life and experiences influenced Stalin throughout his career. I know it is not popular in America to believe that a leader's private decisions and experiences influence one's leadership (aka Bill and Monica). But anyone who writes or reads a biography has to consider how the private experiences of powerful people influence them as they rule and develop policy. In Stalin's case the issue is how his private experiences caused him to view or use people as he manipulated the Terror. I believe Service does a good job showing that the purges were a culmination of his values growing up in a dysfunctional family and then advancing into leadership positions in the organization environment of the Bolshevik party. One quote I particularly liked was: "terror attracted him like a bee to a perfumed flower"(158).

Service does not go as far as some other writers in choosing to see Stalin as suffering from servere psychological problems, although he does recognize he has a strong tendency toward paranoia. I am more inclined to see some serious maladjustments. Service has no answer to how Stalin "displayed congenial 'ordinary' features even while carrying out acts of unspeakable abusiveness"(604).

"GOD TV"

A few days ago I received the latest SCP Journal www.scp-inc.org. It has a very interesting article by Alan Morrison with extensive quotes from a variety of "popular" TV preachers. He also connects much of the prosperity preaching to the New thought movement in late 19th century America. Some quotes (get the article to read them in their entirety):

Creflo A. Dollar: God is limited by man's faith to be able to act on Earth. If God is God, He can do anything He wants at any time.

Kenneth Hagin: First. . .decide what you want from God and find Scriptures which cover your case. . . How about first deciding what God wants.

Steve Munsy: You can speak anything you want into existence. Why don't they speak into existence a world where everyone is healthy or wealthy?

"And they tested God in their heart
By asking for the food of their fancy.
Therefore the Lord heard this and was furious. . ."
Psalm 78:18, 21 (NKJV)

BUMPER STICKER

Bumper sticker on I 20: "Cats are people, too."

WORST CASE SCENARIO

Jubak has written a sobering article at MSN Money http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/JubaksJournal/TheWorstCaseScenarioIsNotAboutUs.aspx. The political ramifications of a slowing of global economic growth in China and India are serious. Slow economic growth will create pressures on their economies and societies which will have world wide consequences. Most of us go through life thinking that tomorrow will be like today, but the global system is much more fragile than many of us realize.

VIENNA UPDATE: BUSH VISITS VIENNA

President Bush is going to Vienna. My Vienna correspondent writes: On Tuesday Mr. President is coming to Vienna and the city will be totally closed off for that reason - until he leaves on Wed. evening. When I read of the number of people accompanying him, the aircraft coming in (a bit more than Austrian Air Force, I think), he is bringing his own helicopter, dozen of cars, etc. - this puts the 30 trucks that Rolling Stones roll through the world in to shame for sure.. I wonder why the "founding fathers" were against aristocracy, kings, etc. - this is similar - at least the costs to the taxpayer are..

Also the EU is discussing illegal immigration. People expect the response of European governments to illegal immigration to be about as effective as Washington's.

AMERIKAN WAR CRIMINALS

Things are really getting tough for the Americans at the World Cup message board http://boards.live.com/MSNBCboards/thread.aspx?ThreadID=25668: its hard to root for the amerikans because its kinda like rooting for the germans at the berlin olympics.

HOME SCHOOLING

The debate goes on! Since I know this is an ongoing controversy, I sat quietly while two history Ph.D.s discussed homeschooling. One was a "conservative Protestant" who had even taught what he called a "home schooling co-op" for home schoolers. It was made even more interesting because the other discussant was a very conscientious Roman Catholic. While each made separate points, I could see commonalities in their perspectives.

One issue that came up was home schooling parents. Both of them recognized that there are "nutty" people in the home schooling movement who are basically anti-intellectual or anti-educational. It seems to happen with both religiously conservative Catholics and Protestants. There is the propensity of home school parents to believe in historical conspiracies and reject commonly accepted factual knowledge when it goes against what some spiritual authority says. If a home schooling authority figure states that slaves loved being on the plantation or that the Holocaust did not happen, they are more likely to believe the authority figure than the factual historical data that exists. This is troubling because people like this are susceptible to cultic leadership.

There is also a deep distrust of recent historical analysis, which some would label "revisionist." Truth becomes less important than maintaining myths, especially about the founding of America. My personal view is that Christians, above all people, should be committed to the truth. God doesn't need to be defended by lies and myths.

DA VINCI CODE

I have not read the book or seen the movie and I am not sure I intend to do either. I was visiting over a snack with a friend of mine who teaches at the University of Washington. He is interested in this kind of thing from an academic perspective and was interviewed by the student newspaper at UW. Here are some of his statements:

The problem with the book and movie is not that it is a piece of fiction that takes liberties with how it presents the past, but rather that it is intentionally deceptive.

Re the movie's claim "that Jesus' followers regarded him as a mortal prophet until the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D." No one at Nicaea thought Jesus was a mere mortal -- rather, the debate surrounded whether he was essentially God a super-powerful Son created by God before the beginning of time.

An important thing to keep in mind is that the book and film mislead their audience not only about Christianity but about history and art as well.

Just about everything in it is inaccurate, as far as I can tell. I graded Advanced Placement History exams a few years ago and observed that quite a number of students failed their exam question on Renaissance art because they had gotten their knowledge from The Da Vinci Code.

The problem is not just that the author injects his own agenda into the story, but that he doesn't present it clearly as fiction. The author Dan Brown believes that religions, including Christianity, are made up, so he wants to make up an alternative version--one that is in step with his own biases and prejudices. But instead of saying, 'I'm making up an alternative version of Christianity that you may like better than the ones we already have," which would be the honest approach, he pretends that he is sharing actual truths about the past with the reader.

As one young scholar of Renaissance history told me recently, there are people who think they're learning about history from The Da Vinci Code, when in fact they know even less about history for having read it.

Christians and non-Christians alike could benefit from a deeper understanding of the story of early Christianity.

The question of how the Bible was put together is fascinating and enlightening, but The Da Vinci Code tells that story in a manner that can only be regarded as ludicrous. Tom Hanks, the lead actor in the film, probably put it best when he recently said that the story was loaded with 'hooey' and 'nonsense.'

HISTORICAL ACTION FIGURE

I arrived at the University of Nebraska today and since I had a bit of time I strolled over to the official university bookstore to browse. I like university bookstores because in most cases they have a selection you do not always see at a chain. You find more academic monographs.

While looking in the history section, at the end of the aisle, I spied a box with a "Marie Antoinette Action Figure." Inside the box was a plastic figurine in a long red dress and a very tall grey wig. The box said you could take the dress and wig off--I am not sure why you needed to be able to undress Marie Antoinette. But what was most interesting is that there was a button at the back of the neck--when you press it, her head pops off! Very interesting.

Now I am curious what other historical action figures in this series do. I can only imagine what an Adolf Hitler or Margaret Sanger or John F. Kennedy action figure might do.