Christmas 1914 and how This isn't Your Grandparents' War

The first year of the War to End All Wars, was shockingly brutal for all sides. The accepted rules of combat from the previous century were shredded by technology: the machine gun, the tank, mobile cannon. Gas attacks, which helped birthed the Geneva Convention had yet to be committed.

On Christmas day, 1914, Germans and English, at various places along the front, stopped fighting. They came out first to bury their dead in shared prayers, then went on to talk (most Germans knew some English), trade tobacco, pipes, buttons and other momentos, and sing and even pray together. German barbers even shaved English troops during the ten day truce. Even after the truce was expired, some troops on both sides tried not to kill their erstwhile trenchmates.

This was the last global conflict of the nation-states. By World War II, the conflict had shifted from pure national supremacy back to the US' Civil War: industrial and financial dominance and national fascism¹.

Our enemy bears no resemblance to our German foes, now turned full partners in democracy and cold, international industrial might. They don't share our values of war, of life (theirs, their constituents, or their enemies), aims, goals. We have nothing they want, other than our subjugation or extinction. They have things we want, and have raped them for decades to get, and we Western nations are now reaping this bountiful crop.

This "war on terror" is truly the Jihad and Crusade, terms villified by both sides for its loaded terms. The emperor has no clothes. The fanatics backing terror will not come out of their trenches to sing Kumbaya on an emotional basis. And if they do, beware the blades behind their backs and bombs strapped to their torsos.

There are some similarities. Innocent civilians are caught in the middle. Cynical military leaders use 'martyrs' on one side, and socioeconomically hungry citizens on the other to do their bidding². And the grinding war itself has little point, cannot be resolved by force, and seems to be intermidable.

World War I ground to a halt in part due to the Allies finally strangling the Axis powers' industrial might: oil, machinery and humans. It ended also in large part due to the influenza pandemic that was slaughtering close-quartered troops at a rate far in excess of any human cannons or machine guns.

Europe suffered from demographic cratering. Due to the sheer devestation and the magnitude of this high-impact war, the societies were able to rebuild -- only to lash out less two decades later in nationalistic angers partly fueled by the nature of the initial defeat.

This low-impact, slow-motion war gives both sides endless opportunities to rearm, learn from their tactical mistakes, and, at least on the terrorist side, fill in the gaps in their ranks with new martyrs, disempowered, emasculated virgins in this world looking to make their first score with their counterparts in the next.

The question is: is the West willing to really fight for victory, or keep the sniping up?

Economically, international corporate-nations with ties to all sides of the conflict are profiting by the tens of billions; it's not in their interest to fight this war to conclusion. Why rebuild a school once if you can rebuild it three times? If the current infrastructure destruction in Iraq continues, it will be importing gasoline like some other major oil producers, a clear added bonus for these "reconstruction firms." This is the ugly military-industrial complex of which President Eisenhower warned.

Politicians have loved the war until recently: fear sells votes. The turnover in the US House and Senate were as much about absolute corruption as the Iraq War. War is great for a country's economy: the huge post-WW II boom was fueled by the technologies and capacities built up during the war³.

I've heard many Americans cut the Gorgian knot and point to the obvious solution: Do not to abide by Western rules of conduct; instead follow that of the enemy. Attack with full strength, quickly cause maximum, lasting damage, and ensure that whatever population is left rebuilds by our rules, not theirs.

That might have worked in Iraq at the start of this war. Now, it would resemble a sore loser tossing a board game into the air, scattering the pieces, when play does not go his way.

There is something to be said, however, for overwhelming, drop-that-20,000-ton-bomb- and-then-invade-with-200,000-soldiers force in small areas. If the United States is to be taken seriously, it will need to be serious, pervasive force, with specific objectives and a take-no-prisoners attitude.

Right now the administration doesn't have the guts to make that decision, and generals may not have the force strength to take that decision. Maybe some variant of the H5N1 flu will come to our aid. God forbid.

Happy holidays.

---

[1] Hitler's rise to power was funded by industrialists who saw the money to be made in a war-oriented German economy. America didn't want to get involved in the foreign war because it was not economically expedient. Like England until the Nazis got too close, it was seen as better to let the various powers fight their own war. Japan attacked the US in part because it was threatened by Washington's oil (energy) sanctions -- a turnabout on America's oil policies of today.

[2]Even after joining, many US soldiers' families rely on food stamps or other aid, as the pay, even with hazardous duty bonuses, is not sufficient to raise a family. Non-citizens join the US army in hopes of citizenship -- which is granted posthumously in some cases.

[3]The difference today is in debt and trust. Whereas in WW II Americans were exhorted to save gasoline, grow their own vegetables and be more frugal, President Bush exhorts citizens to keep up their level of spending (debt) and consumption. That's critical because we are not short so much of supplies as we are of the movement of money in our economy.

From the Mouths of (Jewish) Babes

My daughter, to a school friend trying to convert her (named Christian, lest there be any doubt): "I know you're trying to save me like, from the burning flames of hell, but... I'm okay."

Apartheid -- A Stinking Rose by Any Name

Former President Carter is a naive fool, playing into the hands of both a cynical media and an equally cynical antisemitic Arab PR machine.

Jewish leaders protesting Carter's use of apartheid are self-delusional at best, lying at worst.

Israel has generally treated not only the West Bank and Gaza residents (however they want to refer to themselves) as something a little better than cattle, and something definitely less than human for over thirty years. I've seen it, anyone who's lived or worked in the agricultural, construction, or industrial sector has seen it, and anyone denying it is lying.

Israeli arab towns and cities get less economic, social, cultural, infrastructure, tourism, security and every other support available to their Jewish -- and even mixed ethnicity -- cities. Go drive up a street in Deir Al Assad, then take a spin in neighboring Karmiel. Check out the practice soccer pitches in Haifa, the drive up to Massadeh on the Golan Heights (officially annexed by Israel years ago).

That's not to say that there aren't great people, companies and relationships that transcend these terrible and institutional practices. But the norm is a form of apartheid. Carter's blunder is to let the media equate the concept of apartheid with the level of apartheid. Israel, at its worst, was far better a master than the South Africans. Just writing that sentence makes me cringe, but it's a true, qualitative statement.

And Carter using that statement turns a possible discussion about the non-revolutionary ways out of the quagmire that is the Middle East into a firestorm of fury about the players, guilty and innocent, that have to survive it.

President Carter should stick to building houses for the homeless, and American rabbis should stick to helping their constituents. Neither seems qualified to engage in this current discussion.

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is Dead

With the signing of the deal with India, North Korea, Iran and even Israel can breathe a sigh of relief. No longer can the United States declare that it has been even-handed in how it treats 'rogue' nuclear nations. Even the concept of a 'rogue' nation is no longer valid. India and Pakistan can now figure out how to stockpile for their next testosterone-fueled war of brinksmanship. Israel (whose possible possession of nuclear weapons I personally support) can stand proud in its theoretical ownership of these weapons -- and several different and very accurate delivery systems.

The United States had had the ability to force Iran and North Korea to the table: the NNPT is, after all, something to which almost all countries are signatories. Now that chance is lost, and those two fascist regimes can stand beside Israel as rebels with a cause. After all, if India could cut a separate deal, why can't they? And in the meantime, just like India, why should they not continue to create the tools for world blackmail?

A Late Veterans' Day Memorial

I read this from one of my daughter's 3rd-grade classmates.

Q:	Veterans are important because...
A:	...Or else we would not be able to say the Pledge of Allegiance

Moved me to tears. Just frank words from an eight year old Jewish boy.

418 Republicans Can't All be Wrong

I was voter #450 at my polling precinct this evening. While polling officials said there'd been a steady stream of voters, I had little hope that I was going to help carry the Democratic vote; I have several neighbors that tell me or call me to let me know they're cancelling out my vote.

The interesting thing about voting this year was the tableau when I entered: six folks sitting at little voting carrels, with their carboard walls, and two sitting at tables, all filling out paper ballots. The lone voting machine was standing, available. The ten folks in front of me all took paper ballots and trundled off.

My moment of truth: show my suspicion of anything invented in the 20th century, or go for the geek? I asked the poll officer who was in charge of the paper ballots: "so, how any folks have used the machine?"

He got squinty for a moment. "Well, not many, I can tell you that. You're maybe the twentieth--"

"--Thirtieth--," cut in his seatmate.

"--to use it today."

I thought about all I knew about them, then decided to plunge into the uncertain future. "I'll take the machine," I said.

"Okey dokey," he said, and got up, sticking what looked like a plastic chalkboard eraser into the side of the machine.

I admit it: I was a bit intimidated by the thing when I first saw the thing. But as soon as I saw that it was a touch screen the little 'I hate knobs and levers' knot in my stomach unclenched, and voting proceeded apace.

I was the 32nd person to use it that entire day. Do the Republicans know something about those machines that I don't?

Discrimination and the, um, Differently Abled

Apparently Gallaudet's incoming president wasn't "deaf enough" to lead this once-prestigious school for the differently-hearing.

We complain about leadership: good, bad and indifferent. Leaders must be passionate about the cause, but not necessarily of the cause. Sure, it would be great to find a homeless refugee to run the Red Cross; they'd have the real life experience necessary to understand what such people need. MDA? Ditto. Should a blind person be the only qualified president for a school for the blind?

The very nature of the cantankerous debate at Gallaudet shows that, among the deaf, there are different views on the subject of deafness. My cousin wears a cochlear implant, signs and is "mainstream." Where I work there are some deaf employees that don't -- won't -- speak, but sign instead.

If the students at Gallaudet want to stay in their cave, create a sub-species called "homo sapiens can't hear the oncoming trafficus" that's fine. But that institution belongs to all hearing-impaired individuals, not just to ASL bigots.

More partition noise

Adeed Dawisha spoke about partition on NPR. I don't think he goes far enough; like most 'faces,' he's thinking 1-3 years instead of the unfair, ugly realities of Iraq. Still and all, brave of him to talk about partition.

The Case for Partition

As conditions in Iraq worsten, and "stay the course" suddenly never meant what it said (how can four words, four syllables, mean something other than that?), it's time to look at real ways out. As someone who has spent considerable time dealing with the clash of cultures, I'm going to do a Jonathan Swift and modestly propose the following (not new) idea: Divide to Conquer.

Splitting Iraq into sectarian sections is both a hard and easy thing to do. But with a little thought, and consideration of consequences, it is doable.

Who Gets the Loot?
There are six partners in this land grab, each with a stake:

1. The people of Iraq get the thing they need most: stability, security and no further ties to Western governmental control
   
2. Iran gets Eastern Iraq, from the south, including the swamps, up through to the Bagdhad area. Lots of oil, lots of Shi'ites.
3. Here's the tough one: the Kurds get their own state consisting of Northern Iraq, up to the Turkish border. Yes, this has lots of implications, eeach with their problems. They get oil, but a land-locked dependence on their neighbors. See discussion below.
   
4. Syria's piece of the pie is an odd slice. Below the Kurdish area, but above where Jordan gets their slice.
5. Jordan? They get the southwestern portions of Iraq, bordering Saudi Arabia and what would be Iran. This would serve as a neutral buffer between the radical Islamic empires, and provide Jordan with much-needed leverage in the Middle East: access to oil.
6. The US and the EU have huge stakes in a stable Middle East. Rather than have areas under rule of chaos, this split would ensure that each stakeholder had something to gain by ensuring stability -- and a lot to lose by failing in that mission.

Iraqis
Okay, let's face it: there never was a true Iraq. The Brits did a bang-up job on screwing up land ownership after they conquered the Ottoman Empire, and we are still living the results of their bungling from India to Iraq to Israel. The sun has finally set on the British Empire, but the fires are still burning.

The "Iraqi people" are no more homogeneous than the Palestinians or Israelis. While the latter were nominally bound closer together than the Palestinians ever have been, it's safe to say that the Israelis of today are so diverse they could not now do what they did in 1948.

Aaanyway, they deserve the peace and stability that comes from living among their co-religionists and clans. Let 'em live apart if they can't live together.

Iran
Sometimes you should give a coveter what they want. Add some more oil, and a few million more civilians, and many hundred square miles, and you get a distraction that should keep the Iranians busy for at least a few years. And who wants to have militant armies under someone else's control? Let the Mahdi armies learn who the real top dogs are.

Kurds
The favorite Arab punching bags, after Israelis, these folks already have experience running their own land. Upside: pretty instant stable tribal government. Downside: country envy from Turkish Kurds. Solution: Give Turks EU membership under the stipulation they leave the Kurds alone. This might not be stable in the 10-15 year time frame, but if Turkey manages to up its standard of living and provide real economic and social development opportunities for its large Kurdish minority, they can come up ahead in this delicate game. But they'll need to grow up (and get some help from Western countries) in getting over their Kurdistan fetish.

Syria
My favorite next enemy. This has the downside of giving Hizb'allah a direct land connection from Iran, but it gives the Syrians a new export: oil. I expect it will have the salubrious effect of making Syria less interested in the religious politics and strings that current relationships with Iran bring along with weapons. Syria is a pragmatic dictatorship, and religious messes with that paradigm. As there aren't any large populations in that area, they're able to expand eastward without large local problems. Of course, they can always pull another Hama.

Jordan
The only rational government in the Middle East, it still is the last hope for stable government. At least, unless the US decides to "help" them out. Giving them oil would be a huge blessing. They have a seaport, a relatively effective government, good relationships with almost all countries in the area, a roughly British, Western court system and a good track record of education and economic development. They need the oil more than any other (remaining) nation except Israel.

US & EU
These countries need to "get out of Dodge." Any meddling, any interference, will be punished, no matter how well the actions are intended. Americans hand out candy? Kill the kids for collaboration. Brits give the Iraqi army a free hand? They're at fault for Iraqi-inspired atrocities.

Loose Threads
No, it's not that simple. And yes, it's unfair: so is life. Bad people may win, and good people might lose on the micro basis. But in the macro, this is a more stable solution than the status quo or any delusional "free and democratic state" that Cheney, Bush, Inc. might conceive in their K Street back offices.

Baghdad
Let's start with the ugly, 800-pound oliphant. All the Arab states are so hip about Jerusalem being an international city, let 'em practice on Baghdad. Multinational force, a place for the meeting of minds and common area interests. Set up parks, cultural museums, safe havens for families to come to and not worry about their stressful lives back in their (new) homes. A regional stock exchange. A duty-free trading zone. Think Qatar, only with a San Antonio river walk.

The Great Migration
Yes, people will have their lives uprooted and ruined. That's already happening. Barbers are killed for violating Islamic law by cutting hair one way -- or the other. Shi'a and Sunni bullies are already performing the very act of Transfer they Israeli's forbidden from doing. And getting an organized transfer will shed less blood than what's happening now. (Now children! Keep your hands and AK-47s to yourselves!)

How Could we do this? Especially after Everything We've Invested!
Just watch. The dead can't complain. The wounded won't be back. The money's gone to graft, mud and corporate America. Partition neatly gets around the Republican agenda of getting out of Iraq with a resolution (victory having been declared as a premature statement). Dems will love the amount of real humanitarian aid that can now be funneled to build a new country (Kurdistan) as well as help create an oasis out of Baghdad's ruins.

What's next?
I don't know. Call your congressman/parlimentarian. Organize. Start thinking about how the details could be worked out. There's a Nobel Peace Prize in it for whomever can turn this bloodbath around.

Educators and Idiots

Education is a complex business. It's complex because, to run a school district, a superintendent (CEO) or school board member (corporate board member) must know how to manage people, budgets, priorities, politics, bureaucracies and a community often at odds with itself in terms of needs, desires and purpose.

So it's fun to hear about people interested in running local or state school districts who clearly have not had their meds properly balanced. Like the genius who wants students to learn to stop bullets with textbooks. Or school boards that want to put religion in, and not worry about the intricacies of church and state – or basic literacy as an important part of the learning experience. The latter helped found an amazing new religion, based on the same sane, solid principles as that of Intelligent Design: please read their dogma or join.

In real life, people with sane, common sense give suggestions to leaders. In our wonderful Amerikan world, people with about as much sense as rutabaga make pronouncements in the hoped they are better liked.

We would be best served by asking future politicos -- and especially school board members and superintendents -- to prove their sanity.

From the Mouths of Smaller, Intelligent Humans

Me: That's so stupid!
Him: What?
Me: This professor said compared Bush to Hitler.
Him: That's so stupid! Hitler was smart! Hitler was evil!
Me: (reaching for the keyboard...)

So Many Crises, So Little Brain Power

It's been a while. Wars in the Middle East. Political idiocy and upheaval in the States. A regime change for Thailand, one coming up for Cuba and England. North Korea either blew up a lot of dynamite or has joined the atomic club, which is not a good thing for Planet Earth.

But these are all trivial. The real story is Darfur. This is where global rubber meets the road. This is where all can see how nations of the world work when there isn't a question of what's going on, or who is at fault. Where there are no Jews to blame: it's Muslim on Muslim rape, torture, murder and genocide. It's at the rate of a child, a family, a town.

As a global community we are failing the test. I predict that Rammadan, and the 'Eid Feast that concludes it, will be no different than the months before: innocent die, governments watch and the evil continue to do their work. And we can't expect better outcomes for Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Lebanon, the West Bank and Gaza Strip, or even the US Congress if we, as individuals and as nations, don't stand up and do the right thing. Stop. The. Genocide.

Despair works best
when it has no reason to.

Weather Report

This is a cross-post; normally I'd be putting posts on the Middle East on my other blog, Hadofeq ("the pulse" in Hebrew).

I was reminded of the children's book "Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs" listening to the news on Israeli radio this morning (18ooZ). "The frequency of missile strikes seems to be on the upswing," he said. "Missiles landed in..." and he rattled off a list of twenty villages and towns. That Tiberias was hit speaks to the continued existence of longer-range bottle rockets in Hizballah's hands.

"Residents are advised," he continued, "to stay away from torn or down electrical lines. Also, keep away from electrical substations if they have been hit by missiles." All delivered in calm, mid-alto tones.

"Two sailors killed have been identified," he said earlier in the broadcast. "For the information of Sailors, seas will be fairly rough," ended the weather report.

A postscript: in the three minutes it's taken me to write this, two more missiles have hit Tveria. At this point reporters and witnesses alike seem more calm, reporting damage and continued 'kor ru'ach' -- mental calm, in the target zones that were my home.

Sometimes You Just Want to Look Up...

... and not see incoming rockets.

Sun fire patiently touch
planents
a rain lights clouds
hopes
the silky moon
beyond
desired love

A Backdrop to News from Israel

Poetry.com has a daily 'Poetry in Motion' contest. Here's mine for today:

beneath paint-brushed golden summer days
I found silky
sunrise
filagree
in my last harvest rain.

Copyright © 2006 Da Shlom. All Rights Reserved.

Why Are There so Many Mean People?

I was perusing Yahoo's question engine. That's a service where users submit questions, and then people at large answer them. Stephen Hawking posed a question recently, and I answered it as best I could. Afterwards I trolled for other questions to answer. One in particular caught my eye: "Why are there some many mean people?"

There wasn't any context for the question, but it got me thinking. There are a lot of people that act selfishly or inconsiderately. I get cut off on the highway daily. People--even my children--leave their messes for me to clean up. I get calls from people that clearly don't care how insulting they are in tone and/or language.

The question brought me up short, though. Are there so many mean people? What's our gauge? After all, this site showcases a positive side to news on the planet. To act as a foil for all the negative news.

Bad news sells. Mean people are obvious. A customer support axiom says that if you help someone with a problem, that person will tell one other person about their great experience. But if you irritate or upset a person, that person will tell at least ten more people. Perhaps that's why there's a presumption that there are a lot of mean people.

Perhaps, however, there is another side to this. Our brains are wired for survival, to be wary of danger. Scientists know we can tell the difference in lighting of a single lumen. Movement spotted by a single rod or cone in the eye can trigger 'catching' our attention. On a lower rung of Maslow's hierarchy, this is a survival factor.

I believe spotting the mean people around us is an equally important survival factor. Mean people, stories of meanness and the visual and aural cues to mean activity flag us. We want to know about these people, because They. Are. Trouble. In the Maslow structure, recognizing mean people is just a step above making sure you've got fresh water and shelter.

So, there may seem to be a lot of mean people out there, but that's just your survival instinct looking out for you. The nice ones don't catch your eye, and I'm betting they are in the majority!

Head Held High, Onto the Gallows

Yes, Tom DeLay has exited. As he said, 'stage right.' As in 'conservative?' Yes. As in, correct? No, I think. Like Richard Nixon, the appearance of honor in the face of retreat is no different. He may wave the peace sign, may declare his innocence, but just because he's left on his own power doesn't mean the handcuffs and ignominities of a body cavity search are not far behind.

He has shown us the depths to which politicians will sink to delieve the depravity of peer pressure. And his eventual contributions to the underpaid prison labor of our Great State of Texas will bear the final truth to his mealymouthed exhortations of honesty in the face of Truth.

-Media

I'm watching Liz Taylor's discussion with Larry King Live, hearing all the horrible things said about Elizabeth Taylor, and being bombarded by Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt's new baby.

It's amazing, with the millions being killed in Congo, the many hundreds of thousands in Darfur, AIDS, hunger, poverty and reality, that a sleazy photographer can make over a million dollars by taking a picture of a newborn baby and its parents against the family's wishes. Or that a movie star, whatever her history, is declared dead, insane, or demented.

In the NPR-sponsored project, "This, I Believe," people, famous and plebian, talk about what moves them, what is at the core of their belief. I believe in the baselessness of the commercial media, their ability to search for the paying story, no matter how base, so long as it sells.

Fortunately, I also believe in the concept of 'Tikkun Olam,' the fixing of the world. I believe that for every despicable, amoral, money-grubbing person, there is at least one person trying to solve an important problem facing the world.

I hope the good guys win. And I hope Elizabeth gets to enjoy her new career, and Angelina and Brad their new son, without having to deal with vultures masquerading as 'the press.'

Leonardo Would be Having a Good Laugh

The furor over the movie version of the Da Vinci Code is pretty funny. Calling a book of fiction heresy strikes even religious Catholic friends of mine as funny.

"Oh, yeah, we keep our albino monks under SPF 200, but for a good contribution into the plate I can let you talk with one," one friend said. [5/21 postscript: There is a monk named Silas @ the NYC office!]

My writing groups are up in arms about the poor quality of the writing as well. There are analytical pages about Dan Brown' questionable style and grammatical manglings.

I think a good escapist movie is a great thing to see. And no one ever accused Barbara Cartland of amazing writing.

Entertainment should not be confused with reality. No matter how close some morons might believe the resemblance.

Fear and Pressing in Central Texas

I'm off to a business trip tomorrow and wanted to treat myself to dry cleaning and pre-ironed shirts every morning while away, so I took my load on Tuesday to my local dry cleaner. I dumped the pile of shirts and pants on the counter.

The attendant looked at the pile, then mournfully at me. "Sir," she said, with a Mexican accent, "I can take your clothing, but it won't be ready for at least four days."

The sign outside read "same day cleaning," and the usual turnaround was about 36 hours. I cocked an eyebrow.

"It's the pressers," she said. "They left Monday morning and never came back." She pointed to a "Help Wanted" sign displayed prominently in the window. "No pressers at all. We just got back Saturday's dry cleaning. Don't just take my word for it," she said as I thanked her for my candor and scooped up my clothes, "is everywhere. Everyone running."

Two other dry cleaners also had help wanted signs, and I stopped by the next day, hoping to avoid expensive hotel cleaners, with my load at a local family chain. They too had a 'Help Wanted' sign on the door.

"Any chance of getting this done by Friday?" I asked.

The clean-cut young man behind the counter nodded confidently. "Not a problem," he said. "After five today if you liked."

"So you've got no problems with pressers?"

"Nope," he replied. We're doing just fine."

I left lighter in arms and full of hope. Came back this afternoon to pick up the clothes.

"You still have the sign up," I said to the young Hispanic woman behind the counter. "How's the work in the back?"

She shrugged.

Then another young man, from the same owning family I think, wriggled past her in a vain attempt to catch an incoming phone call. He was sweating, and there were people crawling all around the hanging rails of bagged laundry in the next room.

"I'm glad you were able to keep your workers," I said to the man. "I had problems at other stores."

He gave me a tired look. "It's quiet in the back right now," he said. "There's no one working in the back. And the conveyor belt is broken, so we have to pull everything off by hand." He wiped sweat from his face. "But we're only down two pressers for tomorrow and," he pointed at the sign, "maybe some others will come back."

I assume by "others" he means 'low-paid, hiding from the INS' kind of others, and not the unemployed citizen or eager high schooler others.

"Don' worry," my cashier said as she handed me the bill. "My sister come back tomorrow."

"One down," the man said. "I just have to find one more."

The rumors around town are rife with planned raids at public schools, illegal immigrant detention camps south of Waco, and general fear.

I wonder if my pre-Holocaust parents felt similarly to the missing pressers. At least I'm pretty sure their end will be less certain than that of my parents.

A Joke...

Q: What do you get when you hire a right-wing commentator and a reporter to the White House?
A: A Common Porter. Someone to shoulder the burden of "Message of the Day" for a debased chief executive.

When Bullshit Calls Journalists Listen: Iranian Superweapons

Journalists are wimps.

Iran, the country that doesn't have the spare parts to keep its thirty year old aircraft in the air, has superweapons! Missiles that can't be tracked, can avoid radar, yet are MIRVed. Torpedoes that fly underwater at over 200MPH, also sonar-evading. Read about it in any major media outlet!

While Teheran has 'created' its own fighters, tanks, missiles and other weaponry, the reality is that they have adapted (read repainted for the most part) North Korean technology. Guns for oil... just like Kuwait, Saudia Arabia and now Iraq.

Just a few weeks ago the papers broke the story about how Saddam Hussein had kept the fiction of weapons of mass destruction alive not for the ears of warmongering Bush klansmen, but for his own people, to keep them in fear of what he'd done to the Kurds.

And now the mass media is doing it again, with silence, with acceptance, instead of with jeers. The country that can't support keep its own planes in the air, the country where millions of its citizens in mud brick houses, a country that hasn't had an original thought since the corrupt Shah was ousted, a country that looks to North Korea for even slight technological achievement, is assumed to have leapfrogged all the advanced technology research centers of the world?

Reporting this idiotic pap, in this way, plays right into Bush administration hands that would rather ratchet up the fear, for internal political purposes, than portray Iran as the pathetic hotbed for suicidal radicals that is really is.

So what if this is a real threat? Where' the news media analysis to support that? How do we assess such developments? From Karen Hughes' situation room? From Rumsfeld's office? From unnamed sources in the Bush administration? Me, I'd rather hear an analysis by a report who has spoken to real rocket scientists, or to non-factional experts in the field. Instead we hear translated half-quotes from Iranian television and their military press office releases.

Journalism isn't just about the scoop interview or the 'first to the presses.' It is about analysis of the data, the credibility of the source and the 'big picture.' Even if embedded reporting is sexier. Try harder, folks, try harder!

[A side note: In preparing this blog entry I researched over one hundred separate articles. The vast majority, as you can read through these links, all hark back to the same AP piece written by Ali Akbar Dareini, their Iranian reporter. They were retouched or lightly edited for the end news outlet. Perhaps there aren't anywhere near as many journalists as we think...]

Languaged stetted, ASAP?

There have been some pieces in the news lately about the crossover of IM and text message 'speak' into English. The cries of purists are amusing (kind of like the minority Canadian Quebequa wanting all signs in their province in French), especially since English is the original bastard language; just ask anyone who grew up with a rational language structure how hard it is to learn English!

We've architected English, verbed nouns, mashed words and done everything possible to give Americans more words than every not to know. When I recently had a co-worker talk about polyhierarchical taxonomies, she and I were the only ones in the room (with a group of college grads and educators) that could even parse the concept. Of course, anyone ever stopped for speeding knows what a radar gun is.

So now, IMHO, we LOL, sometimes even ROTF, in <3 with these book new words. To be added to lasers and scuba gear.

Hebrew, a language with a paltry 150,000 purely Semitic words compared to English, has been conjugating acronyms for millenia. Prime Minister Golda Meier used the phrase "Zabash'cha' to create the word 'it's your problem' from Ze Haba'aya Shel'cha.' When referring to a deceased person, Hebrew-speakers will say "Zahl" after their name, or "Zatsal," meaning 'blessed be their memory' or 'blessed be that holy person's memory' respectively.

English, with its incredible palette of words and phrases, changes slowly, word meanings generally outstripping new words. But as technology speeds memetic infection, each new communication facet will bring its own changes to work, culture and vocabulary.

Check out The-Ping for a short discussion on technology, linguistics and a universalist vocabulary.

H5N1 to 0

I think it's clear that the H5N1 "bird flu" is coming and is, in fact, here to stay. It's longevity and continuing spread remind me of the West Nile Virus more than a seasonal influenza.

While I am sure that the avian kingdom is in no danger, and that this is not the dinosaur die-off of the eon, I'd like to point something out: we're breeding for failure.

When I lived in Upstate New York, near Binghamton, the hilltop around our house was mostly fallow fields and woods. There was a flock of turkeys that had made its home on our property. I think 'herd' when I say 'flock,' because they were mostly ground-bound, and took some kind of odd joy in running in circles around our house just after dawn.

Okay, they're not the most brilliant birds, but compared to the ones I worked with when living on a kibbutz, these were Einsteins. The latter were SO dumb that when it was going to rain we had to bring them inside, because while they, like their wild counterparts, would face the sky and open their beaks to drink, they lacked the part of the gene involving closing said orifice before they drowned. If they didn't first fall over from the absurd weight in what humans call the turkey breast. These were the 'Pomela' Andersons (or Loni's) of the bird world.

When H5N1 hits, it's the wild birds that will bear the brunt of the illness. We humans will safely ensconce our stupid, bred-to-be-eaten meat puppets in hermetically sealed havens (where, after x number of weeks, they'll be taken out back and metaphorically shot). This will further reduce the spread and tenacity of the affected wild species, and further weaken our already shaky wild ecology.

Don't get me wrong: I'm a firm believer in eating whatever can't argue its way out of the cooking pot. But I am concerned that in this mechanist society, where everything gets turned into a time-and-motion industry to push for the bottom dollar, that we are selling the global gene pool short when breeding for eatability instead of viability.

I'll pay more for bigger bones, smaller "breasts" and healthier, more sturdy, animals. Ones that more relate to the ones that charged around my house at dawn than the ones, raised in cages, that are as close to sessile as animals can get.

Now I'm Confused...

Inflamatory cartoons have sent the Muslim world into a tizzy, if not frenzy. Non-Muslims insulting the Prophet Mohammed is seen as a horrible, terrible thing.

So what's with the suicide bombers killing fellow Muslims in mosques, on holy days? Where's the anger? Where's the lashing out against terror? Where are these imams with their folders filled with cartoons now? Will the Sunni declare a holy war against the Shi'a? (No, wait, that's already been tried.) And if not, then why not? Could it be that it's okay for Muslims to blow each other to gobbets, while entire continents be held accountable for the acts of deluded Danish cartoonists?

This is a clash of Western vs. radical Muslim culture. Not Muslim, as the vast and overwhelming majority of Muslims are law-abiding, honest, peaceful people. But in our culture, radical fascism is met with legal action. In countries harboring or pandering fanatics, radicals are used as fuel for their unholy fire against rational, human conduct among -- and within -- nations.

Cartoonish Behavior

Yah, it's offensive, blah, blah, blah. There's almost too much media reaction to the original offense -- except for the insane response by legions of enraged primitives. Thanks, Richard, for use of the cartoon.

Muslims are as wise, and dumb, as good and as bad as any other religion. Islamic rule has been tolerant, has fostered the sciences and has created art forms that are as breathtakingly beautiful now as when they were created many centuries ago. Now that I've gotten your attention (or at least confusion), lets deconstruct what's going on.

1. Muslim laws apply to Muslims. Otherwise Jews would get upset about non-Jews eating non-Kosher, Hindi would massacre anyone coming out an American McDonalds, and Southern Baptists would really Crusade to convert non-believers by forcing everyone to adopt their moral standards. Oops, that latter's already happening... Shi'ites have pictures of Mohammed, as do other Muslim sects. I guess it's not as much fun to torch one's own embassy.
   
2. Protesters, at most charitable, are being manipulated. Less charitably, they're taking any excuse to rage against The Machine. Danish imams went on a pilgrimage to other Arab nations, taking with them portfolios not only of the offending, but also of much more henious ones that were never published, ones with bestiality, just to name one ugly. This was a calculated terrorist attack, one that has resulted in several deaths by this writing, millions of dollars in damage to innocents' property, and uncounted millions in lost revenue by companies that probably despise the cartoonist even more than some Arab nations. The French, who have been far less sympathetic towards the inroads Islam has made, and the plight of the millions of young Muslims discriminated against for generations, seemed to have escaped this directed wrath for the most part.
   
3. Terrorist countries are using this incident for their secular gains. Get serious, Assad -- your idea of a good time during Ramadan is more along the lines of a trip to Paris than a delicious fast during the summer heat. Syria is a secular dictatorship, run by a clan in the same manner as the Saud family runs Saudi Arabia. Not like the Jordanian Hashemites, who have the good sense to run the country as if it were a democracy in terms of how they treat their subjects. So Syrian "protests" are no more spontaneous than their Syrian handlers allow. Because Hamma, as Thomas Friedman pointed out, still rules: cross an Assad and you get dead quickly and brutally.
4. Glass houses, stones. Oddly enough, one doesn't hear many protests about the almost continuous stream of vituperative calumny and calls for the genocidal murder of, for example, Jews. Oh, right, I forgot: we don't count. The cartoons (pictures are good for the vast majority of illiterate Arab Muslims) are the perfect medium to showcase the Jews and their sins.
   

Okay, picture time.

The Bomb Cartoon	Nope, not gonna put it up again. I agree with the Muslims on this one: ugly, nasty and negative. But there were others that I have a different view, so here is an exemplar below.
	Is this Mohammed? Not according to the caption. Is this an insult to Islam, saying that too many men have martyred themselves in the name of Islam? I'd see this being printed in any of the secular or non-fanatic Islamic countries, including Egypt. I agree: too many people have died as martyrs. Period.

Yes, there were more cartoons. Like compulsive haters, I could put up a whole pack of these, and just keep people wound up (but Spongebob should do for this rant).

The point of all this is freedom. Western freedom to express ones views, and the freedom of terrorists to use whatever is at hand to advance their instilling terror in others.

The more terrorists and their uneducated lackeys burn things, the more they rant, the more irrational they behave, the more they distance themselves from the community of nations.

Maybe Iran wants this. I think Iran needs this. Remember Salman Rushdie and the death sentence imposed against him? Iranian. Certainly Iran is benefiting from this. (Note to self: how bad are the protests in Saudi Arabia relative to terror-held countries?)

Western nations need to keep centered on the freedom of speech, the value of real democratic freedom, and a careful, watchful eye on a part of the world that really doesn't like any of us very much.

A Plea for Filibuster

Last week I found a bumper sticker for my car. "The last time we mixed politics and religion," it said, "people were burned at the stake."

Yes, I bought it. No, I don't think we're near there -- yet. But I am scared (a serious step up from worried) that President Bush and the religious right are at the cusp of controlling all three bodies of government. Judge Alito is a penultimate, if not the final plank in this ship of nightmares.

There are 11 states where women need to be rich, have friends, or be very brave in order to have even Roe-protected, first trimester abortions. As the father of a young teenager, I agonize now over whether I'd need (as opposed to want) to know about my daughter seeking an abortion. And what is at stake here is the freedom for me, as a parent, to decide that agony.

As a writer of fiction, of political commentary and on the Middle East, I look up articles and download information from the darker side of the Internet. I e-mail people that I don't know that I'd want to meet in real life. These communications feed my art. I suspect that they are also grist for the NSA mill, and the basis for assumptions they might then make about people I know. And their friends. And others.

Cartoon by Richard Bartholomew

It's because of my passion for freedom, for an unbiased judiciary, that FISA makes sense. And precisely for the same reason that Judge Alito's penchant for fawning at the office of the President makes be believe that he is not the right choice to be one of the nine among equals, to sit at the country's highest bench.

Let's not kid ourselves; a liberal candidate is not in the cards. And a wise and balanced (or is it 'fair and balanced'?) conservative is a better choice than a wild-eyed game changer.

I guess the core of my concern is that Samuel Alito is not his own man, does not represent the American citizen, and would not give the individual the rights they deserve especially in the face of the corporate Goliath.

Please help stop Judge Alito from assuming a throne from which he will help rule for the rest of his life, against the People's common and secular interests.