Blogs

Displaying 31-40 of 25858 results.
ID: 1918
Uid: 9
Author: 0
Category: 40
Title: ON ELECTIONS - NO DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ
Source:
Body: By the way, there is no more contradiction between a Muslim State and democracy than there is between a Christian, Hindu or a Jewish State and democracy. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East and Britain like the Scandinavian countries have official religions. The important thing is to secure equal treatment of all the citizens of the state. That can be accomplished by conditioning their membership in international organizations on that principle not to mention reminding Muslim countries that they have diasporas. Muslims cannot continue to demand equal treatment in the non-Muslim world if they do not demand the same for other religions in Dar al Islam. <P><!--endFragment--><P>
ID: 1919
Uid: 9
Author: 0
Category: 40
Title: WITHOUT DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ- BUSH WILL LOSE 2004
Source:
Body: Finally, forgoing elections, though not forgoing the writing of a constitution (many democracies do not have them) means giving up on democracy. Giving up on democracy means losing the war in Iraq and proving to Muslims young and old that Bush was not serious about the Iraqi people. It will also mean that Bush will lose the next elections just as his father did after returning Kuwaiti to its version of"Louis the 18th." It was the economy stupid because the Gulf War may have nourished the American body but failed to nourish their soul. <P><!--endFragment--><P>
ID: 1920
Uid: 9
Author: 0
Category: 40
Title: HUMANITARIAN ORGANIZATIONS PRACTICE COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT
Source:
Body: Can UN and Red Cross hypocrisy be trumped? The same international"humanitarian" organizations which routinely condemn measures designed to protect Israeli citizens from terrorists (security fence, check points, closures) as" collective punishment" are the worst offenders of them all. <p>Kill a French UN refugee agency worker and the agency responds by"pulling foreign staff out of large swaths of southern and eastern Afghanistan on Tuesday in the wake of the killing of a French worker, a decision that could affect tens of thousands of Afghan returnees." <P>Kill a few Red Cross workers and they not only run from Iraq and Afghanistan but they seek to get into the good graces of the leftist-Islamist coalition (The"Antiimperialista" organization's Internet campaign asks people to send"10 Euros to the Iraqi resistance") by withdrawing from the West Bank. Why? Not in order to force Yassir Arafat to use the billions he embezzled from international community donations to the Palestinian people. Oh, no. In order to force Israel (as the"occupying" power) to pay for the feeding of the Palestinian who suffer from the war declared by Arafat on Israel. Do note that prior to the second Intifada, the West Bank and Gaza enjoyed a record economic boom. <P>As you can see from the article <a href="http://www.alertnet.org/thefacts/reliefresources/106915382664.htmbellow">When the Red Cross is the target. </A><P>"But steering a course between capitulation to attack on one hand and manipulation by occupiers on the other is difficult", writes Francisco Ray Marcos after describing the efforts of"the humanitarian community" to keep its neutral position by chastising not terrorists who use ambulances as missiles but those who fight terrorists. <P>He is wrong - So called humanitarian organization have long succumbed to manipulation by tyrants and terrorists. <P>After all, who was the single individual who was permitted to address the UN with a GUN in his hand but archterrorist Yassir Arafat? <P>This holiday season make sure YOUR money does not go to terrorists! <P><!--endFragment--><P>
ID: 1921
Uid: 9
Author: 0
Category: 40
Title: "PREJUDICING PEACE" IS ANOTHER WORD FOR "FREEZE"
Source:
Body: <p> Some things never change. These include the American policy demanding that Israel will do nothing to change the status quo in a way which will cause the Arabs to pay permanently for starting a war against Israel. Israel does best when it fails to listen. The US needs to prove its worth to the Arab world by constraining Israel. The easier Israel is to constrain, the more radical American demands.
ID: 1922
Uid: 9
Author: 0
Category: 40
Title: LOOSING IRAQ FOR THE HATE OF CHALLABI
Source:
Body: The CIA and State Department love"their bastards." Collin Powell objected to the complete overthrow of the Taliban asking"who will we negotiate with?" The Northern alliance and poor Masoud, not the Taliban, was the CIA's real nemesis. The two agencies downplayed the capabilities of the Northern alliance and did their best to delay arming them. They lost their cool when the Northern alliance marched into Kabul. DESPITE them, Afghanis were liberated by Kabul. <p>The two"know nothing" agencies (the intelligence failure was not limited to the issue of WMD but also to the poor Iraqi infrastructure!) join in their hatred of the Iraqi patriot who wished to enlist American help in overthrowing Saddam. I do not know Ahmad Challabi but when I read repeated, unending warnings not to let him"emerge" as the Iraqi leader because the average Iraqi resents him -- this after I have been assured time and time again that most Iraqi have never heard of him, I begin to wonder. The minutes of a May 17, 2002 meeting between an official from the Near East Bureau and the office of the Inspector General official in which it is the reported the"NEA would appreciate any assistance (to help) shut down the Iraqi National Congress." See Joel's Mowbray's <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0895261103/qid=1069363393/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-0575302-5216118?v=glance&s=books"><I>Dangerous Diplomacy, </i></a> p. 141). <p>Challabi is a smooth secular Shia with plenty of experience in negotiating the corridors of power. We could do worse. Bremer highhandedness has alienated many Iraqis and prevented the rise of natural leaders. Remember the self-appointed Baghdad mayor. Bremer's men swatted him like a fly. Only the religious leaders who had their own security people and were protected by their lay following escaped the Bremer put down. It is a small wonder that the religious leaders have gained power and the secular Iraqis are united in their resentment of the American administration. Read the patronizing reports advocating that Iraqis be"permitted to make their own MISTAKES." The idea that they actually may know better, does not even cross either the reporter's mind or the mind of the American military or civilian administrator. <P><!--endFragment--><P>
ID: 1923
Uid: 11
Author: 34
Category: 39
Title: THE SPIRIT OF THE HOLIDAYS
Source:
Body: <p>Our gallant soldiers are overseas this holiday season far from home and loved ones. My wife received a request from a co-worker that I thought best to pass along. This request comes from a person with a son in the paratroopers. They are in Afghanistan and would appreciate any of the following items you may be able to spare: </p><p>”As for DVDs, any Chuck Norris, Bruce Lee, Star Wars, (especially) Star Trek, Disney <a title="Click for more information about movies" style="text-decoration: none; border-bottom: medium solid green;" href="http://search.targetwords.com/u.search?x=5977|1||||movies|AA1VDw">movies</a> (both kids movies i.e. Finding Nemo, etc. and other Disney Movies), James Bond, and any outdoor adventure type movies. Candy is a premium for the troops but it needs to be hard candy or candy that can take a lot of heat before melting. Calling cards, soaps, tooth pastes, shaving cream (edge), different colognes, small packages of kleenex, small hand held (electronic) games i.e. Yatzee, Monopoly, etc. (and batteries for the games), beef jerkies.” </p><p>These items may be shipped to: Company Headquarters 1-501 P.I.R., Operation Enduring Freedom, S and T/FSC/1-501 P.I.R., APO AE 09354. </p><p>________________</p><p>Copyright James Loewen</p><p></p>
ID: 1925
Uid: 4
Author: 34
Category: 39
Title: BLACK WOMEN SPEAK TRUTH TO POWER ...
Source:
Body: High atop my bookshelves is a little shrine of three statues gathered around a tiny sample bale of cotton from the 1930s. One of the statues is of <a href="http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAtalmadge.htm">Eugene Talmadge, Georgia's white racist governor in the 1930s and 1940s</a>. Emphasizing ol' Gene's red galluses, it was a gimmick given in return for campaign contributions. Incongruously, next to him stands an old cast iron tobacco humidor in the form of a robed Friar Tuck. His hands are folded across his capacious stomach in a pious pose. Next to him, glaring across that little cotton bale at ol' Gene Talmadge, is a cast iron bank in the form of <a href="http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/metropolitan/96/04/07/aunt-jemima.html">Aunt Jemima</a>. As a symbol, of course, she offends some people, but it's fairly clear from this Aunt Jemima's pose that she's ready to offend Eugene Talmadge. Her hands are on her hips and she is poised to speak some truth to power.<p> I was reminded of my little shrine yesterday when I read <a href="http://sg.news.yahoo.com/031214/1/3gnoz.html">this story about Lauryn Hill</a> denouncing corruption of the clergy at a Vatican-sponsored concert. Hill's pronouncement at the Vatican reminds me also of <a href="http://www.researchpubs.com/books/ism1exc2.shtml">Eartha Kitt's denunciation of the Johnson administration's pursuit of the Viet Nam War when she was at a White House conference in 1968</a>. Can you imagine the bodacious courage it would take to do such a thing? Some people call it rude and tasteless, but the prophets are always similarly dismissed.<p> More than that, we've recently been learning that African American women, more often than not, were the backbone of local civil rights movements all across the South. Finally, after Dr. King got his national holiday and two Pulitzer Prize winning biographies, we learn about the women who were on the ground and doing the work: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0807827789/qid=1071460276/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-1689358-9320745?v=glance&s=books">Ella Baker</a>, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0252021517/qid=1071460046/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-1689358-9320745?v=glance&s=books">Fannie Lou Hamer</a>, and <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0684850133/qid=1071460938/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-1689358-9320745?v=glance&s=books">too</a><a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0814716032/ref=pd_bxgy_text_1/104-1689358-9320745?v=glance&s=books&st=*">many</a><a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0253208327/ref=pd_sim_books_1/104-1689358-9320745?v=glance&s=books">more</a> to name them all. We should have known that all along and my Aunt Jemima is a constant reminder of it.<p>
ID: 1926
Uid: 4
Author: 34
Category: 39
Title: WHAT PASSES FOR "CONSERVATIVE" IN AMERICA ...
Source:
Body: One of the major shifts in American politics over the past 40 years is the revitalization of political conservatism. Since the Goldwater debacle of 1964, conservative Republicans have scrambled to a dominant position in American politics. Both a Republican and, in many respects, at least, a conservative, I should be celebrating all that. I don't because I don't recognize what it represents as conservative in any meaningful sense of the word.<p> From the ruthless partisanship of a <a href="http://tomdelay.house.gov/">Tom DeLay</a>, which knows no restraint, to the reckless fiscal policies and the crusading foreign policy of this administration, I see nothing but repudiation of core conservative values. The genius of Charles Dickens and Mark Twain combined couldn't have made up a better name for a conservative American republican. Alas, he isn't one. Balanced budgets? All too briefly remembered. International restraint? Please. Several days ago, I wrote about <a href="http://hnn.us/articles/1829.html#12110302">the dilemma of American liberalism</a>, caught between the competing values of freedom and equality. The problem of"American conservativism" is that it isn't conservative at all. It is, in fact, quite radical and, I fear, recklessly so.<p> As I see it, the new American" conservatism" is an alliance of two core constituencies: A) believers in an unbridled capitalism as productive of the greatest good for"me" and B) religious traditionalists who feel threatened by social change. It is an uneasy alliance because the purposes of A do not well serve the needs of B. Ten years ago, I wrote that <a href="http://uncpress.unc.edu/books/T-971.html">"industrial capitalism" has been"the radical force in American society, generating social change of unforeseen consequence, heedlessly disruptive of human community."</a> We have no reason to think that post-industrial capitalism is any less so. Witness a jobless economic recovery that winks at illegal immigrants working for less than minimum wages here at home and outsources middle income jobs for 1/10th of their domestic cost abroad.<p> The very unconservative nature of American conservatism appears in <a href="http://uncpress.unc.edu/books/T-971.html">Michael Crichton's critique of contemporary environmentalism.</a> It is currently widely cited in" conservative" circles, by Richard Jensen's Conservativenet, by Glenn Reynold's <a href="http://www.instapundit.com/archives/013060.php http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/speeches_quote05.html">Instapundit</a>, by <a href="http://hnn.us/articles/1621.html#12160302">David Beito on Liberty & Power</a> and elsewhere.<p> My colleague, Oscar Chamberlain, may comment on the"science" in Crichton's address. I have no expertise in it. What fascinated me was Crichton's attack on the"religion" of environmentalism. That might even give religious traditionalists some pause. Crichton apparently believes that merely because one can discern in some environmentalists' operative assumptions a belief in a primal rightness of things which was somehow and subsequently relentlessly damaged that their beliefs can, in the name of"science," therefore be dismissed as"religious." Well, welcome to much of the whole western intellectual tradition, Mr. Crichton. Sure, the myth of a primal nature of things has its origins in the early Biblical narrative, but it is elemental to the western psyche. Variants of it are found in every major western intellect since Augustine. Hobbs, Locke, Marx, Darwin, Freud argue about the character of our primal selves and society, but they all take our primitive condition as a benchmark. Doing so isn't essentially unscientific. Science wishes to discover what that primal condition was and how it has changed.<p> What passes for" conservatism" in America isn't conservative at all. If it were, it would take the lead in efforts at" conservation." Don't count on unbridled post-industrial capitalism to do that.<p>
ID: 1927
Uid: 4
Author: 34
Category: 39
Title: CHECK IT OUT ...
Source:
Body: Classical historians may be able to help <a href="http://volokh.com/2003_12_14_volokh_archive.html#107151599534142102">Eugene Volokh</a>. He's looking for <blockquote> items (products or processes) that satisfy all these criteria:<br> They were unknown to people in ancient Rome circa 150 B.C.<br> They could be manufactured with then-existing technology and then-available raw materials.<br> They would be at least modestly useful in that era.<br> Even a nontechnically minded person today -- say, a smart 12-year-old -- would know how to make and use them. This is particularly important, and one on which many suggestions seem to founder.<br> Their absence would be pretty clearly visible. </blockquote>"Stirrups, whipped cream, cowpox as a vaccine for smallpox, penicillin, Arabic numerals, the abacus, sterile technique, distillation, the printing press, the scientific method, pasteurization, the horseshoe, the toothbrush, the compass, the wheelbarrow, glass lenses, gunpowder, soap, and horse plow collars" have been commonly suggested, but some of them don't meet all the criteria. The abacus is out because <a href="http://www.ee.ryerson.ca:8080/~elf/abacus/roman-hand-abacus.html">the Romans had it</a>.<p><a href="http://volokh.com/2003_12_14_volokh_archive.html#107168024730120814">Sasha Volokh</a> suggests that you have a look at <a href="http://www.bobsawyer.com/index.php?panel=1&alt=Qveere%20Eye%20for%20thye%20Medieval%20Man">Qveere Eye for Thye Medieval Man</a>. And <a href="http://www.tacitus.org/images/saddam.jpg">the 21st century guys thought <i>they</i></a> had full time work on their hands!<p> If you don't mind the spoilers, <i>Cliopatria</i>'s Tim Burke has a <a href="http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/tburke1/">critically appreciative review</a> of"The Return of the King" at <i>Easily Distracted</i>.<p> Twenty-five years after I invented the A-bomb .... Well, ah, it wasn't exactly <i>me</i> who did it and he didn't <i>actually invent</i> it, but <a href="http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0351/essay.php">John Aristotle Phillips</a> got an A on his Princeton term paper for his figuring out how to make one and life's been downhill ever since. You end up indiscriminately being a fund-raiser for Bush, Hillary Clinton, Trent Lott, and Joe Lieberman.<p>
ID: 1929
Uid: 8
Author: 34
Category: 39
Title: MICHAEL CRICHTON, A SECOND-RATE MICHAEL MOORE?
Source:
Body: A speech of Michael Crichton's on the dangers of"religious environmentalism" has been well-received in some conservative and libertarian quarters. If Crichton's speech reflected his own advice within it, environmentalists be scientific I'd have no problem with it.<p> Instead his <a href="http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/speeches_quote05.html#12180301">Remarks to the Commonwealth Club</a> show him to less an advocate of science and more of a second-rate Ann Coulter or Michael Moore. <p> The points that he really made were these: (1) most environmentalists are religious airheads, just like Christians, and (2) most people, including most members of the Commonwealth Club, are dumber than Michael Crichton.<p> The way he made those points was easy. He made scores of unsubstantiated claims. If he had followed his own advice and used science scrupulously to make his points he would have had problems. <p> For example, the one issue he discusses at length is DDT. He argues that its banning is one example of environmental-religious blindness in that it did not harm animals. But the only"evidence" he gives for this is asserting that it was falsely labeled a carcinogen. That may or may not have been true, I don't know the regulatory history/ But I do know the studies that indicated DDT caused harm concluded that it did so by impairing reproduction, not by causing cancer.<p> I might not be writing this if he had given even one authority to show that it did not hurt animals. That would have been consistent with his call for a scientific environmentalism. But he doesn't.<p> Someone reading this might reasonably say,"But in a speech, does he have time to do that? Maybe there is a good study out there that refutes clearly the previous findings on DDT."<p> Maybe there is. And if any readers know of one I will be happy to post information on it here. I do believe in using science honestly, even when it reveals that I have been wrong.<p> For the moment, however, Crichton's own words will do for a response. This long excerpt will show his real attitude toward scientific debate and for giving sources. (It will also document my comment about his ego).<p><p><blockquote><i>I can tell you that second hand smoke is not a health hazard to anyone and never was, and the EPA has always known it. I can tell you that the evidence for global warming is far weaker than its proponents would ever admit. I can tell you the percentage the US land area that is taken by urbanization, including cities and roads, is 5%. I can tell you that the Sahara desert is shrinking, and the total ice of Antarctica is increasing. I can tell you that a blue-ribbon panel in Science magazine concluded that there is no known technology that will enable us to halt the rise of carbon dioxide in the 21st century. Not wind, not solar, not even nuclear. The panel concluded a totally new technology-like nuclear fusion-was necessary, otherwise nothing could be done and in the meantime all efforts would be a waste of time. They said that when the UN IPCC reports stated alternative technologies existed that could control greenhouse gases, the UN was wrong. <p> I can, with a lot of time, give you the factual basis for these views, and I can cite the appropriate journal articles not in whacko magazines, but in the most prestigeous [sic] science journals, such as Science and Nature. But such references probably won't impact more than a handful of you, because the beliefs of a religion are not dependant [sic] on facts, but rather are matters of faith. Unshakeable belief. </i></blockquote><p> He does have time. He knows it. He chooses not to because he does not respect his audience. He says so himself.<p> So why have some pretty intelligent people latched onto this speech? I think it's the same reason Coulter and Moore are popular. They pick targets that their audiences hate and caricature them. Crichton chooses those environmentalists who tend to have an Eden-like view of nature, caricatures them, and then implicitly connects them with everybody concerned about the environment, except for himself or course. <p> Some readers I think saw the caricature, liked it, and didn't look carefully at what followed. It's a mistake I've made.<p> The sad thing here is that Crichton's a smart man and a rich man. If he truly wants to support good environmental science, he can do much good. But if this is any indication, good science is the last thing on his mind.<p> PS Here's the link to <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/">Science</a>. Crichton is right that it is good. Put Global Warming and CO2 into the internal search engine and ask yourself if he's read it lately.<p>