July 25, 2006
Now I can reach only two conclusions about those calling for proportionality. Either they are disingenuous, or they are stupid. After all, life teaches us that when we face a threat to our lives or our safety, proportional response is not the answer. The response must be overwhelming, absolute, and utterly disproportinate to the threat. The goal cannot be a draw -- it must be the utter subjugation or annihilation of the enemy.
My brother is a sergeant on a police force on the West Coast. We've watched more than one television show or movie in which some scriptwriter has had a police officer shoot a perp in the knee, arm, or hand in order to stop or disarm him. When that happens, my brother laughs, and notes "In real life, that is probably a dead cop." Real cops, you see, recognize that when they pull the trigger they must shoot to kill. If they don't, there is a very real chance that the perp will not be disabled or disarmed, and that he will shoot back or use a blade when the officer approaches. Therefore, they shoot for the chest, in the hope of causing such massive injury (or, of course, death) that there is no chance of that the perp can take any action in response. Any other response is stupid -- and anyone who advocates the use of less than deadly force in that situation either does not understand policework or is more concerned about the life of the perp than the life of the police officer. Cops don't use deadly force often or as a primary course of action -- but they don't hesitate to use it when appropriate.
But with Israel, which is using the IDF to disarm and incapacitate terrorist enemies, the call is for settling for something less than safety and security by using no greater force than the enemy is using.
Take this, for example.
Destroying the Beirut airport, blasting communications towers into oblivion and cleansing southern Lebanon of its civilian population are not measures the world will see as an attack on Hezbollah terrorists. The Israeli campaign is so intense and widespread that it is creating more terrorists than it kills. Proportionate military action might have enhanced Israel's security, but video footage of grandmothers weeping amid the rubble of their homes and bloodied children lying in hospital beds won't make Israel more secure. Hezbollah's stature in the Arab world is growing, and its patrons in Damascus and Tehran must be smugly satisfied.
Ultimately, it doesn't matter how "the world" views Israel. What matters is that the people of Israel are safe. If that makes Israel unpopular, so be it. Experience has shown the Jews that "the world" does little on their behalf, no matter how passive they are. A litany of pogroms and concentration camps demonstrates that. And somehow I doubt that Iran and Syria would make nice if only Israel would refrain from going to extremes in its own defense.
Even Richard Cohen, who calls Israel a mistake, recognizes that calls for proportionality are insane.
If by chance you have the search engine LexisNexis and you punch in the words "Israel'' and "disproportionate,'' you run the risk of blowing up your computer or darkening your entire neighborhood. Just limiting the search to newspapers and magazines of the last week will turn up "more than 1,000 documents.'' Israel may be the land of milk and honey but it certainly seems to be the land of disproportionate military response -- and a good thing, too.The list of those who have accused Israel of not being in harmony with its enemies is long and, alas, distinguished. It includes, of course, the United Nations and its secretary general, Kofi Annan. It also includes a whole bunch of European newspapers whose editorial pages call for Israel to respond, it seems, with only one missile for every one tossed its way. Such neat proportion is a recipe for doom.
The dire consequences of proportionality are so clear that it makes you wonder if it is a fig leaf for anti-Israel sentiment in general. Anyone who knows anything about the Middle East knows that proportionality is madness. For Israel, a small country within reach, as we are finding out, of a missile launched from any enemy's back yard, proportionality is not only inapplicable, it is suicide. The last thing it needs is a war of attrition. It is not good enough to take out this or that missile battery. It is necessary to re-establish deterrence: You slap me, I will punch out your lights.
Damn straight. Anything less is an invitation for further attack and ultimate destruction.
Now there are those -- including my now banned troll -- who plead the case of the poor civilians of Lebanon. Sadly, they are victims in this -- victims of Hezbollah and their own government. Captain Ed sagely makes the point about where the responsibility belongs for the disproportinal response by Israel -- a response that has led to these unintended but unavoidable civilian casualties belongs.
If Hezbollah finds itself holding a knife in a gunfight, then the blame falls on Hezbollah and the Lebanese government that granted then de facto sovereignty in the south. Wars do not get fought through "proportionality," and they certainly do not end that way. They end when one side overwhelms the other with superior force and dictates terms to the loser, or when one side decides they've had enough and sues for peace. Demands for proportionality lead us to where we are today -- long, bloody wars of attrition that solve nothing and embolden asymmetrical warfare.How about this for proportionality: Israel comprises about 6.3 million people, while Hezbollah's sponsors, Syria and Iran, comprise a combined 87 million people. Does that mean that the global community will allow Israel to impose a 13:1 death ratio in this war, and to keep killing people indiscriminately until they reach the correct numbers? When the UN and its international dupes start endorsing that proposal, then we can take their demands for proportionality seriously.
Frankly, I think I could accept precisely such a ratio, though I would prefer that it be higher. So keep up the good work, IDF -- leave not one rocket-launcer standing, and not one terrorist alive.
UPDATE: Would you like to know the effect of a "proportionate" response to Hezbollah? It can be inferred from this statement of Mahmoud Komati, a Hezbollah leader.
His comments were the first time that a leader from the Shiite militant group has publicly suggested it miscalculated the consequences of the July 12 cross-border raid in which two Israeli soldiers were captured and three were killed."The truth is _ let me say this clearly _ we didn't even expect (this) response ... that (Israel) would exploit this operation for this big war against us," said Komati.
He said Hezbollah had expected "the usual, limited response" from Israel.
In the past, he said, Israeli responses to Hezbollah actions included sending commandos into Lebanon, seizing Hezbollah officials and briefly targeting specific Hezbollah strongholds in southern Lebanon.
Komati said his group had anticipated negotiations to swap the Israeli soldiers for three Lebanese held in Israeli jails, with Germany acting as a mediator as it has in past prisoner exchanges.
Yeah, that's right -- Hezbollah was expecting another proportionate response from the Israelis, and is upset that the Israelis aren't playing by Hezbollah's rules. what's more, he goes on to complain that Israel had this campaign planned and had just been waiting for the opportunity to strike. I guess he feels that it is somehow immoral for Israel to decide to effectively defend itself from an external threat.
So let's clarify the matter here -- proportionate response leads to continued attacks -- because Hezbollah gets what it wants in such situations. Disproportionate response might just succeed in getting Israel some security.
Posted by: Greg at
01:39 PM
| Comments (43)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1357 words, total size 9 kb.
, 
),
The candidate, immersed in one of the most competitive Senate races in the country, sat down to lunch yesterday with reporters at a Capitol Hill steakhouse and shared his views about this year's political currents.On the Iraq war: "It didn't work. . . . We didn't prepare for the peace."
On the response to Hurricane Katrina: "A monumental failure of government."
On the national mood: "There's a palpable frustration right now in the country."
It's all fairly standard Democratic boilerplate -- except the candidate is a Republican . And he's getting all kinds of cooperation from the White House, the Republican National Committee and GOP congressional leaders.
Not that he necessarily wants it. "Well, you know, I don't know," the candidate said when asked if he wanted President Bush to campaign for him. Noting Bush's low standing in his home state, he finally added: "To be honest with you, probably not."
The candidate gave the luncheon briefing to nine reporters from newspapers, magazines and networks under the condition that he be identified only as a GOP Senate candidate. When he was pressed to go on the record, his campaign toyed with the idea but got cold feet. He was anxious enough to air his gripes but cautious enough to avoid a public brawl with the White House.
Still, his willingness to speak so critically, if anonymously, about the party he will represent on Election Day points to a growing sense among Republicans that if they are to retain their majorities in Congress, they may have to throw the president under the train in all but the safest, reddest states.
personally, I'm betting it is Lincoln Chafee -- but I could be wrong. It could be any number of incumbents or challengers this year.
And that is where the problem lies. Voters have a right to know where the candidate stands -- and if a candidate is unwilling to come out and make such statements publicly, how can voters be sure that they are voting for the sort of candidate they want? How can donors know that their money is going to support candidates who stand where they do?
UPDATE: I wondered if this was who made the statements above. And given that he has made such statements publicly in the past, I'm not as troubled.
Maryland Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele's Senate campaign acknowledged yesterday that he was the anonymous candidate quoted by a Washington Post political reporter as saying that being a Republican was like wearing a "scarlet letter" and that he did not want President Bush to campaign for him this fall.The campaign made the disclosure after a day of speculation in the blogosphere and among political reporters about which Republican Senate candidate had made the disparaging remarks reported by Dana Milbank in the Washington Sketch column in yesterday's Post.
But interestingly enough, it seems that Milbank took a few isolated comments that were negative about the president and ignored those positive statements that were made by Steele.
Steele spokesman Doug Heye did not dispute the accuracy of Steele's quotes in the paper but said Steele spent little time at the luncheon talking about the subject and said the article did not include some comments Steele made praising Bush."When he agrees with the Republican administration, he absolutely does so," Heye said. "When he disagrees, he speaks his mind."
We know that with Michael Steele we will get a moderate-conservative -- not a liberal like certain New England senators, but not a hard-right ideologue. That is fine with me, because it is the best we can get out of Maryland. He isn't Alan Keys -- but then again, who would vote for Alan Keyes?
Posted by: Greg at
11:56 AM
| Comments (32)
| Add Comment
Post contains 678 words, total size 4 kb.
And that leads me the decision I made this afternoon.
I've had a commenter who is vigorously opposed to Israel commenting here. Now I'm willing to accept that position as legitimate -- indeed, it has not been too many years since I was a vigorous critic of Israel. I recognize that opposition to Israeli policy and criticism of Israeli leaders need not be based in anti-Semitism, and respect an honest discussion of the topic. I would, in fact, welcome such discussion here.
Unfortunately, the commenter in question, Ken Hoop (revbronco@yahoo.com -- send him as much spam as you want) has crossed the line several times. Not only has he repeatedly made rather disgusting statements in posts, but he also sent me even more vile material in my email. This included links to extremist sites like antiwar.com, davidduke.com, and juancole.com. I can accept such items in the spirit they are offered -- a hate-filled spirit, to be sure, but one which at least makes a pretense of intellectual discussion.
Today I received an email containing various links and graphics from a site called holywar.org. After opening the email and looking at the site, I felt a compulsion to bathe in the hopes that I could remove the contamination caused by viewing such material. I will not even describe it, except to indicate that it is anti-Semitic, anti-Catholic, and laden with a level of bigotry that I did not think that even Ken Hoop could descend to.
Ken Hoop is now banned. His emails are now deleted before I ever see them. I have blocked every IP from which he has ever posted, including at least two public library systems in the Cincinnati area (one in Ohio, one in Kentucky). If anyone has difficulty commenting as a result, please feel free to email me and I will see if we can make other arrangements to allow you to post while keeping the hatemonger off of this site.
Posted by: Greg at
10:41 AM
| Comments (22)
| Add Comment
Post contains 379 words, total size 2 kb.
And here is a link to the full results of the vote.
Posted by: Greg at
10:14 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 43 words, total size 1 kb.
July 24, 2006
NUT seek pre-school gay awareness
But it isn't -- and shows just how far some are willing to go into indoctrinating young people into the "gay is good" cult of the Left.
Nurseries must play their part in challenging homophobia from an early age amongst pupils, the National Union of Teachers (NUT) has warned.The NUT reacted to The Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) consultation from the Department for Education and Skills on policies regarding pre-school children up to 5 years old.
The report said: “By five years old many children have already internalised gender-role expectations, through the process of socialisation. Early years education, amongst other cultural and social factors, plays an important role in young children’s socialisation.
“Research shows that children as young as five begin to display disapproval of peers’ role-inconsistent behaviours and are self-critical when judging how they would feel if they were playing with role-inconsistent toys. Young children monitor their behaviour against gender stereotypes, feeling pride on performing gender role-consistent behaviour.
“In the case of homophobia, the use of the word ‘gay’ is prevalent in primary schools and young boys who are perceived to not conform to masculine stereotypes are at risk of bullying, isolation and social exclusion.
“It is too late to wait until primary school to challenge prejudice and intolerant abusive language. The EYFS curriculum needs to alert early years teachers to their responsibilities to challenge gender stereotypes and to challenge language that is negative or prejudiced.”
The document also called for pre school children to be made aware of different family structures such as civil partnerships, gay parents or grandparents, adoptive parents and guardians, “Many gay parents do not ‘come out’ to their nursery schools because they fear their children will be bullied as a result of the sexual orientation of their parents. Now that civil partnerships are legal, nursery settings need to use the curriculum to educate children about all types of family and to promote respect and understanding.
"Increasingly there are resources such as reading books available for nursery settings which give positive examples of diversity.”
Last week gay charity Stonewall produced a DVD entitled Spell It Out to be distributed to teachers in all LondonÂ’s secondary schools, as part of its campaign to combat homophobic bullying.
The Guardian recently reported that Stonewall had won a government tender to produce guidance on tackling homophobic bullying in all schools.
So start spoon-feeding the gay agenda to kids in pre-school -- sexualizing children at an even younger age. And ignore, of course, that there are certain norms of family structure and gender roles in society -- norms that I will gladly concede are not rigid, but to which the bulk of people in Western society conform.
What next? Subliminal pro-homosexual messages in the neo-natal nursery at the hospital?
In short, I think that NUT is nuts.
Posted by: Greg at
12:25 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 494 words, total size 3 kb.
Israeli children write on munitions which are intended to kill terrorists.
Muslim children strap on munitions which are intended to kill civilians.
Which one outrages you? Which one should?
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT: Conservative Cat, Mark My Words, Bullwinkle Blog
Posted by: Greg at
08:55 AM
| Comments (24)
| Add Comment
Post contains 80 words, total size 1 kb.
TEAMS of Iranian suicide bombers were heading for LebanonÂ’s war zone last night in a terrifying bid to spark meltdown in the Middle East.Twenty-seven martyrdom-seekers have been sent to Syria on their way to front line positions.
The mad fanatics, belonging to the Iranian Martyrs of Islam World Movement, have been training for months to wreak maximum havoc on military and soft civilian targets. Their aim is to spark terror which will detonate all-out war and suck Western nations into a final bloody showdown.
A spokesman for the martyrs group said yesterday: “Two teams of 18 and nine have gone to Syria separately.
“They have been deployed on a voluntary basis in order to get to the areas of conflict in any way they can.”
The man, named only as Mohammadi, claimed the 27 were picked from 55,000 who registered in Iran. They were briefed and have completed the “relevant courses” so that they could perform both military services and helping the wounded.
Mohammadi added: “If Israel would decide to occupy Lebanon again, they will carry out martyrdom-seeking operations.”
The would-be bombers are also trained to recruit local volunteers and create new cells of suicide attackers.
But of course, the whole situation is Israel's fault -- that is what the "international community" tells us. After all, who are they to demand that terrorist incursions and missle attacks into their territory stop?
Posted by: Greg at
08:32 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 252 words, total size 2 kb.
Perhaps the most important aspect of the visit to the region has been this statement of the US position onthe current conflict between Israel and Hezbollah terrorists who control much of Lebanon.
According to a Lebanese political source quoted by Reuters news agency, Rice told Berri, the speaker of the Lebanese parliament and a strong ally of Syria, that the situation on the Israeli-Lebanese border "cannot return to what it was before July 12." She referred to the date on which fighters of the radical Shiite Hezbollah organization, which is supported by Syria and Iran, crossed into Israel, killed three Israeli soldiers and abducted two others, triggering the current crisis.The Lebanese source, describing the meeting's tone as "very negative," said Rice told Berri there would be no cease-fire before Hezbollah freed the soldiers unconditionally and pulled its forces back at least 12 miles from the border, Reuters reported.
In other words, tehre can be no peace in the region so long as the terrorists continue to be in a position to attack Israel at will, hiding beyon international borders for safety. Any plan for peace must therefore eliminate the threat to the security of Israel, which has repeatedly taken steps in recent years to appease the Palestinians with little received in return except more attacks and casualties. An additional goal is enabling Lebanon, which until last year was dominated by Syria, to gain effective control of its own territory from the hezbollah terrorists.
The visit, which Rice said was requested personally by President Bush, was designed in part to show support for Lebanon's government, the first in years to be led largely by anti-Syrian figures. The visit was also aimed at determining what Lebanon needs to support itself and possibly get control over its southern region, now used by Hezbollah to fire rockets into Israel."If they could control the country, we would not be in this situation. The status quo has never been stable," said a senior official accompanying Rice.
Ultimately, the issue is Hezbollah, Hamas, and other terrorist groups. Israel has shown that it can negotiate peace with its neighbors and that it is prepared to accept a Palestinian state. On the other hand, the terrorist groups which control the Palestinian authority and southern Lebanon -- not to mention the Syrians, who are among the sponsors of those groups -- are unwilling to settle for anything less than the destruction of Israel. Thus the problem can only be solved by eliminating (or at least neutralizing) those groups.
Posted by: Greg at
08:02 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 476 words, total size 3 kb.
Over the last few weeks, I've read a number of good books that I would like to offer up as suggestions to my readers.
This is NOT an ideological recommendation -- it is one based upon readability. Bennett has written a history of the US (up to the eve of WWI) that is not only strong on facts but also entertaining. While very much written from a traditional perspective, Bennett does not fail to point out the less-proud moments in our nation's history. He also sprinkles the book with tidbits and asides that make his subjects, so often presented as dry, wooden figures by academic historians, come alive. For example, while the correspondance between John Adams and his beloved Abigail is well known, I never imagined that the microfilm of their letters, laid end to end, would extend over five miles. Those who love history -- or who want to love history -- would do well to add this book to their collection.
I'll admit it -- when Anne McCaffrey decided to pass her much-loved Pern series on to her son, Todd, I was frightened. After all, Anne had developed Pern over the course of nearly four decades, beginning with the Draonriders Trilogy, expanding it with the Harper Hall Trilogy of juvenile novels (which take us into more mundane life on Pern) and then expanded with novels set in much earlier periods of Pern's history and some which complete the story begun in the initial novels. Todd has brought us into a different world -- one which looks to the common people of the planet -- in particular the outcast and marginalized of society. This novel looks at the miners of Pern -- and the Shunned, those expelled from the Holds for crimes great and petty. While this might not be the best of the Pern novels to begin one's acquaintance with Pern (you really need to read the Dragonriders Trilogy for that), this is a worthy place to continue the friendship.
If Horatio Hornblower and Jack Aubrey are among your literary heroes, I strongly encorage you to read of the exploits of Charles Edgemont of the Royal Navy, for he is another fighting captain of the Napoleonic Wars. A relucant hero, Edgemont earns his reputation and first command at a young age when he is the senior surviving officer aboard a stricken ship at the battle of St. Vincent. He rises to the challenge -- but finds his most pressing battle is for the heart of a Quaker girl, Penny Brown, whose faith presents an obstacle to their relationship. The battles are fierce, the romance touching, and the issues of faith handled with respect and dignity. By the way, Hornblower and Aubrey each mak a cameo appearance in the first two novels -- yeah, a bit of a gimmick, but a pleasant (though brief) surprise. By the way -- how captivating are these books? I read the first in two sittings, and the second in a single marathon sitting. I literally could not bring myself to put them down. I cannot wait for Jay Worrall to bring us the next installment of this charming series.
These are the first few novels of Charles Stross' "Merchant Princes" series. The series combines an old cliche (a foundling who is secretly royalty) and combines it with two of my favorite science fiction themes -- alternate histories and traveling between parallel universes. The series follows Miriam Beckstein, a technology reporter from Boston, and her discovery that she has the ability to travel between (at first) this world and a very different one. Lo and behold, this discovery leads to her being caught up in the political intrigue of her real family -- a noble family in a feudal world. But wait, there are twists and turns coming, as it turns out that her new-found family has a rather interesting business, and that her return to the fold disrupts the entire system of alliances that exists. Oh, by the way, there is a long-lost renegade branch of the family that appears on teh scene, leading to the discovery of a THIRD universe -- one which Miriam makes the most of. The third novel is definitely a bridge to the rest of the series, and so we will have to wait until next year's installment to see where this is all headed (Stross has already inked a deal to take the series through Book 6 -- one a year through 2009). The author, Charles Stross, has written a number of other novels that deal in different aspects of science fiction -- including at least one that is a must for fans of Lovecraft's Cthulu books. And to think I discovered this series by accident, when I noticed the paperback edition of The Hidden Family on the rack at Krogers! Good things are found in unexpected places.
Feel free to talk about any new discoveries in the comments below.
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT: Conservative Cat, Mark My Words, Bullwinkle Blog
Posted by: Greg at
06:45 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 874 words, total size 9 kb.
July 23, 2006
I'll still be posting, but probably not as frequently.
Posted by: Greg at
07:29 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 52 words, total size 1 kb.
July 22, 2006
'Nuff said.
Posted by: Greg at
09:49 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 26 words, total size 1 kb.
The corruption investigation of Rep. William J. Jefferson (D-La.) has taken many strange twists: an FBI sting that caught the lawmaker on videotape accepting a large payoff; a subsequent raid that turned up $90,000 of that cash in his apartment freezer; and a weekend FBI search of his congressional office that triggered a constitutional uproar.But one of the most puzzling and intriguing facets of the case is Jefferson's ties to Atiku Abubakar, the vice president of Nigeria. Abubakar, a wealthy businessman and one of the leading candidates in next year's race for president of Nigeria, divides his time between his homeland and Potomac, Md., where he and one of his four wives maintain a $2.2 million mansion.
Jefferson, who was a member of a House Ways and Means trade subcommittee, got to know Abubakar after the Nigerian was elected vice president in 1999. Later, Jefferson turned to Abubakar for help in winning a lucrative Nigerian telecommunications contract for a high-tech firm in Kentucky that was paying Jefferson bribes, according to an FBI affidavit. Jefferson told a business associate in a secretly taped conversation that Abubakar was "corrupt" and needed a hefty bribe and a cut of the profits in return for his help -- allegations Abubakar has strongly denied.
Abubakar's involvement in the case has created a buzz in Washington's diplomatic circles and generated intense political controversy and media attention in Nigeria -- a country that is trying to shed its long-standing reputation for corrupt government.
"I don't think it will be simply excused or trivialized," said J. Stephen Morrison, director of the Africa program for the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "I think his opponents will use it, certainly. Nigerian politics is hardball."
Nearly a year ago, the home in Potomac was searched by the FBI, which has indicated that Jefferson may have brived a foreign official.
For his part, Abubakar denies any involvement in Jefferson's corruption, claiming that Jefferson just used his name to further his own illegal schemes. Still, Abubakar rose from modest beginnings in a civil service known for its corruption -- and today is a multi-millionaire whose wealth came from sources which are difficult to determine. When one considers tht teh pair met shortly before the discovery of $90,000 in Jefferson's freezer, it is not unreasonable to connect the dots.
Intrestingly enough, though, it may be that $90,000 that clears the Nigerian Vice President.
Following the meeting (with Abubakar) on Sorrel Avenue, Jefferson told Mody that the vice president had demanded a cut of the profits (from Mody's iGate scheme). He said they also needed to give him a $500,000 payment "as a motivating factor," the affidavit said.On July 30, Mody gave Jefferson a $100,000 bribe to pass on to Abubakar, and shortly after, Jefferson assured her that it had been delivered.
On Aug. 3, FBI agents found $90,000 of the marked FBI bills in Jefferson's freezer at his Capitol Hill apartment. None of cash had gone to Abubakar, according to the FBI affidavit.
Edward Weidenfeld, the vice president's Washington lawyer, called Jefferson's comments implicating Abubakar "false, self-serving statements."
Judy Smith, a Jefferson spokeswoman, said: "It should be clear from the statement by the vice president's counsel that the vice president never accepted or agreed to accept any money from the congressman. The congressman . . . maintains that he is innocent of any wrongdoing."
It will be interesting to see where further investigation leads.
Posted by: Greg at
06:47 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 628 words, total size 4 kb.
Homeowners, real estate brokers and builders see the natural foods powerhouse not just as a grocery but also as an engine for development. In Pittsburgh's East Liberty neighborhood, a Whole Foods is credited with triggering a revival. In Sarasota, Fla., developers say they pre-sold all 95 apartments in a condominium tower because a Whole Foods opened on the first floor. And in Washington, many trace the revival of Logan Circle and the 14th Street corridor to the opening in 2000 of a Whole Foods on P Street NW.What makes the Columbia Heights quest pronounced -- and controversial -- is that a glistening Giant opened less than a year ago a cucumber's toss from where the Whole Foods would go. Giant's all right in a pinch, Cooper and others say, but it's no Whole Foods.
The hunger of some residents for the cachet of Whole Foods is stirring unease among working-class residents who worry they will be forced out by new affluence and among longtime retailers who are struggling with rising rents and sagging sales.
* * *Whole Foods has received about 500 e-mails from people in Columbia Heights. Some bear messages as simple as "We beg you!" Others contain sophisticated references to the company's stock price, corporate strategy and the neighborhood's demographics. Many of the writers said they admired the company's social conscience and employment practices.
Whole Foods gets similar requests every day, said Kate Lowery, spokeswoman for the 184-store chain, which was founded 27 years ago as a natural foods store in Austin and had $4.7 billion in sales last year. "We even get e-mails from people who say 'I'm thinking of moving to a certain city but before I leave, do you have any plans to move there?' " she said.
Listen to the Clear Lake area -- build it and we will come.
Posted by: Greg at
06:27 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 341 words, total size 2 kb.
The issues vary from state to state. But many Southern Baptist colleges and their state conventions have been battling over money, control of boards of trustees, whether the Bible must be interpreted literally, how evolution is taught, the propriety of some books for college courses and of some plays for campus performances and whether cultural and religious diversity should be encouraged.At the root of the conflicts is the question of how much the colleges should reflect the views of their denomination. They are part of the continuing battle among Southern Baptists for control of their churchÂ’s institutions.
More than 20 years ago, theological and cultural conservatives gained control over moderates in the Southern Baptist Convention, the denominationÂ’s broadest body, representing more than 16 million worshipers. Similar shifts then occurred in many, but not all, state Baptist conventions, which have considerable independence.
And therein lies the problem. When one is dealing with the department of theology, it is really easy to demand conformity. But when one starts strying outside of that field, the issues become more murky. Academic freedom is important, but so is the question of maintaining the focus on the religious mission of the school. After all, if one wishes to produce not just scholars, but scholars with a Christ-centered world-view, does it not make sense to draw lines that foster that world-view?
Ultimately, such conflicts lead to either a disaffiliation between the school and the religious institution, or to a "hostile takeover" of the board of trustees by the institution. In the case of Catholic colleges and universities, many retain an affiliation with a religious order, but are effectively insulated from control by local bishops or the Vatican by a structure which guarantees such independence. Unfortunately, this means that many such schools are Catholic in name but not in practice. I suspect that, as this conflict continues among the Baptists, that we will see something similar happen.
Posted by: Greg at
06:13 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 393 words, total size 3 kb.
July 21, 2006
A CHURCH school has barred children from singing John Lennon's Imagine - because the lyrics are "anti-religious".Primary pupils were rehearsing the 1971 peace anthem, which asks people to imagine a world without religion, when head Geoff Williams vetoed the song following a teacher's complaint.
Mr Williams, who was backed by his governors, said: "We believe God is the foundation of all we do. It's not an appropriate song for our concert."
Advertisement
Falk AdSolutionYesterday parents of disappointed children said the ban was "ridiculous". They were backed by secular organisations which accused the school of "fun-hating orthodoxy".
Pupils at St Leonard's C of E School, in Exeter, Devon, rehearsed Imagine for their annual concert, which is themed Songs for a Green Earth.
The song's lyrics include: "Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try/ No hell below us, above us only sky...no thing to kill and die for and no religion too." It was replaced by a traditional ditty, The Building Song.
And frankly, I think it is the correct choice. Let me explain by analogy.
When I was in teh seminary, one of my professors dealt with liturgical music. He argued that while some secular music might be approrpiate during a service, some sends the wrong message and should not be permitted. He mentioned th old 1970s hit, "The First Time (Ever I Saw Your Face)" as an example of th latter. Couples want to use it at their weddings, because of the beautiful melody and the passionate lyrics of teh first verse. Unfortunately, the second verse is all about "Tthe first time ever I laid with you". Stop the presses! A song about the glorious feeling that accompanied the couple's first pre-marital intercourse doesn't belong in a church service. Don't do it.
And that leads us to "Imagine". I love the song. If I had an i-Pod, it would be one of the songs on it. But in a religious setting, it just does not belong, because it includes an explicit rejection of religion and religious faith. And after all, that is what sets religious education apart from non-religious education.
Posted by: Greg at
03:08 PM
| Comments (113)
| Add Comment
Post contains 392 words, total size 3 kb.
There was a time when it would have been suicidal to threaten, much less attack, a nation with much stronger military power because one of the dangers to the attacker would be the prospect of being annihilated."World opinion," the U.N. and "peace movements" have eliminated that deterrent. An aggressor today knows that if his aggression fails, he will still be protected from the full retaliatory power and fury of those he attacked because there will be hand-wringers demanding a cease fire, negotiations and concessions.
That has been a formula for never-ending attacks on Israel in the Middle East.
It is as I pointed out in a comment last night on another thread.
A more realistic end scenario is that it ends with Israel again caving into the international community's call to play nice -- and with the real aggressors (the so-called Palestinians) again being painted as the victims of injustice. That means security for another few years -- until the next time Israel caves into the latest demands of the international community to make concessions. That will set off a new round of the IDF engaging in vermin control -- and Israel being condemned for it.
It is unfortunate that Israel wil not be allowed to crush her foes compleely, for then we might see peace born out of the ashes of the defeat of Hamas and Hezbollah. Instead, these two groups will be permitted to lick their wounds and build up for the next round. Taht is teh pattern we have seen in the past, and which we will see in the future.
Such "peace movements" lead to a moral people giving up the will to "fight for King and Country" (to use the term from the infamous Oxford Union debate). The result is that those who have fewer scruples about engaging in a true war of aggression are encouraged and strengthened.
The most catastrophic result of "peace" movements was World War II. While Hitler was arming Germany to the teeth, "peace" movements in Britain were advocating that their own country disarm "as an example to others."British Labor Party Members of Parliament voted consistently against military spending and British college students publicly pledged never to fight for their country. If "peace" movements brought peace, there would never have been World War II.
Not only did that war lead to tens of millions of deaths, it came dangerously close to a crushing victory for the Nazis in Europe and the Japanese empire in Asia. And we now know that the United States was on Hitler's timetable after that.
For the first two years of that war, the Western democracies lost virtually every battle, all over the world, because pre-war "peace" movements had left them with inadequate military equipment and much of it obsolete. The Nazis and the Japanese knew that. That is why they launched the war.
"Peace" movements don't bring peace but war.
While usually springing from the most noble of sentiments, such pacifism is generally the basis of false peace and real war.
Posted by: Greg at
05:37 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 540 words, total size 3 kb.
The political action committee used as a vehicle to power in Congress by Representative Tom DeLay has agreed to pay $115,000 in fines for violations of federal campaign rules and will close its doors permanently, the Federal Election Commission said Thursday.According to an agreement with the commission, Mr. DeLayÂ’s committee, Americans for a Republican Majority, agreed to the fines to settle accusations that it had failed to report more than $322,000 in debts and other obligations to its vendors and had misrepresented more than $240,000 in other financial activity in 2001 and 2002.
The pact did not provide a timetable for the shutdown of the committee, which for years was Mr. DeLayÂ’s chief fund-raising arm, allowing him to make millions of dollars in contributions to political allies who then supported his rise in the Republican leadership in Congress.
An audit last year disclosed problems -- though there appeared to be no wrong-doing on DeLay's part. The FEC has since changed teh rules that were violated on the grounds that they were confusing and at times contradictory -- with artificial distinctions between hard money and soft money and how each could be spent tripping up many groups. Campaign finance law experts also indicate that the amount of the fine was not unusual, which would further indicate taht any violations were not knowingly or willfully committed.
Posted by: Greg at
05:22 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 276 words, total size 2 kb.
Researchers in Germany said Thursday that they planned to collaborate with an American company in an effort to reconstruct the genome of Neanderthals, the archaic human species that occupied Europe from 300,000 years ago to 30,000 years ago until being displaced by modern humans.Long a forlorn hope, the sequencing, or decoding, of Neanderthal DNA suddenly seems possible because of a combination of analytic work on ancient DNA by Svante Paabo, of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, and a new method of DNA sequencing developed by a Connecticut company, 454 Life Sciences.
The initial genome to be decoded comes from 45,000-year-old Neanderthal bones found in Croatia, though bones from other sites may be analyzed later. Because the genome must be kept in constant repair and starts to break up immediately after the death of the cell, the material surviving in Neanderthal bones exists in tiny fragments 100 or so DNA units in length. As it happens, this is just the length that works best with the 454 machine, which is also able to decode vast amounts of DNA at low cost.
Recovery of the Neanderthal genome, in whole or in part, would be invaluable for reconstructing many events in human prehistory and evolution. It would help address such questions as whether Neanderthals and humans interbred, whether the archaic humans had an articulate form of language, how the Neanderthal brain was constructed, if they had light or dark skin, and the total size of the Neanderthal population.
And they only have to sequence 3 billion bits of Neanderthal DNA to do it, while separating out the DNA of human handlers of the bones and the various bacteria that have entered teh bones over the course of tens of thousands of years.
But they do have some areas with which to start.
The researchers’ hope is to recover the entire sequence of the Neanderthal genome, but that will depend on whether they can recover enough DNA. From sampling so far, no particular gaps in the sequence are apparent. “We are hitting all the chromosomes and getting good coverage,” Dr. Egholm said. If no single specimen yields a full sequence, the genome might be recovered by combining DNA from several individuals.One of the most important results that researchers are hoping for is to discover, from a three-way comparison of chimp, human and Neanderthal DNA, which genes have made humans human. The chimp and human genomes differ at just 1 percent of the sites on their DNA. At this 1 percent, Neanderthals resemble humans at 96 percent of the sites, to judge from the preliminary work, and chimps at 4 percent. Analysis of these DNA sites, at which humans differ from the two other species, will help understand the evolution of specifically human traits “and perhaps even aspects of cognitive function,” Dr. Paabo said.
The degree of resemblance between humans and Neanderthals is fiercely debated by archaeologists, and even issues like whether Neanderthals had language have not been resolved. Dr. Paabo believes that genetic analysis is the best hope of doing so. He has paid particular attention to a gene known as FOXP2, which from its mutated forms in people seems to be involved in several advanced aspects of language.
A longstanding dispute among archaeologists is whether the modern humans who first entered Europe 45,000 years ago, ultimately from Africa, interbred with the Neanderthals or forced them into extinction. Interbreeding could have been genetically advantageous to the incoming humans, says Bruce Lahn, a geneticist at the University of Chicago, because the Neanderthals were well adapted to the cold European climate — the last ice age had another 35,000 years to run — and to local diseases.
And that plays out in textbooks. My old book indicated tehre was no relationship, my new one that there was not, and much current research comes down in the middle. The recovery of the full genome might well lay that question to rest, along with the question of interbreeding.
I won't telll you what lies at the end of the article -- but it raises all sorts of moral/ethical questions that are fascinating to think about.
Posted by: Greg at
05:14 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 757 words, total size 5 kb.
July 20, 2006
Still, I can't help but feel a chill as I read about six deaths that appear to be connected. Add to that the sexual assaults, and I fear for the safety of women I know who live in that part of town.
Houston police said this afternoon they are looking into whether a serial killer is responsible for the deaths of six women and the sexual assaults of six others in north Houston this year."We clearly believe that these cases are related," said Capt. Dale Brown of the Houston Police Department's homicide division.
"We are very concerned about this series of deaths that have occurred, and we have assigned a lot of resources to this investigation," added Police Chief Harold Hurtt.
The slayings occurred primarily in and around the Acres Homes area. Police said some of the victims had a history of being involved in prostitution.
A woman found stabbed to death behind a northwest Houston bar Wednesday may be the latest victim.
I hope HPD solves this case quickly, before others are violated or killed.
Posted by: Greg at
02:40 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 249 words, total size 1 kb.
The Senate today extended the Voting Rights Act of 1965 for 25 more years as Republicans sought to earn goodwill from minority voters in a congressional election year.The vote was 98-0.
The temporary provisions of the landmark civil rights bill -- enacted to stop systematic disenfranchisement of black voters, particularly in the South -- did not expire until next year.
But with their control of Congress at stake, Republican leaders seemed intent on extending the legislation before the August recess.
Sorry, I just find this cynical.
I've explained my reasoning before.
Fine, I can accept some sort of renewal of these provisions of the VRA. But none of these provisions is about turning the clock back four decades. Indeed, one of the defeated amendments (opposed by Democrats as a killer amendment) would have targetted voting issues as they exist TODAY, not back when I was still an infant.
A second amendment, offered by Rep. Charles Whitlow Norwood Jr. (R-Ga.), would have made every district potentially subject to the pre-clearance requirement, by including any jurisdiction where voter turnout fell below 50 percent in a presidential election. It would have eased the pre-clearance requirement for jurisdictions with voter turnout above 50 percent in three consecutive presidential elections, presuming that no court had found that discriminatory voting practices were employed. The measure failed 318 to 96.Wow -- considering voter turnout in elections taking place TODAY was labelled as being against civil right. Applying the law to what happened in 2004 and what will happen in 2008 is not as important as correcting what happened in the election when Lyndon Johnson beat Barry Goldwater. Good grief -- would you accept the advice of a doctor who shunned MRIs and CAT scans and stuck strictly to old-fashioned x-rays because that was what he learned in medical school back in the 1960s? Of course not! Then why engage in the illogically absurd practice of using antiquated measures to determine racial discrimination -- and demand that they continue to be used for another quarter century?
One would think that John Kerry would have supported something like this, given his words on the Senate floor.
"Too many Americans in too many parts of our country still face serious obstacles when they are trying to vote here," said Kerry, who opposed Bush in the 2004 presidential election. " . . .No one should pretend that reauthorizing the Voting Rights Act solves the problem of being able to vote in our own country. It doesn't. And in recent elections, we've seen too many times how outcomes change when votes that have been cast aren't counted."
While I think the last part of that statement is a line of crap, he is dead on in noting that there are obstacles to voting today. But renenwing provisions and sanctions based on elections going back up to four decades isn't the answer -- looking at current elections is.
But the VRA is such a sacred cow that even the slightest tweak to make it relevant is seen as a desecration and a return to the days of the (all Democrat) KKK lynching "uppity niggers" for trying to vote.
Too bad the Senate lacked the courage to do what was needed.
Posted by: Greg at
02:33 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 589 words, total size 4 kb.
One of Saudi Arabia's leading Wahhabi sheiks, Abdullah bin Jabreen has issued a strongly worded religious edict, or fatwa, declaring it unlawful to support, join or pray for Hezbollah, the Shiite militias lobbing missiles into northern Israel.The day after Hezbollah abducted two Israeli soldiers on July 12, Sheik Hamid al-Ali issued an informal statement titled "The Sharia position on what is going on." In it, the Kuwaiti based cleric condemned the imperial ambitions of Iran regarding Hezbollah's cross border raid.
The surprising move demonstrates that Sunni Muslim fundamentalists in the Middle East are deeply divided over whether Moslems should support Hezbollah, Iran's Shiite proxies in the war raging in Lebanon.
Unfortunately, this position is not held unanimously.
While the Gulf's ascetic Wahhabi sects, who are closer to the ethnic fighting between Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq, have opposed Hezbollah in its stand against Israel's forces, other Sunni fundamentalist groups, such as the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, have pledged their solidarity. On Friday, the brothers will host a rally in support of Hezbollah at Cairo's most influential mosque, Al-Azhar.
So while some Muslim nations and religious leaders have condemned Hezbollah, there is still a sizeable group that supports the terrorists.
Posted by: Greg at
01:14 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 227 words, total size 2 kb.
The pharaohs of ancient Egypt owed their existence to prehistoric climate change in the Eastern Sahara, according to an exhaustive study of archaeological data that bolsters this theory.Starting at about 8500 B.C., researchers say, broad swaths of what are now Egypt, Chad, Libya, and Sudan experienced a "sudden onset of humid conditions."
For centuries the region supported savannahs full of wildlife, lush acacia forests, and areas so swampy they were uninhabitable.
During this time the prehistoric peoples of the Eastern Sahara followed the rains to keep pace with the most hospitable ecosystems.
But around 5300 B.C. this climate-driven environmental abundance started to decline, and most humans began leaving the increasingly arid region.
"Around 5,500 to 6,000 years ago the Egyptian Sahara became so dry that nobody could survive there," said Stefan Kröpelin, a geoarchaeologist at the University of Cologne in Germany and study co-author.
Without rain, rivers, or the ephemeral desert streams known as waddis, vegetation became sparse, and people had to leave the desert or die, Kröpelin says.
Members of this skilled human population settled near the Nile River, giving rise to the first pharaonic cultures in Egypt
This does help to explain the Neolithic Revolution that occurred around this time, as people began the transition to an agricultural society. The concentration of human beings in one region resulted in th formation of cities, specialization of labor -- and civilization.
Posted by: Greg at
11:57 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 255 words, total size 2 kb.
HIS reputation is one of a hawkish warmonger with a crusty demeanour and a heart of steel. But Donald Rumsfeld, it seems, has a little-known softer side.Five decades after one of his US Navy friends was shot down over China during a Cold War spy mission, the US Defence Secretary is still waging a quiet campaign to win closure for the airman's widow. In the finest military tradition, he has vowed that Lieutenant James B Deane will not be left behind.
Leaving his normally hard-line views on communist China to one side, he has persuaded General Guo Boxiong, vice-chairman of China's Central Military Commission, to hand over once-secret papers divulging information previously unknown to the US regarding the fate of the young pilot.
Gen Boxiong ranks second only to China's president, Chairman Hu Jintao.
It was unclear yesterday exactly how much light the documents - which were handed over during a meeting at the Pentagon on Tuesday - shed on what happened to Lt Deane or whether he may even still be alive.
Lt. Deane was listed as presumed dead in 1057 -- only four bodies were recovered of the 16 crewmen who were aboart the plane. One declassified report indicates there may have been two prisoners -- including one who fit Deane's description.
Rumsfeld has been involved in the effort to find out more about his old friend since 1992, when he was in the business sector. His efforts have been quiet -- but intense.
"After her husband's shoot-down, my mother and Mr Rumsfeld stayed in touch, mostly through Christmas cards. When my mother began her search in 1992, Mr Rumsfeld was a business executive in Chicago. She addressed her letters to him as Rummy. He wrote back to Bo Bo, her college nickname," she explained.He obtained letters to the Chinese government from former US president Gerald Ford, whom he served as a defence secretary, and former secretary of state Henry Kissinger, which called on Beijing to assist in unearthing the truth. His quest was resurrected after he joined the Bush administration as Defence Secretary.
May this act of loyalty and friendship be rewarded with some concrete answers about the fate of this American fighting man who gave his life for his country during the Cold War.
Posted by: Greg at
11:41 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 450 words, total size 3 kb.
Prosecutors on Wednesday stood by their contention that the three teens who allegedly beat and robbed a 14-year-old Beverly boy won't be charged with a hate crime -- even though one of the trio told police they picked the boy because he was "a goofy-looking white boy."They instead charged the three black teens with aggravated battery and robbery, both felonies. Bond was set Wednesday at $300,000 for Micha Eatman, 17, and two 16-year-olds were in juvenile detention.
Meanwhile the condition of the victim, Ryan Rusch, was upgraded from critical to serious.
Chicago Police said after the incident Sunday they were investigating it as a robbery. But Tuesday, in light of the suspect's statement in court, the case was assigned to the department's civil rights section.
Now tell me -- what would happen anywhere in this country if three white kids beat a black kid into a coma and one of them made a public statement that they picked the victim because he was a "goofy-looking black kid"? Hate-crime charges would be filed in an instance, and every self-aggrandizing member of th e"civil rights leadership" would be on the scene, demanding government action and a cut for their organization.
Now as I've said often enough in the past, I don't believe in hate-crime laws. I don't think they can ever be applied in a neutral fashion. This case proves my point.
Posted by: Greg at
11:18 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 280 words, total size 2 kb.
July 19, 2006
It is immoral, it is un-Christian, it is un-American...
Israel is not a Christian nation, Pat. Nor is it America, where one can safely sit and play Sunday evening quarterback, questioning policy decisions without random missle and terrorist attacks on a daily basis. As a result, virtually any action taken against terrorists by Israel is undeniably moral.
But then again, Pat Buchanan would probably have found something to criticize when the Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto rose up against their Nazi captors.
UPDATE: I didn't realize that the moronic moral midget had turned around and made a column out of the inane comment -- and complain about the casualties that immoral Allied forces inflicted upon the innocent German people at the same time. Sieg heil, Herr Buchanan -- you are this week's winner of the Ezra Pound Award for Political Commentary.
Posted by: Greg at
01:53 PM
| Comments (21)
| Add Comment
Post contains 172 words, total size 1 kb.
A federal judge said Wednesday that investigators could examine documents seized in a search of Rep. William Jefferson's office, denying a request to delay the bribery probe while the Louisiana Democrat appeals the judge's earlier ruling that the search was legal.Chief U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan said granting the delay "would harm the public's interest in a prompt and final outcome of the government's investigation of serious crimes involving a sitting United States congressman running for re-election in November."
Last week, Hogan rejected arguments by Jefferson and House leaders in both parties that the May 20-21 search of Jefferson's congressional office violated the Constitution's protections against intimidation of elected officials.
For 16 months, investigators have been looking into whether the congressman promoted the sale of telecommunications equipment and services in exchange for stock and cash.
Unfortunately, certain executive branch officials are blocking the probe for teh time being.
At issue is whether a review of the seized documents can begin by an
FBI "filter team" unconnected to the prosecution team looking into bribery allegations. Jefferson contends no one in the executive branch of government should examine the documents until the question of returning the material to Jefferson is resolved on appeal.
Get otu of the way, Alberto -- let the G-Men get teh goods on this crook.
Posted by: Greg at
10:05 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 257 words, total size 2 kb.
Talk about misleading terms -- there is no such thing as a "ghetto tax". There is, however, a real issue of higher costs to life in poverty, or in certain areas of a city, county, state, or country.
But let's look at the NY Times scare story.
Drivers from low-income neighborhoods of New York, Hartford and Baltimore, insuring identical cars and with the same driving records as those from middle-class neighborhoods, paid $400 more on average for a yearÂ’s insurance.
Gee -- my insurance would be $200 less a year if I lived on the other side of the 100-yard wide body of water separating Harris County and Galveston County -- because Harris County has a higher rate of auto claims than Galveston County.
The poor are also the main customers for appliances and furniture at “rent to own” stores, where payments are stretched out at very high interest rates; in Wisconsin, a $200 television can end up costing $700.
Because of the choice to buy new rather than used items -- and the resulting cost associated with going to the rent-to-own stores. That is simply bad economic decision-making.
But I will agree, in part, with the proposals made by the Brookings Institution -- though not with the alarmist cries of these liberals about the unfairness of it all.
Part of the problem, the study found, is a discrepancy between the poor and the middle class in consumer skills and mobility: people who comparison-shop, especially on the Internet, tend to pay hundreds less for the identical car than those who walk onto a city lot and buy.But the disparities can be reduced, the report said, not only by consumer education but also by some combination of incentives to lure banks and stores into poor neighborhoods and tighter regulation on things like the fees of storefront lenders.
And those considerations are real. When I lived in St. Louis 20 years ago, I watched one neighborhood blossom after it got a major supermarket plunked down in the middle of it. Rather than shopping at the corner gas station or the little mom & pop store on the corner, the people in the neighborhood tended to shop at the bigger store. They also got jobs in the enighborhood. The extra cash began tob e saved, banks came into the area, and you saw growth.
But the notion of a "ghetto tax", with its demeaning implications and hints of racism in policy choices, is wrong. What you are dealing with is the natural working of the capitalist system.
Posted by: Greg at
09:44 AM
| Comments (15)
| Add Comment
Post contains 446 words, total size 3 kb.
July 18, 2006
HereÂ’s a neat idea for dealing with Osama and every other terrorist on the planet. They are hostis humani generis -- the enemies of all mankind.
TO UNDERSTAND THE POTENTIAL OF DEFINING TERRORISM as a species of piracy, consider the words of the 16th-century jurist Alberico Gentili's De jure belli: "Pirates are common enemies, and they are attacked with impunity by all, because they are without the pale of the law. They are scorners of the law of nations; hence they find no protection in that law." Gentili, and many people who came after him, recognized piracy as a threat, not merely to the state but to the idea of statehood itself. All states were equally obligated to stamp out this menace, whether or not they had been a victim of piracy. This was codified explicitly in the 1856 Declaration of Paris, and it has been reiterated as a guiding principle of piracy law ever since. Ironically, it is the very effectiveness of this criminalization that has marginalized piracy and made it seem an arcane and almost romantic offense. Pirates no longer terrorize the seas because a concerted effort among the European states in the 19th century almost eradicated them. It is just such a concerted effort that all states must now undertake against terrorists, until the crime of terrorism becomes as remote and obsolete as piracy.
What would be the impact of classifying terrorism along with piracy?
If the war on terror becomes akin to war against the pirates, however, the situation would change. First, the crime of terrorism would be defined and proscribed internationally, and terrorists would be properly understood as enemies of all states. This legal status carries significant advantages, chief among them the possibility of universal jurisdiction. Terrorists, as hostis humani generis, could be captured wherever they were found, by anyone who found them. Pirates are currently the only form of criminals subject to this special jurisdiction.Second, this definition would deter states from harboring terrorists on the grounds that they are "freedom fighters" by providing an objective distinction in law between legitimate insurgency and outright terrorism. This same objective definition could, conversely, also deter states from cracking down on political dissidents as "terrorists," as both Russia and China have done against their dissidents.
Recall the U.N. definition of piracy as acts of "depredation [committed] for private ends." Just as international piracy is viewed as transcending domestic criminal law, so too must the crime of international terrorism be defined as distinct from domestic homicide or, alternately, revolutionary activities. If a group directs its attacks on military or civilian targets within its own state, it may still fall within domestic criminal law. Yet once it directs those attacks on property or civilians belonging to another state, it exceeds both domestic law and the traditional right of self-determination, and becomes akin to a pirate band.
Third, and perhaps most important, nations that now balk at assisting the United States in the war on terror might have fewer reservations if terrorism were defined as an international crime that could be prosecuted before the International Criminal Court.
I encourage you to read the article by Douglas R. Burgess Jr., “The Dread Pirate Bin Laden”. It may come out of the Legal Affairs, but it is incredibly approachable.
Posted by: Greg at
04:40 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 579 words, total size 4 kb.
ur foreign policy
The IDF has found that Hizbullah is preventing civilians from leaving villages in southern Lebanon. Roadblocks have been set up outside some of the villages to prevent residents from leaving, while in other villages Hizbullah is preventing UN representatives from entering, who are trying to help residents leave. In two villages, exchanges of fire between residents and Hizbullah have broken out.
But Israel is, of course, the bad guy -- the French, Russians, and Iranians tell us so.
Posted by: Greg at
03:56 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 93 words, total size 1 kb.
This conflict is not about political or social divisions. It’s about authority—specifically, whether or not Christians are willing to acknowledge that the Bible is our authority.Tony Campolo certainly recognized this. Though Tony and I disagree on lots of things, I really like Tony. He’s honest, and he loves the Bible. He tried to explain at this conference the necessity of following Scripture. But one participant retorted, “I thought this was a spiritual progressives’ conference. I don’t want to play the game of ‘the Bible says this or that,’ or that we get validation from something other than ourselves.â€
And therein lies the problem. Rather than talk about God and the spiritual imperatives of his divinely revealed word, the quoted participant effectively stated (in the words of Toby Keith) “I want to talk about ME.†Dare I suggest that such a theological stance is not religious faith, but is instead spiritual narcissism.
Posted by: Greg at
02:56 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 208 words, total size 1 kb.
This conflict is not about political or social divisions. It’s about authority—specifically, whether or not Christians are willing to acknowledge that the Bible is our authority.Tony Campolo certainly recognized this. Though Tony and I disagree on lots of things, I really like Tony. He’s honest, and he loves the Bible. He tried to explain at this conference the necessity of following Scripture. But one participant retorted, “I thought this was a spiritual progressives’ conference. I don’t want to play the game of ‘the Bible says this or that,’ or that we get validation from something other than ourselves.”
And therein lies the problem. Rather than talk about God and the spiritual imperatives of his divinely revealed word, the quoted participant effectively stated (in the words of Toby Keith) “I want to talk about ME.” Dare I suggest that such a theological stance is not religious faith, but is instead spiritual narcissism.
Posted by: Greg at
02:56 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 214 words, total size 1 kb.
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted unanimously Tuesday to make the city the nation's first to provide all residents with health care, approving a plan that would give adults access to medical services regardless of their immigration or employment status.Financed by local government, mandatory contributions from employers and income-adjusted premiums, the universal care plan would cover the cost of everything from checkups, prescription drugs and X-rays to ambulance rides, blood tests and operations.
Let’s clarify this for you. The new program will be paid for by “local government” (read that “current tax dollars”), “mandatory contributions from employers” (read that “a new tax on employers”) and “income adjusted premiums” (read that “a new income tax on workers”).
Why not come right out and call it what it is -- tax-funded health care?
Posted by: Greg at
02:55 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 158 words, total size 1 kb.
Iran's parliament speaker warned Tuesday that no part of Israel is safe during Hizbullah's battle with Lebanon - a statement made despite Iran's claim that it is not aiding the guerrillas in their fight.Speaking to thousands of anti-Israel demonstrators in Palestine Square, Speaker Gholam Ali Haddad Adel told Israelis: "The towns you have built in northern Palestine (Israel) are within the range of the brave Lebanese children. No part of Israel will be safe."
Haddad Adel is not among the most influential officials in Iran. Nevertheless, his comments call into question the Teheran government's official position that it is not involved in the conflict between Israel and Hizbullah in Lebanon.
After all, how would he know if there was not a connection?
Posted by: Greg at
02:53 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 143 words, total size 1 kb.
In WW II, the total German dead were 10.82% of the population, and the much lower Japanese rate was 3.61%. But the UK lost 0.94% and the USA 0.32%. Were the Allied defenders of freedom “dis-proportionate”?What moral or military or historical logic suggests to Chirac and Putin that Israel is “disproportionate”? Since when is the aggressor entitled to suffer only the same losses as the defender ? Did De Gaulle or Stalin make that complaint in, or after, WW II ?
A Just War is not for revenge or reprisal, but to eliminate a deadly threat. The Fanatical Jihadi Fringe is such a threat, and for other Arabs and Muslims as well. The “proportionate” casualties they take are whatever it takes to conquer them thoroughly, and remove their aggressive capacity for good.
Our hopes and prayers are with the “Armed Democrats” of the IDF, on land, sea and air, on whose courage, determination, and skills not only the people of Israel depend, but all those who are, or who seek to be, truly free, including the majority in Lebanon.
Yours etc,
Tom Carew
Israel has a right to exist, safe from attack by barbarians beyond its borders. God and the international community (the UN) have both confirmed Israel's title to the land between the Jordan and the Mediterranean.
Let the smiting continue.
Posted by: Greg at
02:51 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 263 words, total size 2 kb.
I mean, consider this bit of finely crafted moral reasoning.
There is no point in condemning Hezbollah. Zealots are not amenable to reason. And there's not much point, either, in condemning Hamas. It is a fetid, anti-Semitic outfit whose organizing principle is hatred of Israel. There is, though, a point in cautioning Israel to exercise restraint -- not for the sake of its enemies but for itself. Whatever happens, Israel must not use its military might to win back what it has already chosen to lose: the buffer zone in southern Lebanon and the Gaza Strip itself.
Yeah, you read that right -- don't condemn the aggressors, because they are aggressive. Blame the victim for fighting back!
And while Cohen concedes that the current conflict illustrates that those who opposed the Israeli pull-back from Gaza and south Lebanon -- which was supposed to help bring "peace in our time" -- were absolutely correct in their prediction that it would embolden israels enemy, you will not guss what Cohen's solution is.
All that the critics warned has come true. But worse than what is happening now would be a retaking of those territories. That would put Israel smack back to where it was, subjugating a restless, angry population and having the world look on as it committed the inevitable sins of an occupying power. The smart choice is to pull back to defensible -- but hardly impervious -- borders. That includes getting out of most of the West Bank -- and waiting (and hoping) that history will get distracted and move on to something else. This will take some time, and in the meantime terrorism and rocket attacks will continue.
Yeah, that's right -- SHOW MORE WEAKNESS BY GIVING UP MORE TERRITORY TO APPEASE THE UNAPPEASIBLE!
Anyone with so much as an ounce of moral decency would never make such a suggestion. But then again, Cohen's starting premise makes it clear that he is severely lacking in that department -- for he begins with the premise that "Israel itself is a mistake."
And no doubt Richard Cohen believes that his female family members and friends, after enjoying their rape, should offer their attacker a blow job as well -- because after all, it was a mistake for them to even take their vagina into that part of town.
For that is the posture he suggests for Israel -- despite the fact that there has been a continuous Jewish presence between the Mediterranean Sea and the River Jordan for at least 3000 years -- twice as long as there has been either an Arab or Muslim presence.
Perhaps it is time for the civilized world to quit telling the Jews to get off the Arab street, and instead act to ensure that the Arab are scoured from the Jewish street.
UPDATE: Over at American Thinker, James Lewis argues that Cohen should be fired for the position he takes in this morally reprehensible column.
MORE AT: Stop the ACLU, Hot Air, Iowa Voice, Kesher Talk, Atlas Shrugs, Shining City, Don Singleton, Expose the Left, Mover Mike.
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT: Conservative Cat, Blue Star Chronicles, Bullwinkle Blog, Third World County, Pursuing Holiness, Adam's Blog, Right Faith, Planck's Constant, Fredom Watch, Is It Just Me?
Posted by: Greg at
12:56 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 608 words, total size 5 kb.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton said yesterday that she supported “whatever steps are necessary” to defend Israel against Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and Syria in the military conflict in the Middle East.Addressing a crowd of several thousand in Midtown at an impassioned rally for Israel, she said America must show “solidarity and support” for Israel in the face of the “unwarranted, unprovoked” seizure of three Israeli soldiers by members of Hamas and Hezbollah, which she described as among “the new totalitarians of the 21st century.”
“We will stand with Israel because Israel is standing for American values as well as Israeli ones,” said Mrs. Clinton, who joined two dozen political and religious leaders on a stage a few blocks from the United Nations headquarters on the East Side.
(Would that the last sentence read "a few blocks from the former headquarters of the defunct United Nations.")
American values -- like a support for (small d) democratic values and freedom, as well as opposition to terrorism. American values not shared by those who are calling for Israel to stand down and (implicitly) wait to be destroyed by a hoard of seventh-century barbarians.
And she has more to say.
Bringing the threat home, she compared Israel’s military response, which has included heavy bombardment of Lebanon, to a theoretical response by the United States if it faced attacks from neighboring countries. “I want us here in New York to imagine, if extremist terrorists were launching rocket attacks across the Mexican or Canadian border, would we stand by or would we defend America against these attacks from extremists?” she said to roars of approval.
Damn straight, Senator. Keep this rhetoric up and I could almost develop a neutral attitude towards you and your husband.
I'm curious -- does this signal support for taking on the criminals flowing across our border daily, trafficking in human beings and narcotics? Does it signal a support for the American lawmen who face violence at the hands of the criminals?
Not, mind you, that the New York Times can let a news story make it into print without an editorial comment thrown in.
Mrs. Clinton and the other speakers focused almost exclusively on IsraelÂ’s right to act militarily and unilaterally, and the speeches were fiery and resolute, with little mention of civilians in Lebanon and Gaza who have been injured in the fighting.
What the editors of the Times don't realize is that if you support terrorists and harbor terrorists you risk dying with the terrorists -- and your blood is on your own hands. (Perhaps they shoudlc onsider that before tehy publish teh next national security secret on the front page.)
Well said, Madam Senator.
Posted by: Greg at
12:19 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 477 words, total size 3 kb.
As you can see, we are back.
I'll post shortly, after I get back from picking up groceries.
UPDATE: Well, we had a second outage, but are back again.
Posted by: Greg at
09:41 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.
July 17, 2006
And this Jew-hatred is implicit in the teachings of Islam. After all, the Islamic equivalent of the anti-Christ is held to be a Jew -- and the great apocalyptic battle in Islam is between Muslims and Jews.
Georges Vajda —in a seminal 1937 essay [1] (long before the establishment of the State of Israel)—provides an overall assessment of the portrayal of the Jews in the hadith collections (the putative words and deeds of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, as recorded by pious transmitters), complemented by Koranic verses, and observations from the earliest Muslim biographies [or “sira”] of Muhammad.VajdaÂ’s research demonstrates how Muslim eschatology emphasizes the JewsÂ’ supreme hostility to Islam. Jews are described as adherents of the Dajjāl—the Muslim equivalent of the Anti-Christ—and as per another tradition, the Dajjāl is in fact Jewish. At his appearance, other traditions state that the Dajjāl will be accompanied by 70,000 Jews from Isfahan wrapped in their robes, and armed with polished sabers, their heads covered with a sort of veil. When the Dajjāl is defeated, his Jewish companions will be slaughtered— everything will deliver them up except for the so-called gharkad tree. Thus, according to a canonical hadith (Sahih Muslim, Book 40, Number 6985), if a Jew seeks refuge under a tree or a stone, these objects will be able to speak to tell a Muslim: “There is a Jew behind me; come and kill him!”
As Vajda observes,
Not only are the Jews vanquished in the eschatological war, but they will serve as ransom for the Muslims in the fires of hell. The sins of certain Muslims will weigh on them like mountains, but on the day of resurrection, these sins will be lifted and laid upon the Jews.
And let's not forget that the name of Hezbollah comes straight from the Koran -- and is applied to those who kill Jews in the name of Allah.
Let us consider the relationship of these Koranic teachings to the two dominant terrorist groups among the Palestinians -- those Israel is fighting today -- Hamas and Hezbollah.
Hizbollah and Hamas have constructed core ideologies based upon this Islamic theology of Jew hatred, which one can glean readily from their foundational documents, and subsequent pronouncements, made ad nauseum. Hamas further demonstrates openly its adherence to a central motif of Jew-hatred in Muslim eschatology—Article 7 of the Hamas Charter concludes with a verbatim reiteration of the apocalyptic hadith alluded to earlier:
“The Last Hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: `Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him’; but the tree Gharkad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.” (Sahih Muslim, Book 40, Number 6985).Both jihadist terror organizations believe they can now take advantage of their political gains in Lebanon (Hizbollah), and the Palestinian controlled areas of Gaza and the West Bank (Hamas), and succeed in their goal to destroy Israel—motivated by a primordial hatred of Jews, sanctioned in Muslim theology and eschatology.
Hizbollah’s name, “The Party of Allah” derives from Koran 5:56:
“And whoever takes Allah and His messenger and those who believe for a guardian, then surely the party of Allah are they that shall be triumphant.”In a public statement issued February 15, 1986, Hizbollah conceived of itself as a “nation” linked to Muslims worldwide by “…a strong ideological and political bond, namely Islam.” Expressed in the political language of the Koran, Hizbollah’s ideology encompasses, triumphally (as per the slogan adorning the party emblem, “The Party of Allah is Sure to Triumph”) at least three major objectives: transforming Lebanon into a Shari’a state; destroying Israel; establishing regional, followed by international Islamic hegemony, i.e., bringing the region, then the world under Shari’a law.
In other words, this conflict is not about land -- it is about the extermination of Jews and the imposition of the barbaric ShariÂ’a law on an unwilling world. The destruction of the Jewish people therefore lies at the heart of the motivation of the terrorists, and virtually any move made against them is a valid defensive action on behalf of the state of Israel and the Jewish people. To oppose such defensive activity is therefore to actively cooperate in this attempted genocide, morlly no different than coopertion with the Nazi Final Solution.
Posted by: Greg at
08:53 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 789 words, total size 5 kb.
I guess that doesn't apply when the donors and recipients are left-wingers -- but then the Left has never believed it should play by the rules it seeks to impose on its opponents.
An alliance of nearly a hundred of the nation's wealthiest donors is roiling Democratic political circles, directing more than $50 million in the past nine months to liberal think tanks and advocacy groups in what organizers say is the first installment of a long-term campaign to compete more aggressively against conservatives.A year after its founding, Democracy Alliance has followed up on its pledge to become a major power in the liberal movement. It has lavished millions on groups that have been willing to submit to its extensive screening process and its demands for secrecy.
These include the Center for American Progress, a think tank with an unabashed partisan edge, as well as Media Matters for America, which tracks what it sees as conservative bias in the news media. Several alliance donors are negotiating a major investment in Air America, a liberal talk-radio network.
But the large checks and demanding style wielded by Democracy Alliance organizers in recent months have caused unease among Washington's community of Democratic-linked organizations. The alliance has required organizations that receive its endorsement to sign agreements shielding the identity of donors. Public interest groups said the alliance represents a large source of undisclosed and unaccountable political influence.
And then there is this aspect of the super-secret group.
To become a "partner," as the members are referred to internally, requires a $25,000 entry fee and annual dues of $30,000 to cover alliance operations as well as some of its contributions to start-up liberal groups. Beyond this, partners also agree to spend at least $200,000 annually on organizations that have been endorsed by the alliance. Essentially, the alliance serves as an accreditation agency for political advocacy groups.This accreditation process is the root of Democracy Alliance's influence. If a group does not receive the alliance's blessing, dozens of the nation's wealthiest political contributors as a practical matter become off-limits for fundraising purposes.
Ideological screening and litmus tests as a condition for receiving donations. Deviation from the ideology is the kiss of death.
Yet somehow, the groups funded claim to be non-partisan, despite the stated objective of the Democracy Alliance to fund groups dedicated to electing Democrats.
Likewise, a Democracy Alliance blessing effectively jump-started Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). It bills itself as a nonpartisan watchdog group committed to targeting "government officials who sacrifice the common good to special interests." Alliance officials see CREW as a possible counterweight to conservative-leaning Judicial Watch, which filed numerous lawsuits against Clinton administration officials in the 1990s. A CREW spokesman declined to comment.
But hold it -- isn't the Democracy Alliance, a consortium of millionaire and billionaire ideologues, a classic example of a special interest group? Why don't you start by investigating yourself?
Let's apply the Left's own standards to these donations -- they are clearly a sign of corrupt bargains with special interests seeking to impose their own extreme ideology to the detriment of the American people. After all, these are coordinated donations to Left-wing organizations by millionaires and billionaires -- and we all know that these super-rich individuals must be evilevilevil, because that is what the Left tells us is the case.
But then again, what Leftist activities and proposals are NOT harmful to America?
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT: Mudville Gazette, Conservative Cat, Mark My Words, Pursuing Holiness, Third World County, Is It Just Me?, Random Yak
Posted by: Greg at
03:17 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 641 words, total size 5 kb.
Dan Quayle took time out from participating in the American Century Celebrity Golf Championship in Stateline, Nev., on Friday to attend John Mellencamp's concert only to run into a political statement.He then made a statement of his own by walking out during Mellencamp's rendition of ``Walk Tall.'' Before launching into the song, Mellencamp told the Harveys casino crowd, in effect, that it was dedicated to everyone hurt by policies of the current Bush administration.
Quayle, who served as vice president for President Bush's father in 1989-93 walked out of the venue before Mellencamp finished the song.
Quayle said through a publicist: ``Well, I think Mellencamp's performance was not very good to begin with, and the comment put it over the top.''
Mellencamp couldn't be reached for comment.
More of us need to make such statements when performers make such statements.
After all, they have a First Amendment right to speak -- but no right to an audience.
Posted by: Greg at
01:58 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 187 words, total size 1 kb.
81 queries taking 0.6025 seconds, 563 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
