Apologies

If there is anyone who has been checking this blog out on a semi-regular basis (Hi, Tess!) I have to apologize for my unintentional self-imposed hiatus. I’d love to say that I was out there working for Democratic candidates to get elected or doing something else productive, but that would be a lie. Well, I did spend four days at the JRF convention in Philadelphia (look it up – jrf.org), but that’s a pretty small proportion of the time I haven’t been posting.

Anyway, I hope to be back posting on a regular basis soon –  maybe, as I said in my list of middot, even with some original writing.

Shalom!

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(Meant to be posted on Nov. 8)
Start picking out those drapes, SPEAKER PELOSI (insert Stephanie Miller’s bloodcurdling scream soundbite here)! And (it appears) Senate Majority Leader Reid – if Joe Lieberman doesn’t flip, which I wouldn’t put past him. America has finally repudiated the failed policies, illegal war, and gutter politics of the pathetic (if they didn’t wield so much power) gang in the White House, the Mayberry Machiavellis, “if you will.“ And Dick (”if you will“) Vader, of course, spent yesterday killing things - I hope it helped him feel better.

And if Democrats don’t want to start investigations on everything right away, there are two that they should start immediately, the massive dirty tricks that took place all over the country yesterday and contractor malfeasance in Iraq. The second should be a no-brainer, even for responsible Republicans. It’s fiscally irresponsible and hurts our troops to have these profiteers mucking things up even more over there.

Middot

On Rosh Hashanah the rabbi listed 13 middot, or qualities that he thought were important to cultivate. On the whole it didn’t really speak to me, so here is my list of qualities that I would like to aim for. The asterisks are for the ones that I think need particular work.

1. Chesed (kindness, compassion, also not being judgmental, snarky –  or at least so quick to be)*
2. Patience (with people, things, and circumstances)*
3. Public involvement (more than just signing Internet petitions –  I feel like I’ve been particularly bad on this over the past year or two)*
4. Use of my talents (even if all I’m going to do is keep a blog, I have to do some actual original writing, not just post excerpts from other people’s thoughts).
5. Financial responsibility*
6. Generosity (more on the selfishness front – if I am going to spend money, spend more on worthy causes, less on myself).
7. Taking care of my body, which is, after all, supposed to be a temple of God, even if it’s St. Paul who says that (getting more exercise, eating better)
8. Respect for others
9. Hope – (Over the past year I feel like I’ve fallen into the kind of “quiet desperation” that Thoreau talks about – try to think less about my own mortality, and living in the moment more)
10. Humility
11. Honesty, both with myself and with others, although always with due regard for the feelings of others.
12. Orderliness (I’ve been saying for most of my life that I need to get organized)*
13. Humor

Stories that have received short shrift in the "all Foley, all the time" atmosphere

Yes, I know – the man is beneath contempt, it's about sex (with underage subordinates, yet) and unbelievable Republican hypocrisy on "family values," and Democrats should be shouting it from the rooftops, but these stories are at least as important and probably far more so.

The end of habeas corpus (see earlier posts). This detainee bill is a devastating blow to everything we stand for as a country, as well as a huge gift (with a big bow on it) to bin Laden.

From 10/3: 8 G.I.’s Die in Baghdad, Most in a Day Since ’05

700 Iraqi Policemen Under Investigation For "Possible Complicity" With Death Squads...

Shooting of 10 girls, 5 of whom have died, in Lancaster, PA Amish school This may be the least important one, in the larger scheme of things, but to me it is the saddest. I can also have nothing but awe and respect for the Amish community, which could give lessons to many Muslims, Christians and yes, even Jews - in forgiveness.

Mark (how appropriate) 9:42

"And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck.

This applies even when they’re 16 or 17, especially if you’re a 50-something congressman who’s in a position of authority over them.

Doing bin Laden's job for him

I came up with the idea for the art before reading the column (click on title to read the whole thing), so I guess that Molly's mind and mine run in parallel courses.

Habeas Corpus, R.I.P. (1215 - 2006)
Posted on Sep 27, 2006

By Molly Ivins

AUSTIN, Texas—Oh dear. I’m sure he didn’t mean it. In Illinois’ Sixth Congressional District, long represented by Henry Hyde, Republican candidate Peter Roskam accused his Democratic opponent, Tammy Duckworth [who lost both legs while serving in Iraq], of planning to “cut and run” on Iraq.

...

The legislative equivalent of that remark is the detainee bill now being passed by Congress. Beloveds, this is so much worse than even that pathetic deal reached last Thursday between the White House and Republican Sens. John Warner, John McCain and Lindsey Graham. The White House has since reinserted a number of “technical fixes” that were the point of the putative “compromise.” It leaves the president with the power to decide who is an enemy combatant.

This bill is not a national security issue—this is about torturing helpless human beings without any proof they are our enemies. Perhaps this could be considered if we knew the administration would use the power with enormous care and thoughtfulness. But of the over 700 prisoners sent to Gitmo, only 10 have ever been formally charged with anything. Among other things, this bill is a CYA for torture of the innocent that has already taken place

....

The version of the detainee bill now in the Senate not only undoes much of the McCain-Warner-Graham work, but it is actually much worse than the administration’s first proposal.
...

The bill also expands the definition of an unlawful enemy combatant to cover anyone who has “has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States.” Quick, define “purposefully and materially.” One person has already been charged with aiding terrorists because he sold a satellite TV package that includes the Hezbollah network.

The bill simply removes a suspect’s right to challenge his detention in court. This is a rule of law that goes back to the Magna Carta in 1215. That pretty much leaves the barn door open.

As Vladimir Bukovsky, the Soviet dissident, wrote, an intelligence service free to torture soon “degenerates into a playground for sadists.” But not unbridled sadism—you will be relieved that the compromise took out the words permitting interrogation involving “severe pain” and substituted “serious pain,” which is defined as “bodily injury that involves extreme physical pain.”

In July 2003, George Bush said in a speech: “The United States is committed to worldwide elimination of torture, and we are leading this fight by example. Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right. Yet torture continues to be practiced around the world by rogue regimes, whose cruel methods match their determination to crush the human spirit.”

Fellow citizens, this bill throws out legal and moral restraints as the president deems it necessary—these are fundamental principles of basic decency, as well as law.

...

To find out more about Molly Ivins and see works by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

Give me liberty or...oh, never mind.

Hang your head in shame. Obviously Bill taught his fellow Democrats nothing on Sunday. From an editorial in the New York Times - not always one of my favorite news sources (I just can't seem to write anything myself these days - luckily others have been more than eloquent):

Here’s what happens when this irresponsible Congress railroads a profoundly important bill to serve the mindless politics of a midterm election: The Bush administration uses Republicans’ fear of losing their majority to push through ghastly ideas about antiterrorism that will make American troops less safe and do lasting damage to our 217-year-old nation of laws — while actually doing nothing to protect the nation from terrorists. Democrats betray their principles to avoid last-minute attack ads. Our democracy is the big loser.
...
We don’t blame the Democrats for being frightened. The Republicans have made it clear that they’ll use any opportunity to brand anyone who votes against this bill as a terrorist enabler. But Americans of the future won’t remember the pragmatic arguments for caving in to the administration.

They’ll know that in 2006, Congress passed a tyrannical law that will be ranked with the low points in American democracy, our generation’s version of the Alien and Sedition Acts.

Speaking of our early history, here are a couple of quotes from Benjamin Franklin:

"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security."

At the close of the Constitutional Convention, a woman asked Franklin what type of government the was being formed. “A republic, if you can keep it,” replied Franklin.

A thing of beauty and a joy to behold

I haven’t liked the way he’s been buddying up with George H.W. and Rupert Murdoch over the last few years, but Bill Clinton’s smackdown of Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday shows that the Big Dog still has what it takes. Just imagine Dubya giving such a reasoned, point-by-point rebuttal to a challenge like this one if he’d had a week’s warning! About Chris Wallace’s smirk, though – after watching that and also the appearance he made to discuss how shocked! shocked! he was at Bill’s “going crazy” on him, I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s actually a face that he made once and, as all our mothers warned us would happen, it froze that way.

Go, Bill! Democrats, this is what someone with a backbone looks like. Please (except for Russ Feingold and one or two others) watch over and over again, and take notes.

One more thought: We also heard two words from Bill that we have only heard from one other person in the government regarding 9/11 (Richard Clarke, whose book is now #19 at Amazon in the hardcover edition), and I can guarantee that we will never hear them from Dubya or any of his cronies: "I failed." Yes, sir, you did, but it wasn't for lack of trying, and you are a big enough man to admit it and to feel remorse for it. For that I respect you.

Our soldiers are risking - and giving - their lives - for THIS?

Excerpted (click on title for full story). And the former governor’s furious lobbying to insert the right to torture into U.S. law is an apt illustration of the caution to “choose your enemies carefully, because you will become like them.”

New terror that stalks Iraq's republic of fear
By Patrick Cockburn in Arbil
Published: 22 September 2006

The republic of fear is born again. The state of terror now gripping Iraq is as bad as it was under Saddam Hussein. Torture in the country may even be worse than it was during his rule, the United Nation's special investigator on torture said yesterday.
...
The brutal tortures committed in the prisons of the regime overthrown in 2003 are being emulated and surpassed in the detention centres of the present US- and British-backed Iraqi government. "Detainees' bodies show signs of beating using electric cables, wounds in different parts of their bodies including in the head and genitals, broken bones of legs and hands, electric and cigarette burns," the human rights office of the UN Assistance Mission in Iraq says in a new report.
...
Human rights groups say torture is practised in prisons run by the US as well as those run by the Interior and Defence ministries and the numerous Sunni and Shia militias.
The pervasive use of torture is only one aspect of the utter breakdown of government across Iraq outside the three Kurdish provinces in the north.
...
Iraq is in a state of primal anarchy. Paradoxically, the final collapse of security this summer is masked from the outside world because the country is too dangerous for journalists to report what is happening. Some 134 journalists, mostly Iraqi, have been killed since the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003.
...
The bi-monthly UN report on Iraq is almost the only neutral and objective survey of conditions in the country. The real number of civilians killed in Iraq is probably much higher because, outside Baghdad, deaths are not recorded.
...
Nobody in Iraq is safe. Buses and cars are stopped at checkpoints and Sunni or Shia are killed after a glance at their identity cards. Many people now carry two sets of identity papers, one Shia and one Sunni.
...
The Iraqi state and much of society have been criminalised. Gangs of gunmen are often described on state television as "wearing police uniforms" . One senior Iraqi minister laughed as he told The Independent: " Of course they wear police uniforms. They are real policemen."
...
It has long been a matter of amusement and disgust in Iraq that government ministers travel abroad to give press conferences claiming that the insurgency is on its last legs. One former minister said: "I know of ministers who have never been to their ministries but get their officials to bring documents to the Green Zone where they sign them."

Beyond the Green Zone, Iraq has descended into murderous anarchy. For several days this month, the main road between Baghdad and Basra was closed because two families were fighting over ownership of an oilfield.

Government ministries are either Shia or Sunni. In Baghdad this month, a television crew filming the morgue had to cower behind a wall because the Shia guards were fighting a gun battle with the Sunni guards of the Electricity Ministry near by.

I'm hopeless, I admit

I was so intimidated by the powerful 9/11 tribute/indictment delivered by Olbermann (as detailed in the last post) that I was silenced for a week. I tried to write something that came anywhere near it but gave up in despair, although as it turned out what I wrote was more personal than political. (Maybe I will finish it and post it later.) Since then I’ve been unpleasantly riveted by the campaign being waged by the former governor of Texas (how horrible that he should share that title with the late lamented Ann Richards) to legalize torture. It’s a little like a bad accident on the freeway – it’s sick, but you have to look.

The thing that I found most offensive was the press conference, where (if the photo I saw on the front of the NY Times was from that) he stood in front of a bunch of American flags and demanded the right to torture, or else he was going to essentially stop any interrogation of prisoners. That may not be what he was saying, but it sounded that way to me. There are plenty of ways to interrogate people without breaking the law, and if he even stops those because (WAAAAAAHH!) he can’t have his way, then he is responsible for anything that happens and should be impeached for a willful refusal to protect this country even in undoubtedly lawful ways.

The great Paul Krugman says it best:

So why is the Bush administration so determined to torture people?

To show that it can.

The central drive of the Bush administration — more fundamental than any particular policy — has been the effort to eliminate all limits on the president’s power. Torture, I believe, appeals to the president and the vice president precisely because it’s a violation of both law and tradition. By making an illegal and immoral practice a key element of U.S. policy, they’re asserting their right to do whatever they claim is necessary.

And many of our politicians are willing to go along. The Republican majority in the House of Representatives is poised to vote in favor of the administration’s plan to, in effect, declare torture legal. Most Republican senators are equally willing to go along, although a few, to their credit, have stood with the Democrats in opposing the administration.

Mr. Bush would have us believe that the difference between him and those opposing him on this issue is that he’s willing to do what’s necessary to protect America, and they aren’t. But the record says otherwise.

The fact is that for all his talk of being a “war president,” Mr. Bush has been conspicuously unwilling to ask Americans to make sacrifices on behalf of the cause — even when, in the days after 9/11, the nation longed to be called to a higher purpose. His admirers looked at him and thought they saw Winston Churchill. But instead of offering us blood, toil, tears and sweat, he told us to go shopping and promised tax cuts.

Only now, five years after 9/11, has Mr. Bush finally found some things he wants us to sacrifice. And those things turn out to be our principles and our self-respect.

Keith Olbermann hits another one out of the ballpark

I was trying to come up with something meaningful to write on this fifth anniversary of 9/11, but while I may be able to within the next couple of days, I doubt that I will come up with anything better than this.

Some excerpts below (full transcript available at link):

...
Of all the things those of us who were here five years ago could have forecast — of all the nightmares that unfolded before our eyes, and the others that unfolded only in our minds… none of us could have predicted… this.

Five years later this space… is still empty.

Five years later there is no Memorial to the dead.

Five years later there is no building rising to show with proud defiance that we would not have our America wrung from us, by cowards and criminals.

Five years later this country’s wound is still open.

Five years… later this country’s mass grave is still unmarked.

Five years later… this is still… just a background for a photo-op.

It is beyond shameful.
...
Five years later, Mr. Bush… we are still fighting the terrorists on these streets. And look carefully, sir — on these 16 empty acres, the terrorists… are clearly, still winning.

And, in a crime against every victim here and every patriotic sentiment you mouthed but did not enact, you have done nothing about it.
...
Terrorists did not come and steal our newly-regained sense of being American first, and political, fiftieth. Nor did the Democrats. Nor did the media. Nor did the people.

The President — and those around him — did that.

They promised bi-partisanship, and then showed that to them, "bi-partisanship" meant that their party would rule and the rest would have to follow, or be branded, with ever-escalating hysteria, as morally or intellectually confused; as appeasers; as those who, in the Vice President’s words yesterday, "validate the strategy of the terrorists."
...
A mini-series, created, influenced — possibly financed by — the most radical and cold of domestic political Machiavellis, continues to be televised into our homes.
The documented truths of the last fifteen years are replaced by bald-faced lies; the talking points of the current regime parroted; the whole sorry story blurred, by spin, to make the party out of office seem vacillating and impotent, and the party in office, seem like the only option.

How dare you, Mr. President, after taking cynical advantage of the unanimity and love, and transmuting it into fraudulent war and needless death… after monstrously transforming it into fear and suspicion and turning that fear into the campaign slogan of three elections… how dare you or those around you… ever "spin" 9/11.
...
When those who dissent are told time and time again — as we will be, if not tonight by the President, then tomorrow by his portable public chorus — that he is preserving our freedom, but that if we use any of it, we are somehow un-American…
When we are scolded, that if we merely question, we have "forgotten the lessons of 9/11"… look into this empty space behind me and the bi-partisanship upon which this administration also did not build, and tell me:

Who has left this hole in the ground?

We have not forgotten, Mr. President.

You have.

May this country forgive you.

Thank you once again, Keith, for saying what needs to be said, and for saying it so eloquently. You are truly showing yourself to be the heir of the great Edward R. Murrow.

A trio of fiery patriots

Last week was kind of rough for me so I have to apologize for not posting much. I also would like to get back to my Torah commentary at least after Rosh Hashanah. We will then be studying the sixth aliyah.

In the meantime, I'd like to highlight a couple of great speeches (well, one commentary and a speech) that took place last week. The first was given by Ross C. ("Rocky") Anderson, mayor of Salt Lake City, at an anti-war rally on the same day (I believe) that Dear Leader was arriving for a visit. Talk about chutzpah! One particularly memorable quote (although the speech is worth reading in its entirety):

Blind faith in bad leaders is not patriotism.

A patriot does not tell people who are intensely concerned about their country to just sit down and be quiet; to refrain from speaking out in the name of politeness or for the sake of being a good host; to show slavish, blind obedience and deference to a dishonest, war-mongering, human-rights-violating president.

That is not a patriot. Rather, that person is a sycophant. That person is a member of a frightening culture of obedience – a culture where falling in line with authority is more important than choosing what is right, even if it is not easy, safe, or popular. And, I suspect, that person is afraid – afraid we are right, afraid of the truth (even to the point of denying it), afraid he or she has put in with an oppressive, inhumane, regime that does not respect the laws and traditions of our country, and that history will rank as the worst presidency our nation has ever had to endure.

The second was a response by Keith Olbermann to Rumsfeld's speech to the American Legion (also in Salt Lake City), comparing those of us who oppose the war in Iraq to Chamberlain and the "appeasers" of Hitler and calling us "morally and intellectually confused." (As Frank Rich points out in his column from this weekend, "Since Hitler was photographed warmly shaking Neville Chamberlain’s hand at Munich in 1938, the only image that comes close to matching it in epochal obsequiousness is the December 1983 photograph of Mr. Rumsfeld himself in Baghdad, warmly shaking the hand of Saddam Hussein in full fascist regalia.") A quote from Olbermann:

[Rumsfeld's speech] demands the deep analysis - and the sober contemplation - of every American. For it did not merely serve to impugn the morality or intelligence - indeed, the loyalty - of the majority of Americans who oppose the transient occupants of the highest offices in the land; Worse, still, it credits those same transient occupants - our employees - with a total omniscience; a total omniscience which neither common sense, nor this administration’s track record at home or abroad, suggests they deserve. Dissent and disagreement with government is the life’s blood of human freedom; And not merely because it is the first roadblock against the kind of tyranny the men Mr. Rumsfeld likes to think of as "his" troops still fight, this very evening, in Iraq. It is also essential. Because just every once in awhile… it is right - and the power to which it speaks, is wrong.
...
From Iraq to Katrina, to flu vaccine shortages, to the entire "Fog of Fear" which continues to envelope this nation - he, Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, and their cronies, have - inadvertently or intentionally - profited and benefited, both personally, and politically. And yet he can stand up in public, and question the morality and the intellect of those of us who dare ask just for the receipt for the Emperor’s New Clothes.

Mr. Anderson, Mr. Olbermann, and Mr. Rich, we salute you!

Books for kids hit by Katrina

Democrats.org has a post called "CDF Katrina Project Needs Books" that's worth checking out...

The Children's Defense Fund (CDF) Freedom Schools Katrina Project partners with community based organizations, service agencies and universities in the Cleveland, Columbia and Jackson, MS areas to provide after-school programming each day public schools are in session for children in families affected by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

Dubya thinks that if we leave Iraq we will have "lost our soul as a nation" or some such thing. I think that, despite all the good work that has been done by private individuals and organizations, the mess on the Gulf Coast a year after Katrina shows that we already have.

Thank you, Judge Taylor

Judge Anna Diggs Taylor is the judge who struck down the NSA wiretapping program as unconstitutional. Dubya doesn't think she and those who applaud her ruling "understand the world we live in today." Judge Taylor is a 75-year-old black woman. I think she probably understands a lot about terror and intimidation, as well as having lived through the Depression, World War II and the Cold War. Find out more about her and thank her for her ruling here. This is what I wrote:

Thank you, Judge Taylor, for showing Congress the way. Too many people have allowed themselves to be intimidated because Karl Rove and his attack dogs in the right wing echo chamber might call them names or even make death threats against them, but that is not how this country got started and survived until today. Those things happened because people like you had the courage to stand up for their convictions. Even if, God forbid, your ruling is overturned or weakened on appeal, this administration's lawlessness is now on record, and history will vindicate you.

Book Review: Tower of Silence

Tower of Silence by Sarah Rayne *****

Mary Maskelyne, an infamous teenage murderess from the 1960s, now in her forties, is transferred to Moy, a remote Scottish institution for the criminally insane. Selina March, a colorless, proper spinster, short of money, converts her house to a B&B. Mystery writer Joanna Savile arrives in the village of Inchcape, near Moy, to do some research and specifically to interview Mary Maskelyne. The stage is now set for events that began with a shattering atrocity in the tumultuous India of the late 1940s to play out to their final conclusion.

Sarah Rayne is supposed to be a pseudonym for a writer who is already well-known in Britain for horror fiction. Remnants of this may be seen in some of the particularly gruesome events that take place in Tower of Silence, but they don't seem to be out of place or inserted just for shock value. I, for one, am glad that she decided to switch genres; her other novels may be well written but I probably would not have found them, and I would imagine that psychological suspense gives her much more scope for her talents. Her writing is superb and even poetic at times. Her characters, even the worst of them, are imagined from the inside, and are vividly drawn. The portrayal of Mary Maskelyne, manipulative, narcissistic and attention-seeking, is one of the most chilling fictional examinations of the sociopathic mind that I have ever encountered. Other, more sympathetic characters include Emily Frost, the colorful and many-faceted daughter of one of the doctors at Moy, who volunteers to work with some of the patients; the sad, traumatized and extremely dangerous patient known as Pippa; and the attractive, strangely charismatic Joanna.

Unfortunately, for the most part Rayne does not seem to portray male characters nearly as vividly or sympathetically, although I did like Joanna's husband, the half-Hungarian Krzystof Kent. Also, she may push coincidence a bit too far for some in bringing all of these people together in the same place, but if you're like me you will be too caught up in the plot and the characters' lives to care.

Book Review: Labyrinth

Labyrinth by Kate Mosse ***-1/2

Labyrinth focuses mainly on two women, Alice in the present, who finds a mysterious cave while volunteering on an archaeological dig, and her ancestress Alais in the era of the Albigensian Crusade. The link between the two is a set of three books called the Labyrinth Trilogy, which supposedly leads to the Holy Grail. I found this the weakest point in the book – it feels like the whole Holy Grail connection was thrown in to capitalize on the success of The Da Vinci Code, as was the pursuit of the heroine across southern France by (at least self-appointed) agents of the Catholic Church. I never did get quite clear on who exactly was behind the villains or if they were mainly working for themselves.

I found the medieval sections of the book to be the strongest, both in character and in plot; the modern characters seemed to be pale echoes of their prototypes. It’s too bad that the author (or her editors) seemed to be a bit too concerned with jumping on Dan Brown’s bandwagon, because I think that Mosse could have written a much better book if she had made it a straight historical novel about the persecution of the Cathars, an event which, at least as far as I know, has yet to be thoroughly explored in fiction. She would, however, need to delve a bit more into their beliefs; as it was, apart for a couple of throwaway lines about their dualistic theology, they were portrayed pretty one-dimensionally as proto-Protestants of a sort, all of whom seem to have been perfect, in more sense than one. (The Perfect was the name for the more advanced “grade” of Cathars.)

I am not generally a fan of books that switch back and forth between the past and present, but at least, thank God, Mosse did not use the "time travel" gimmick, which has been done to death, except in a very oblique way. I did find the use of untranslated French and Occitan words to be distracting. Surprisingly (since I am an English major), I didn't notice the sentence fragments that annoyed another Amazon reviewer, but one thing that did jump out at me was the figurative language, some of which seemed to be a bit forced, as if the author had written these “great” similes in creative writing class and felt like she just had to use them somewhere. However, all in all I did find this book to be a worthwhile and enjoyable read.

Missionaries, my dear!

Missionaries, my dear! Don't you realize that missionaries are the divinely provided food for destitute and underfed cannibals? Whenever they are on the brink of starvation, Heaven in its infinite mercy sends them a nice plump missionary.

—Oscar Wilde

A couple of them showed up at my door today, and not being desitute, underfed or a cannibal, I sent them away uneaten. They asked (or rather the one who was in charge did) if I read my Bible and I said "Yes." (Thought bubble: But not the same one you read.) So of course he started telling me about how the end was near and all these wonderful things were going to happen – nothing about the bloodbaths in the streets and all the Jews and other "infidels" who don't convert being killed and thrown into the lake of fire, of course. Then he whipped out a little book and asked if I would read it if he left it with me. I said, "Probably not," so he left me one of the cut-rate tracts – he did compliment me on at least being honest.

It's kind of ironic (and very apropos) that I was looking at an article on Darwin in an old issue of the Skeptical Inquirer earlier and found a quote that expresses my sentiments perfectly – if I'd been feeling feisty I might have tried it out on this guy. As the article points out, "Darwin was not, by anyone's standards, a believing Christian," although he "consistently denied the charge" of being an atheist – and why shouldn't he have been telling the truth, since his problem seems to have been more with Christian doctrine than with God? Anyway, here is the quote, and this has always been my sticking point as well:

"... I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so, the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my Father, Brother and almost all my best friends, will be everlastingly punished. And this is a damnable doctrine." (Barlow 1958)

I know that there are people who get around this whole idea somehow, but I can't, and a lot of others have no problem with it, but just accept that the vast majority of people who have ever lived, no matter how good a life they have led, are going to be thrown into eternal torment by a "loving, merciful" God for not believing the right thing.

"The nexus of politics and terror"

An excellent clip from 2005 - Keith Olbermann examines the curious way in which, whenever the Republicans have a spate of bad news, or the Democrats get some positive press, lo and behold, someone from the government comes out and says, "Be afraid. Be very afraid. The terrorists are going to get you!"



Note (Tuesday, 12:30 p.m.): The YouTube site appears to be doing some maintenance at the moment, so if the link is blank, please check back later. Thanks.

The threat level is up - it must be election season

Maybe I’m crazy, but I thought I read somewhere that they were going to ditch the color-coding thing because it was basically useless – didn’t give anyone a clue as to what they were supposed to do or not do – although it does, as Greg Palast points out on Buzzflash today (8/15), let the terrorists know when our guard is down. Well, there is one thing that orange or red means we’re supposed to do – vote Republican.

The Nagasaki principle

I am excerpting this column liberally (and I hope not doing any violence to the context) but the whole article (please click on title) should really be read. Although to my abiding (but not everlasting, I hope) regret, I have yet to finish one of James Carroll’s book (among them Constantine's Sword and Crusade) but I think that he is one of the most powerful writers on the scene today, as well as the only one I know of who truly writes with a prophetic spirit. (I am referring here to the prophets of the Hebrew Bible, whose function was not so much to predict the future as to denounce the sins of the nation and call it back to the right path.)

The Nagasaki principle By James Carroll | August 7, 2006 Today is the anniversary of what did not happen. Sixty-one years ago yesterday, the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. The scale of nuclear devastation was apparent at once. The next day, no decision was made to call off the bombing of Nagasaki. Why? Historians debate the justification of the Hiroshima attack, but there is consensus that Nagasaki, coming less than three days later, was tragically unnecessary. President Harry Truman's one order to use the atomic bomb, given on July 25, established a momentum that was not stopped. ....... It is commonly said that war operates by the law of unintended consequences, but another, less-noted law operates as well. War creates momentum that barrels through normally restraining barriers of moral and practical choice. Decision makers begin wars, whether aggressively or defensively, in contexts that are well understood, and with purposes that seem proportionate and able to be accomplished. When destruction and hurt follow the outbreak of violence, however, and then when that destruction and hurt become extreme, the context within which war is begun changes radically. First assumptions no longer apply, and original purposes can become impossible. When that happens, what began as destruction for a goal becomes destruction for its own sake. War generates its own force in which everyone loses. This might be called the Nagasaki principle. The Nagasaki principle comes in two parts. It can operate at the level of close combat, driving fighters to commit atrocities that, in normal conditions, they would abhor. It operates equally at the level of the commanders, leading them to order strikes out of desperation, frustration, or merely for the sake of ``doing something." Such strikes draw equivalent responses from the other side until the destruction is complete. After the fact, massive carnage can seem to have been an act for which no one is responsible, like the result of a natural disaster. That's when a second aspect of the Nagasaki principle comes into play -- the refusal to undertake a moral reckoning with what has been done. ........ This may seem like airy theorizing, but the psychologically unfinished business of the Nuclear Age, dating to the day after Hiroshima, defined the American response to the trauma of Sept. 11, 2001. The nation had lived for two generations with the subliminal but powerfully felt dread of a coming nuclear war. Unconsciously ashamed of our own action in using the bomb, we were waiting for pay-back, and on that beautiful morning it seemed to come. The smoke rising up from the twin towers hit us like a mushroom cloud, and we instantly dubbed the ruined site as Ground Zero, when, as historian John Dower observes, the only true Ground Zeros are the two in Japan. Our unconscious shame was superseded by an overt sense of victimhood. We launched a war whose momentum has carried the world into the unwilled and unforeseen catastrophe that unfolds today. Our denial of nuclear responsibility, meanwhile, embodied in our permanent nuclear arsenal, licenses other nations that aim to match us -- notably Iran. Momentum and denial combined to destroy Nagasaki, which was, alas, not the end, but the beginning. James Carroll's column appears regularly in the Globe. © Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

Those lazy crazy hazy days of summer...

Or however it goes. It certainly has been hazy – up in the 90’s last week, which probably is no excuse for my being lazy. And here I’d meant to try to put something up here every day, since going for days on end with nothing new is no way to get regular visitors – not something I need to worry about too much right now.

Anyway, things seem to be, if not going from bad to worse, at the very least staying very very bad over in Israel, Lebanon and Iraq. Condi (and yes, Secretary Rice would be more respectful but her boss leads the way) is energetically exerting herself, making the rounds of the Sunday morning talk shows and issuing demands to Iraq, Syria and Hezbollah via interview and press conference. As people are continually pointing out, diplomacy means talking to the people you disagree with, not just the ones who hang on your every word.

Rummy is starting (starting?) to sound like a parody of himself with his “my goodness!” and rhetorical questions in front of the committee last week – sorry, I forget which one but I know Hillary slapped him down good. “Am I a delusional old coot who should be doing nothing more demanding than sitting out on the porch playing checkers, Senator Clinton? Heavens to betsy, I don’t think so.”

I’ve finished a couple of good books (The Thief by Megan Whalen Turner and The Templar Legacy by Steve Berry), and although I’m not sure whether I’ll review them I definitely have a rant waiting to be spewed about the people who go around whining that the authors of “religious thrillers” like The Da Vinci Code and The Templar Legacy are being mean to Christianity, hate it, “have an ax to grind,” etc.

Finally, today is Judgment Day for Joe Lieberman in Connecticut. I’m sorry, I liked Joe in the 2000 race although I did think he was a bit too collegial with Dick Cheney in their “debate,” but I have to hope now that he loses. As I’m reading all over in the blogs and in other articles on the Internet, and as his own constituents were calling in to On Point last week to say, he’s out of touch with them, he’s enabling and providing cover for the disastrous policies of this administration, and he’s acting as if he’s somehow entitled to his seat in the Senate and it’s the height of presumption for anyone to mount a serious challenge. I found it interesting that as far as I could tell, not a single “real” person called in to On Point to express their support of him, and I know from listening to them in the past that they always try to get people expressing different points of view. He may still pull it off, and I hope that if he does he comes down off his high horse and considers what brought him to the point of almost losing a primary that he should have walked away with, but I don’t have much hope.

A different take on Qana

From Naomi Ragen, an author living in Jerusalem (sent on Sunday night so more information may be available):

Friends,

1. Tonight, an IDF spokesman showed aerial photos of rockets being fired from residential areas in Qana. It showed the portable rocket launchers being parked beneath residential buildings. The spokesman said that the bombs dropped on Qana were dropped at 1 a.m. The reports of the building collapse took place at 7 a.m. Also, no bombs actually hit the building. So, who was responsible for the collapse of that building? Could Hezbollah weapons have exploded, destroying the building? Was it deliberate, a way to pressure Israel into a ceasefire the same way they did last time, in exactly the same spot? And why is no one in the media picking up on this time gap and asking questions?

2. The number of those injured is being supplied by Lebanese sources, and being quoted by all the news stations. So far, only 26 bodies have been recovered. But news reports are saying the number was twice that, and half are children. That too is supplied by unknown sources and repeated by the major media.

3. At 7 a.m. a barrage of Hezbollah rockets hit the shopping center and buildings of Kiryat Shmona, unlike anything else the town has experienced. Altogether 1500 kilograms of bombs have hit the area's approximately 25,000 residents remaining in their homes. Where is the outrage over that?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

For more articles,please visit my Web page at: http://www.NaomiRagen.com

The Middle East

Considering that the "About me" section of this blog says that I want to share some of my "passions," some may wonder why I've generally been silent about the attacks being made back and forth across the Israel-Lebanon border by Israel and Hezbollah for the past two weeks. I suppose that my feelings about the whole situation could be described as "passionately conflicted."

One reason is that I feel decidedly inadequate in talking about the situation. My knowledge is nowhere near deep enough to enable me to make my way through the morass of interpretations, propaganda, "spin," exaggerations and outright lies. Although I believe fervently in Israel's right to defend itself (and it's sad that even a supporter of Israel has to innoculate herself against the inevitable demonization by the right), I am deeply troubled by its methods of doing so, and have to wonder if the long-term consequences are worth the short-term gains. The bombing of the U.N. post on Tuesday was especially disturbing, although I can't believe that something of this sort would be done deliberately by any sane government.

In trying to come to some understanding of what is going on over there, I found this article to be particularly useful.

Criminalizing Jesus

41"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' 44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' 45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'

Matthew 25:41-45

Where are all the good Christians now? Loaves and fishes, anyone? There is also a well-attested tradition in Judaism that the sin for which Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed was not so-called “sodomy” but the fact that they outlawed giving any asistance to strangers, who were in much the same position as the homeless today – dependent upon the kindness of those in the host city. Shame, shame, Orlando and Las Vegas! I assume that people are still allowed to feed the pigeons, who, like blastocysts, have more rights than fully functioning human beings. Click on title for full story.

Another U.S. City Outlaws Feeding Homeless People Even Mayor Supports Homeless Feeding Ban ORLANDO, Fla. -- Another American city has made it a crime to feed the homeless in certain areas. Last week, Las Vegas outlawed feeding homeless people at city parks. Now, Orlando is following suit. Orlando is trying to keep charitable groups from feeding the homeless in downtown parks. Officials said transients gathering for weekly meals create safety and sanitary problems for businesses. The City Council voted to prohibit serving meals to groups of 25 or more people in parks and other public property within two miles of City Hall without a special permit. A group called Food Not Bombs, which has served weekly vegetarian meals for the homeless for more than a year, said it will continue illegally. The American Civil Liberties Union vows to sue, saying it's a superficial fix that ignores the city's homeless problem. Two of the city's five commissioners voted against the ordinance, including Commissioners Robert Stuart, who runs the homeless shelter Christian Service Center, and Sam Ings, a retired police officer. Stuart told The Orlando Sentinel that Orlando is taking a step to "criminalize good-hearted people" who he says are trying to help. He went on to tell the paper that group feedings in the parks had not become unwieldy to the city, as some had claimed. He said the ordinance says, "Orlando doesn't care," the Sentinel reported.

Arlen, Arlen, Arlen...

You have done this to us so many times before – you get our hopes up that Congress is finally going to stand up for itself, if for nobody else. Then in a couple of days you’ll announce that you have a “compromise” that allows the puppet king and his evil vizier to go on doing just what they’ve been doing all along. However, Arlen, you tease, I still can’t help hoping that this time you’ll stick to your guns and prove me wrong.

Click on title for full story.

Specter prepping bill to sue Bush
By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - A powerful Republican committee chairman who has led the fight against President Bush's signing statements said Monday he would have a bill ready by the end of the week allowing Congress to sue him in federal court.

"We will submit legislation to the United States Senate which will...authorize the Congress to undertake judicial review of those signing statements with the view to having the president's acts declared unconstitutional," Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said on the Senate floor.

I couldn't have said it better myself

Please click on title for full story.

July 18, 2006, 9:39PM
Please keep your religion away from my stem cells

By CRAGG HINES
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle

Vainly would you have waited in the Senate's stem cell debate for one of the more enlightened members to rise and state the obvious: "This is an outrage."

No, none of that. It was all too exquisitely polite, as is often the case in that intensely self-regarding body.

So no member dared to note the absurdity of the national legislature actually having to take time, in the 21st century, to discuss such a scientific — and, if you insist, moral — no-brainer.

You can find another, more closely reasoned article, which points out the glaring inconsistency of denouncing research (and any destruction of blastocysts) as murder while blithely allowing "murder" to take place all over the country (as long as it's not federally-funded) here.

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God

Bill Clinton qualifies. Jimmy Carter qualifies, although I don’t always agree with some of his more recent stances. Dubya’s response (video here) to a serious question about the turmoil in the Middle East: “I thought you were going to ask me about the pig [the boar that was being roasted for dinner].” Don’t they have pig roasts in Texas? You’d think this was the first one he’d ever been to

I hate to tell you, Dubya, but saying that maybe they should stop does not qualify you as a peacemaker.

I suppose it could have been worse - he could have invited the Arabs and Israelis to talk about their differences while eating some of "the pig" (shudder) On the other hand, that might have brought them together as they were both mortally offended by his cultural insensitivity.

Book Review: Misquoting Jesus

Misquoting Jesus by Bart Ehrman ****

In his introduction to Misquoting Jesus, Bart Ehrman gives a brief account of his own personal journey from unquestioning acceptance of the New Testament text to his present view of it as a “very human book.” He then proceeds to show the reader exactly why we cannot know in many cases what the original text was, the ways in which texts are changed, accidentally or intentionally, and gives several examples of verses whose “original” content is disputed.

While I suppose that the history of the development of textual criticism and the discovery and comparison of various manuscripts over the past several centuries is necessary to the overall thrust of the book, this was the part that I found least interesting although the sheer number of discrepancies (many relatively minor) is eye-opening. However, I believe that two sections of the book are particularly helpful to the general reader in understanding why the differences exist. Chapters 1 and 2 deal with the formation of the Christian canon as well as the mechanics of scribal transmission and that of the New Testament in particular. Ehrman stresses the fact that many of those who were copying the earliest texts of these books were not trained scribes and in many cases may have been barely literate – something that the average person probably doesn't even consider in our modern world of widespread literacy, photocopying and "cut and paste." Chapters 6 and 7, on the other hand, look at the motivations for intentional changes, which were often pure; that is, in many cases the scribe may have believed that he was correcting an earlier mistake or clarifying a text that might otherwise be used to support “heretical” beliefs.

Many readers, I suspect, will be upset to discover that there is a consensus among textual critics that one of the most famous stories in the Gospels, that of the woman taken in adultery, is not original to the Gospel of John. However, as Ehrman points out, that does not mean that it is not a real tradition; like many parts of the Bible that seem out of place, it may have been so well-known and powerful that it had to find its way into the text somehow.

It has always struck me that the belief in the inerrancy of the Bible (or anything made or transmitted by human hands) comes dangerously close to the sin of idolatry. I hope that this introduction to textual criticism, which is carried out by many scholars because of their love of the text and a desire to get as close to the original as possible, will inspire many with a new respect for the many people who did create it and transmit it. God does work through human beings, after all.

Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame Wilson, patriots

If this administration (and its allies in the echo chamber) are as concerned about leaks of classified information as it claims to be, why is Karl Rove still working in the White House, and where are the calls to prosecute Novak under the Espionage Act (not something I support, by the way, since I try to be consistent)? Click on title for full story:

Former CIA officer: Cheney, Rove engaged in 'whispering campaign'
Plame alleges Bush administration officials ruined her career

Friday, July 14, 2006; Posted: 11:01 a.m. EDT (15:01 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Former CIA officer Valerie Plame and her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, said Friday they decided to sue Vice President Dick Cheney and presidential adviser Karl Rove because they engaged in a "whispering campaign" to destroy her career.

Plame told a news conference that "I and my former colleagues trusted the government to protect us in our jobs" and said it "betrayed that trust. I'd much rather be continuing my career as a public servant than as a plaintiff in a lawsuit."

To donate towards what will probably be astronomical legal costs in the Wilsons’ pursuit of justice, click here.

Comments on the "You have no civil rights if you're dead" school of thought

These people are such wimps. As one member of Congress said when another used that despicable line on the floor, “Give me liberty or give me death!”

It’s a little late but still close enough to the Fourth of July to remember the Revolution and Declaration of Independence. Let’s listen in on some of our friends on the right as they react in real time:

Dick Cheney: Whoa, Tom – guys! What’s all this about pledging our fortunes? You mean we might lose money on this deal? I wouldn’t have to give up my slaves, would I? (Aside) Maybe the British would give Halliburton some no-bid contracts...if their troops die from the contaminated food and water and these moonbats win, I could claim that I was really working for them all along.

George Dubya: Wait a minute - pledging our fortunes is bad enough. You’re also talkin’ about our lives here! Dad! Is there a nice, safe National Guard unit you can get me into?

Bill O’Reilly: Just remember, if you’re dead you have no inalienable rights, or freedom. And what's all this "endowed by our Creator" stuff? If you mean God, say "God." Are you guys part of the "War Against Christmas" or something?

Bob Novak: (writing) Thomas Jefferson, John Hancock - hey, John, thanks for writing your name so big...

And the Pope thought that he was the only one who was infallible!

Of course, he also probably thought that he was the only one who talked to God.

Justice Department Lawyer To Congress: ‘The President Is Always Right’

The Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday heard testimony from Steven Bradbury, head of the Justice Department’s office of legal counsel. When questioned by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) on whether the President’s interpretation of the Hamdan case was right or wrong, Bradbury replied, “The President is always right.” Watch it:

Full transcript below:

LEAHY: The president has said very specifically, and he’s said it to our European allies, he’s waiting for the Supreme Court decision to tell him whether or not he was supposed to close Guantanamo or not. After, he said it upheld his position on Guantanamo, and in fact it said neither. Where did he get that impression? The President’s not a lawyer, you are, the Justice Department advised him. Did you give him such a cockamamie idea or what?

BRADBURY: Well, I try not to give anybody cockamamie ideas.

LEAHY: Well, where’d he get the idea?

BRADBURY: The Hamdan decision, senator, does implicitly recognize we’re in a war, that the President’s war powers were triggered by the attacks on the country, and that law of war paradigm applies. That’s what the whole case —

LEAHY: I don’t think the President was talking about the nuances of the law of war paradigm, he was saying this was going to tell him that he could keep Guantanamo open or not, after it said he could.

BRADBURY: Well, it’s not —

LEAHY: Was the President right or was he wrong?

BRABURY: It’s under the law of war –

LEAHY: Was the President right or was he wrong?

BRADBURY: The President is always right.

Note: Funny – I don't remember anyone, including myself, ever applying that standard to Bill Clinton! This is a CULT, the focus of which is a the most pathetic specimen of humanity the worshippers could find.

Book Review: The Amber Spyglass

The Amber Spyglass by Philip Pullman*****

At the end of The Subtle Knife, Lyra was kidnapped by Mrs. Coulter, who we find at the beginning of The Amber Spyglass has turned against the Church and fled to a remote mountain village where she is keeping her daughter in a drugged sleep in order to “protect” her. Will, accompanied by the angels Baruch and Balthamos, insists on rescuing Lyra before he will take the subtle knife to Lord Asriel. After a harrowing escape from Mrs. Coulter and now accompanied by Lord Asriel’s tiny Gallevespian agents, the two determine to travel to the land of the dead to find Will’s father and Lyra’s friend Roger, which will test their courage and strength of will more than anything they have been through so far. Meanwhile, Mary Malone, the physicist and ex-nun who helped them in the previous book, finds herself in another alternate world, where evolution itself has taken a different turn and a conscious species called mulefa has developed.

In the course of the book we will go with Lyra and Will to the world of the dead, at the entrance of which she will be forced to make the great betrayal foretold by the witches and others; witness the final battle between the forces of Lord Asriel and those of the Authority as well as Lyra’s parents’ final grand gesture on her behalf; and end up in a quiet field in the world of the mulefa as Lyra and Will make a momentous discovery that sets the history of Dust (and consciousness) on the right path again.

The Amber Spyglass contains many mature and disturbing themes that parents might want to discuss with their children, such as the nature of death, whether the Authority is really God Himself or only some people’s warped, twisted idea of God, and the fact that sometimes we must give up what matters most to us in order to live a full life. Pullman doesn’t pull any punches or shoehorn his story into a conventional “happy ending,” and of course it’s hard to imagine any of the greatest romances becoming an everyday life together with screaming kids and arguments about the car. The main ideas that this series communicates to me are: 1) True stories are “nourishing,” as No-name the harpy puts it, “truth” meaning much more fact; 2) Keeping promises and keeping faith with individuals is more important than “saving the world” – in fact, that may be what saves the world. 3) We must live in the here and now, whether or not we believe, as Pullman does, that there isn’t anywhere else. (In Judaism we are told that we will have to account to God after our deaths for the things we didn’t enjoy during our lives.)

A major theme of this particular book seems to be cooperation, as time and time again people who start a relationship in mutual distrust come to respect each other and work together for a common good. The society of the mulefa has been accused by some of being like a hippie commune. However, in addition to being a different species which may not have some of the violent impulses that seem to be part of human nature, it could be argued that because they only have one prehensile appendage, a trunk, instead of two hands, the fact that they need to cooperate in order to do many of the things that we can do alone may have caused nature to select for tolerance and the ability to get along.

I feel that this entire series would be perfect for teenagers who are wrestling with their own doubts about the role of religion in their lives, although it should be pointed out to them that Pullman’s almost uniformly negative Church is a fictional one and that most of the best qualities that his characters possess are also valued by most or all religions in their truest forms. I also feel that this book, in particular, can only really be appreciated after at least one rereading, as it is much deeper and more philosophical (to quote another Amazon reviewer) than the first two.

Just in time for the 4th of July...

King George and his minions, declaring war on the freedom of the press. This is a very long post, but worth it. Please click on title for full story.

"Media Matters"; by Paul Waldman

A declaration of war

This week, the conservatives declared war.

Not on The New York Times. Not even on the media in general. No, this week the entire conservative movement -- from the White House to Republicans in Congress to Fox News to right-wing talk radio to conservative magazines -- declared war on the very idea of an independent press.

They declared war on the idea that journalists have not just the right but the obligation to hold those in power accountable for their actions. They declared war on the idea that journalists, not the government and not a political party, get to decide what appears in the press. They declared war on the idea that the public has a right to know what the government is doing in our name.

This is a profound threat to our democracy, and we underestimate it at our peril.

Book Review: Lapdogs

Lapdogs by Eric Boehlert ****

Lapdogs: How the Press Rolled Over for Bush, is a devastating indictment of the so-called mainstream media (MSM) for their fawning, credulous treatment of the Bush administration throughout its tenure, particularly but not exclusively in the wake of 9/11 and the lead-up to the Iraq war. With meticulous documentation of his accusations, Boehlert makes mincemeat of the right-wing cry of “liberal bias” and shows that while the MSM may not necessarily be conservative, their fear of attack by the well-oiled right-wing echo chamber means that they effectively are, for the most part, a mouthpiece for the administration. Economic considerations such as media consolidation, cuts in newsroom staff, the drive for profit, and the healthy incomes of many media higher-ups also play a part.

Although he acknowledges honorable exceptions, Boehlert shows over and over again how the media spun administration and right-wing talking points, ignored and marginalized critics and dissenters, and often, when they did do real investigative reporting, as with the NSA wiretapping story and disturbing information about some of Bush’s judicial nominees, only came through when it was too late to make the difference it should have. Reporting of the NSA story or Bush’s probable cheating in the debates, for example, might have led to a different outcome in the 2004 election, but the electorate was denied vital information that might have affected their decision.

Particularly instructive is Boehlert’s in-depth analysis of two similar stories and their diametrically opposed treatment by the MSM: the ignoring of the credible allegation that Bush blew off his National Guard duty (which did not depend solely on Dan Rather’s questionable memos but were supported by careful study of thousands of government documents); and the respect, even deference, shown by the so-called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, whose claims were easily debunked, contradictory and shown to be partisan by the most cursory examination of their backgrounds.

A depressing and sobering analysis of a true nadir in the history of American journalism.

Note: Considering the hysterical, vitriolic denunciation of the NY Times (and, for the most part, only the NY Times) in the past week over its story about the administration’s investigation of banking records, we can now see what they were afraid of. It remains to be seen whether the foaming-at-the-mouth accusations of treason, etc. will have a chilling effect or make the Times and others in the MSM realize just how stupid they have been over the past five and a half years.

Book Review: The Secet of Castle Cant

The Secret of Castle Cant by K.P. Bath *****

Orphaned Lucy Wickwright is the long-suffering maidservant and involuntary co-conspirator in the madcap exploits of her mistress Pauline, heiress to the Barony of Cant. However, their relatively carefree childhoods are rapidly nearing an end. Amid ominous rumblings of discontent and even revolution, Lucy finds herself caught up in plots against Pauline and the gum-chewing aristocracy of Cant, and must decide where her loyalties lie.

Intelligent and well-written with an original premise (the premodern barony of Cant, tucked away in the creases of modern maps, which allows for modern incursions such as chewing gum and t-shirts), _The Secret of Castle Cant_ is a very promising first novel. The author's strongest suit, in my opinion, is the fact that he, like the best authors for young readers including J.K. Rowling, obviously respects the intelligence of his readers and doesn't write down to them. His "footnotes" and other references to the "history" of Cant also suggest that this world has not just been casually thrown together but carefully developed in his mind.

Pauline and Lucy develop a wonderful friendship that outweighs their original class differences and, while spoiled, Pauline is portrayed sympathetically and is obviously in the process of changing to a better, less thoughless person by the end of the book. Lucy is fiercely loyal and, while her methods for avoiding trouble without strictly lying may be deplored by some parents, her use of them is certainly realistic (I know I did it), and is unfortunately in common use by many adult public figures these days. My only criticism is that boys close to the heroines' ages seem to be portrayed as either stupid or arrogant, but I hope that will be remedied in the next book.

Altogether this was an enjoyable book, and I'm eagerly awaiting the sequel.

Sorry, George – it's nothing to do with you

(Why we haven’t been attacked again, that is.) Except, of course, that you’re doing exactly what Osama bin Laden wants you to do, you twit! Click on title for full story (bold is my emphasis).

Al Qaeda Strategic Vision: Engage the U.S. Overseas, Not at Home

June 27, 2006 10:09 AM
Maddy Sauer Reports:

Al Qaeda's strategic vision involves challenging the United States and its allies overseas using small- to medium-scale attacks, according to an online book available on extremist websites that has become the seminal jihadi textbook. The first English translation of the text is being circulated this week among DOD and government policy circles.

The translation is being released by the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point. As ABC News reported last month, the Center has been translating thousands of declassified insurgent and extremist documents that were seized in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Abu Bakr Naji, an al Qaeda insider and author of the book, "The Management of Savagery," believes that the 9/11 attacks accomplished what they needed to by forcing the U.S. to commit their military overseas. He says 9/11 forced the U.S. to fall into the "trap" of overextending their military and that "it began to become clear to the American administration that it was being drained."

Note: Not that I've seen any sign that it has become clear to anyone in the "American Administration," except maybe for a few renegades, that it's being "drained."

On a more serious note...

Unfortunately, since I didn't post earlier this week, I didn't get a chance to express my outrage and horror at the deaths of Pfc. Kristian Menchaca, 23, of Houston, Texas and Pfc. Thomas L. Tucker, 25, of Madras, Oregon, the two soldiers whose bodies were found earlier this week. Horrible as the circumstances were, though, the mere loss of a loved one in Iraq (16 in the last week alone) has to be bad enough for the parents, children, other relatives and friends left behind that it can't get much worse.

In response to those on the right who have been calling for "revenge," a desire for vengeance may be a satisfying personal feeling and is certainly understandable, especially in those who, unlike Rush Limbaugh et al., knew and loved the deceased, but it has no place in policy decisions. I remember hearing the late Simon Wiesenthal speak several years ago, and after all this time I can still hear him, a man who lost his entire family and several years of his youth at the hands of the Nazis, insisting that justice, not vengeance, was what was needed, while also acknowledging the impossibility of meting out a proportionate justice to those whose victims numbered in the hundreds, thousands, or millions.

As promised, the sexy cat photos...

OK, OK, I was just kidding about the sexy part. This is Jake, whose mere presence has had Shadow extremely annoyed for the past few days, even though he's very friendly and doesn't bother her at all. Unfortunately she's convinced that all other cats are like her nemesis Beanie (aka Beanzlebub), who chased and pounced on her constantly in our last apartment. He only wanted to play (I assume) but couldn't seem to get it through his head that she's a dignified older lady who only plays when she feels like it. (OK, when she's resting on her back with her feet in the air she doesn't look that dignified.) Above and on the right is Shadow's reaction to Jake.

Book Review: A Dark Dividing

A Dark Dividing by Sarah Rayne *****

What are the connections between two sets of conjoined ("Siamese") twins born eighty years apart and a ramshackle onetime workhouse named Mortmain (Dead [Man's} Hand)? These are the questions that down-and-out reporter Harry McGlen ends up answering after his editor assigns him to do a story on the enigmatic photographer Simone Marriot (née Alexander).

In this elegant and atmospheric thriller, Sarah Rayne shifts effortlessly among multiple viewpoints (the mothers of both sets of twins, Harry, and Simone, among others) without ever losing the thread of her complicated story, and keeps the reader turning the pages until the satisfying ending, which is the most difficult trick of all, since I find that books that start out with promising premises such as this one often fall flat at the end.

If you enjoy this book I would also recommend Thomas Cook and Robbert Goddard, who write a similar type of fiction – suspense tinged with a nostalgic sadness and often with an all too natural (as opposed to supernatural) horror.

My bad

Yes, I have been very bad this week, not posting anything, especially when such momentous events have been happening. Rick Santorum, obviously delusional as a result of the fact that he has something like the second lowest approval rating in the Senate and is way behind his Democratic opponent, announced that we found the long-sought weapons of mass destruction, but it’s a secret! Come on – wouldn’t the White House be yelling it from the rooftops if they had been vindicated?

Congress, continuing its slide into irrelevance, seems to have spent the last couple of weeks debating non-binding resolutions, although at least the Democrats have the excuse of not being able to bring real, meaningful laws to the floor since they’re not in charge. The Republicans also decided that they have no chance of ever capturing the black vote and have put off (forever?) renewing the Voting Rights Act. Greg Palast, author of Armed Madhouse and the journalist who broke the Florida “felon” purge story, also suggests that not renewing it allows them to violate its provisions with impunity.

In my personal life, it’s been a fun week since Shadow has been playing involuntary hostess to a very friendly little gray and white cat who got left behind (unintentionally) when his person moved. I keep telling her that his “pet parent” will be picking him up soon – I certainly hope so, nice as he is. At least she did let him up onto the bed last night, since I woke up with one on either side of me, so if we do have to keep him they won’t be at constant loggerheads. Maybe I can put up a picture later. I’ve seen in the comments that some people don’t think I have enough graphics.

The Washington Post or The Onion?

I swear, this career summary for Zarqawi’s replacement (from the Washington Post), sounds exactly like something you’d write about the new CEO of a major company. You can’t make stuff like this up!

A veteran of the Zawahiri-led Egyptian Islamic Jihad and of al-Qaeda's organization in Afghanistan, Masri – also a pseudonym, meaning "the Egyptian" – has been in Iraq at least since 2003, officials said. Since the 2004 battle of Fallujah, he had been a trusted lieutenant of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the insurgent leader killed in a U.S. attack north of Baghdad last week.

Speaking to reporters today, Masri said that he was “excited” about his new position and was “looking forward to the challenge” of being George W. Bush’s newest boogeyman and chief evildoer. (my addition – can you tell?)

Some thoughts on recent events (in no particular order)

Karl Rove’s non-indictment: Bummer, but as has been said, it’s always possible that it’s in return for his cooperation on going after other, bigger fish. A good question raised on one of the blogs – why won’t his lawyer release the entire text of the letter? Then there’s the interesting saga of “Sealed v. Sealed” on truthout.org. Even if it’s nothing to do with Rove, what is it about? Has anyone else confirmed that this indictment exists? (Shouldn’t be too hard for anyone with journalism experience.) And to me, what Rove’s lawyer (or Fitzgerald’s letter) said seems to be very carefully worded legalese. “In a statement, Mr. Luskin said, ‘On June 12, 2006, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald formally advised us that he does not anticipate seeking charges against Karl Rove.’” There can always be unanticipated events.

Dubya’s visit to “Iraq”: If, indeed, you can call the Green Zone “Iraq.” To paraphrase Randi Rhodes, take off your coat and stay awhile, sir. Get out, see the sights, meet the people. Unless, that is, you’re too scared. He’s essentially admitted that either he’s a coward or that, after three years, the place is so dangerous he can’t make a real visit, or both of the above. And all this stuff about closing the airport for an hour and then giving the “Prime Minister” only five minutes’ notice. First of all, in a real sovereign country, no one could shut down the main airport without the leader of the country even knowing. Secondly, the five minutes’ notice just shows that Maliki, however good his intentions may be, is nothing but a lackey to be summoned at a snap of the fingers from the Emperor. The complete and utter contempt shown by that little detail, and its reporting in the media, is going to do wonders for the perception (in Iraq and elsewhere) of Maliki’s independence and freedom from American control.

The suicides at Guantanamo and the government’s reaction thereto: Disgraceful. “An act of asymmetrical warfare waged against us.” I suppose that this means that those of our troops who have committed suicide will be court-martialed for desertion. And this from a Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy: “A good PR move to draw attention.” Obviously a graduate of the John Bolton School of Diplomacy.

Worse than Ann Coulter: David Horowitz defending her on Larry King slandered half the country as well as, incidentally, his own party. “Conservatives...see half the country abandoning our troops in the field. You can’t support the troops and not support the war.” Evidently he isn’t aware of the Republicans claiming during the action in Kosovo that they could support the troops and not support the war, or the Commander-in-Chief.

Laura — worse than Dubya, in my opinion

As far as I’m concerned she’s worse because a) she’s smarter than he is, so, unless she’s medicated out of her mind, which may be, considering the “Stepford wife“ expression she usually wears, she knows that his policies are wrong, and b) she enables him in everything that he does.

Click on title for full story.

Area candidates embrace a visit by Laura Bush

By Cynthia Burton
Inquirer Staff Writer

As Republican candidates around the country avoid appearances with President Bush or Vice President Cheney, two in the Philadelphia area - U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum in Pennsylvania and Senate challenger Thomas H. Kean Jr. in New Jersey - welcome visiting Laura Bush today with open war chests.

"Laura Bush is safe," Republican political consultant Dave Murray said.

People don't blame her for the war in Iraq, rising gasoline prices, or unpopular administration policies.

You mean she didn't just crawl out of a cesspit somewhere?

Daily Kos has a link to an excellent editorial written as a letter to Ann Coulter's mother(!) in her hometown newspaper (excerpt below) about her lovely daughter's slandering of the "Jersey girls." In case you haven't seen what Coulter said in her latest book, here's the worst of it: "These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much."

Peter Urban of the Connecticut Post writes:

Through my work, I met the New Jersey widows — and other 9-11 family victims — often over the last five years because Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., and Rep. Christopher Shays, R-4, took up their cause.

Shays, in particular, has continued to fight for additional reforms that the 9-11 Commission recommended. He is driven largely by the memory of 87 constituents who died in the attacks. Those 87 individuals were your neighbors, too.

Anyway, the widows came to Washington and pushed for an independent commission and then lobbied for the commission's recommendations to be implemented. They never sought celebrity and I never saw them enjoying the deaths of those they held dearest.

Personally I find it hard to conceive of Coulter having a mother. Maybe her real mother was a hyena or whatever like in The Omen, and she was just given to this poor woman to raise. I always pictured her crawling out of a swamp or hatching like a reptile.

Anyway, maybe Mrs. Coulter could tell us what happened to Ann in her childhood to turn her into the pathetic hate-filled creature that she is today, and whether she is proud or ashamed of inflicting this wretched excuse for a human being upon an undeserving world. On the other hand, Ann’s utter narcissism and total disregard for others may be a result of her upbringing. I know that if she were a child of mine I would change my name and move to Australia rather than admit it.

(Regarding the use of a connection to 9/11 for fun and profit, Keith Olbermann reminds us that on 9/13/01, while the fires were still smouldering at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, “our Annie” was proclaiming her rage over the death of her friend Barbara Olsen — as if the attack had been aimed at her personally rather than the entire country, as she would say — and demanding that we “invade [the hijackers’] countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity.” I’m still waiting for the former governor of Texas to invade Saudia Arabia, which provided 15 of the 19, or for Coulter to criticize him for not invading them.)

It's so good to know that our leaders are on top of things

Evidently I'm living in an alternate reality, since Congress feels that it has nothing better to do than to debate gay marriage, flag burning and the Paris Hilton tax cut. (I can't take credit for that last one, but the opponents of eliminating the estate tax cut should use it - over and over again. Or maybe the Barbara and Jenna tax cut, except that they haven't been too obnoxious lately.) This is the laziest bunch since Truman's "do-nothing" Congress and they still can't find anything to talk about besides this drivel.

I'm glad to see that at least some of the Democrats are taking the time to list some of the many, many other issues that are more pressing than any of these things - gas prices, Iraq, spiraling health care costs, New Orleans and the rest of the places in the Gulf that are still waiting for help, genocide in Darfur, etc., etc., etc.

Chag Sameach

Shavuot begins tonight – have a good one if you celebrate it. Originally an agricultural festival celebrating the barley harvest and the bringing of the “first fruits” to the temple, it was historicized by the rabbis of the Talmud to commemorate the giving of the Ten Commandments on Mt. Sinai, fifty days after Passover. (The Christian analogue is Pentecost, which bears a similar relationship to Easter.) Traditionally, the book of Ruth is read on Shavuot. Not only is it set at the time of the barley harvest; it also chronicles the acceptance of the Jewish covenant with God by Ruth, a young Moabite woman who becomes the great-grandmother of King David and by extension an ancestress of the Messiah. It is believed to have been written as a rebuttal to the xenophobia that ran rampant after the return of the Jews from the Babylonian exile, when many of those who had remained behind and married non-Jewish women were forced to abandon them, along with their children. Shades of today’s immigration debate, a great deal of which is fueled by xenophobia, whatever legitimate concerns there may be.

And they don't have eyes because God created them underground (sarcasm)

Cool! Click on title for full story.

Prehistoric ecosystem found in Israeli cave

Wed May 31, 8:10 AM ET

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israeli scientists said on Wednesday they had discovered a prehistoric ecosystem dating back millions of years.

The discovery was made in a cave near the central Israeli city of Ramle during rock drilling at a quarry. Scientists were called in and soon found eight previously unknown species of crustaceans and invertebrates similar to scorpions

Memorial Day

We must remember all those who gave their lives in the service of our country, but the most recent are always the most poignant, especially when we consider that as immoral, illegal and unnecessary as this war is, if it had at least been conducted competently, so many of these people (and so many Iraqis) would still be alive today.

Note how evenly the casualties are distributed across the "coalition."

There have been 2,690 coalition deaths, 2,466 Americans, two Australians, 113 Britons, 13 Bulgarians, three Danes, two Dutch, two Estonians, one Fijian, one Hungarian, 30 Italians, one Kazakh, one Latvian, 17 Poles, two Romanians, two Salvadoran, three Slovaks, 11 Spaniards, two Thai and 18 Ukrainians in the war in Iraq as of May 29, 2006, according to a CNN count. ... At least 18,184 U.S. troops have been wounded in action, according to the Pentagon.

From CNN.com