Saturday, March 22, 2003
Blinding Flash - of Epipany! - An American "peace protester", in Iraq on Human Shield duty, saw the light before he fled to Jordan today:A group of American anti-war demonstrators who came to Iraq with Japanese human shield volunteers made it across the border today with 14 hours of uncensored video, all shot without Iraqi government minders present. Kenneth Joseph, a young American pastor with the Assyrian Church of the East, told UPI the trip "had shocked me back to reality." Some of the Iraqis he interviewed on camera "told me they would commit suicide if American bombing didn't start. They were willing to see their homes demolished to gain their freedom from Saddam's bloody tyranny. They convinced me that Saddam was a monster the likes of which the world had not seen since Stalin and Hitler. He and his sons are sick sadists. Their tales of slow torture and killing made me ill, such as people put in a huge shredder for plastic products, feet first so they could hear their screams as bodies got chewed up from foot to head."This may be my single favorite paragraph from this war so far. I wish I could have pasted it on a sign at the rallies today.
Next week for sure.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/22/2003 06:15:04 PM
The Other Protest - I figure there were about 1/4 as many people at the MacAlester protest. As I arrived, they were marching west down Grand Avenue toward the MacAlester quadrangle. The march was led by a loudspeaker truck at the front of a group of a couple hundred Peace Youth. A doughy fella with a very grating voice was leading the Peace Youth in the usual chants - some of them very ornate, of the type that bespeaks lots of prep time. They filed into the Quad to sit and listen to scads of folk musicians who looked as if they'd been transplanted from the '60s - and at least one speaker who actually had been, Jerry Rachleff from MacAlester College.
I wish I'd had either a digital camera or a notepad with me.
I'd welcome your observations from either rally.Paul Wellstone:
I stood there for a moment, dumfounded, trying to figure what, if anything, to say to the woman; the song (a very important one to me lately) is an elegy to the NYC firemen who died in the World Trade Center. I opened my mouth, but the words just didn't come out.
"May your strength give us strength,
may your faith give us faith,
may your hope give us hope,
may your love give us love"
Bruce Springsteen, "Into The Fire".
posted by Mitch Berg 3/22/2003 05:17:32 PM
Protest - They were saying 20,000 people attended the rally at the capitol today.
I wandered through the crowd. During the course of the beautiful afternoon, I must have cased the entire Capitol Mall. I stood up under the dais, and back across Constitution Avenue talking with a very outnumbered band of protesters.
It was a beautiful sight.
And unlike the Anti-Bush demonstrations plagueing so many cities, nobody took their clothes off; nobody pooped on the Capitol steps; nobody blocked traffic or spit on anyone; nobody threw eggs or fake blood or generally disgraced their parents.
No, it was pretty workadaddy, huggamommy Minnesota polite. Mostly. More on that later.
But not all was perfect. A Moslem woman - who, according to one event volunteer, was as pro-intervention as any ex-Marine in attendance - was booed for trying to bring a little moral and political nuance to the proceedings. Talking about trying to mend fences with the Arab world earned her a round of catcalls and "U.S.A, U.S.A"s that nearly drove her from the stage, bringing the MC to the mic to calm the crowd (or at least a rather loud part of it) into order. Not a great moment for Minnesota Nice, or Minnesota Smart for that matter.
On the other hand, the tiny pack of anti-Bush protesters didn't do a whole lot better. About of dozen of them - college kids and some fiftyish ones - stood across Constitution Avenue from the Mall, carrying signs and, occasionally, heckling. As I got to the demonstration, the Moslem woman had just begun speaking. She said something in support of the war, and one of the students barked out, taking her voice, "...a war that's killing my Moslem Brothers".
Coming back at the end of the rally, the police and Highway Patrol were keeping the anti-Bush protesters apart from a small gaggle of pro-liberation demonstrators (which grew rapidly). The "conversation" degenerated rapidly into slogans on both sides before either side could get to the essential illogic of the other. You can't win 'em all.
I'm on my way to MacAlester now, where rumor had it there's an Anti-Bush protest going on. A group of pro-liberation protesters wanted to put in an appearance. We'll see.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/22/2003 02:51:13 PM
Rally - I'm on my way to the big rally at the Capitol. Noon to 2PM.
Hope to see you there.
Quote Of the Day - Yesterday Edition - Sullivan from yesterday's Daily Dish:It's really wonderful to watch apologists for inaction now have to watch as action defeats evil. They will change the subject; they will attack those who got this entire story right while they got it entirely wrong. But they will never reconsider... The forces of evil are being dealt a terrible blow on the battle-field. But their chattering enablers are about to be politically annihilated.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/22/2003 11:14:19 AM
Site of the Apocalypse? - Perhaps the most interesting feedback I've gotten on the redesign came from Plain Layne:
Once upon a time life was comprised of three certainties -- death, taxes, and the unremittingly earth-toned palette of Shot in the Dark. Except it's not unremittingly earth-toned anymore. Mitch has implemented a custom masthead graphic and enough touchy-feely blue to make Kofi Annan proud. What next, product placements for Martha Stewart? This must be the beginning of the end...
Hey, what's wrong with earth tones? My old site design reminded me of every apartment I had when i was single the first time.
But seriously, thanks to everyone for the very kind feedback!
posted by Mitch Berg 3/22/2003 11:00:40 AM
Another Quote Of The Day - "“Oh no. They’re surrendering at us from all sides.” -- British Royal Marine Commando, quoted in The Times as the Al Faw garrison performed a human wave surrender..
posted by Mitch Berg 3/22/2003 10:16:32 AM
Catholics - I rarely get as much feedback as I did when I tackled the Catholic notion of the just war, and the Catholic Bishops' and Pope's positions on war, the the catholic concept of the Just War.
It's clear the most American catholics disagree with the Pope - as Jason Lewis said the other night, "even if you are a Catholic, the Pope is not infallible on matters of politics".
So this article, in The Tablet (a British theological magazine) on catholic Americans' dual loyalties, is interesting:Many of those outside St Perpetua’s [the pseudonym chosen for the Long Island parish the magazine visited] wore little metal lapel pins of the stars and stripes, and they told me they were prouder to be Americans now than for many years. No one I spoke to doubted the justice of the American cause, although some worried about the consequences; all seemed braced by churchgoing for the fight. “If it’s a crusade, then it’s got be our crusade”, said one youngish mother. And a thoughtful middle-aged man told me: “You know, throughout history, standing up to evil has been the Catholic way.”
I love this next part:
But it is not a way endorsed by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, which recently pronounced that this war did not and “would not meet the strict conditions of Catholic teaching for the use of military force”. It is a way forbidden by the Vatican, which calls the war “a crime against peace”, and which sent Cardinal Pio Laghi to warn Bush off. The cardinal issued a statement boasting that there is “great unity on this grave matter on the part of the Holy See, the bishops in the United States, and the Church throughout the world”; the White House riposte was that the war “would make the world better”, and that the President’s first duty was to protect his people.
Still, a quarter of his people are Catholics. Must not the enmity of their Communion to the President’s great enterprise impede it, or at least threaten his hold on half the Catholic vote?
Well, no. Dan Bartlett, Bush’s communications director, shrugs off the Church’s condemnation of the war: “There are many Catholics who support it; I am one of them.” Polls showed American Catholics in favour of a unilateral assault on Iraq by two to one: much the same proportion as non-Catholics. Laghi is right that the Pope and his bishops stand united against the war. But this episcopal unity does not matter. For most American Catholics the dilemma of divided loyalty is simply not much of a dilemma. ohn Paul, despite his approval of forcible intervention in East Timor and Bosnia, is widely perceived as a pacifist, and therefore not a serious commentator. “It’s the Pope’s job to shake his head over the wicked way of the world”, I was told by another white-haired, loyal worshipper at another parish, forthright and cheerful in sensible shoes and medal of Lourdes. “And it’s our job to do something about it.”
I'm not in the least bit Catholic - although the main governing body of my church, the Presbyterians, may be farther to the left than the American Bishops, and unlike the Catholics, may have a congregation to match. Which is interesting - mainstream Catholics in the US are probably more unabashedly pro-liberation as a group than are most mainstream Presbyterians and Methodists, whose leaderships aren't as irredeemably anti-war as the Pope and the Bishops.
And with that remark we come to the core of the matter.
It has often been observed that American Catholics sound more like American Baptists or Presbyterians than like Old World Catholics. They share with their Protestant compatriots an intensely privatised religiosity, an intensely privatised conscience. Nancy Pelosi, Democratic leader in the House of Representatives, has given an amazing interview to the National Catholic Reporter explaining that, despite her views on women priests and abortion, she remains a conservative Catholic because she enjoyed a “strict upbringing in a Catholic home where the fundamental belief was that God gave us all a free will and we were accountable for that, each of us”. In the United States, that does not seem an eccentric definition of Catholicism.
It's a never-ending conflict.
(Via Sullivan)
posted by Mitch Berg 3/22/2003 10:10:43 AM
Attention, Anti-Bush Protestors - This, from today's Sullivan:
"You're late. What took you so long? God help you become victorious... I want to say hello to Bush, to shake his hand. We came out of the grave.
Welcome to the world.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/22/2003 09:36:33 AM
Friday, March 21, 2003
Allies - Australian forces are in action in Iraq:
General Cosgrove (an Australian Military spokesman said RAAF F-18) Hornets were continuing to escort coalition planes, including airborne early warning aircraft and air-to-air refuellers above Iraq.
Some people on the left sneer that we only have two allies. When you remind them that we actually have 45 allies, they sneer a little harder "well, only two are supplying troops".
General Cosgrove said they were currently flying 12 sorties a day.
"And while they have had some close encounters with enemy anti-aircraft artillery ... none of our aircraft have been hit and they've all completed their missions," he said.
Gen Cosgrove also said a contingent of SAS [Australian Special Air Service - their special forces] troopers had engaged in a firefight with Iraqi soldiers in a command post which they discovered deep inside Iraq.
He said the SAS soldiers had been on a reconaissance mission when they came across the concealed command and control post.
"I'm delighted - relieved - to report that there were no Australian casualties," Gen Cosgrove said.
SAS troops gave first aid to Iraqi soldiers injured in a skirmish in the opening stages of the war, Gen Cosgrove said.
He said Australia's special forces had been involved in four battles since the war began and there had been no Australian casualties.
Hm. During the Cold War, at times it was just us.
With allies like the UK and Oz, I don't feel so bad at all. Andrew Sullivan calls this new axis the "Anglosphere" - a loose union of people based not on the English language, but on the English legal and political traditions of rule of law and due process.
More on the war tomorrow.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/21/2003 09:26:01 PM
Benefits of War? - I've been job-hunting since early January.
Since Tuesday, I've come across more job leads than I found in all of February together.
And since the attack on Iraq started, something that's not happened in over a year - a potential employer actually called me.
Two of them.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/21/2003 06:34:15 PM
Hmmm... - Word has it that an entire Iraqi division, the 51st, has surrendered en masse in the Basra area.
On CNN, one talking head was commenting on the processing of these huge groups of prisoners. According to the head, the officers will be allowed to keep their sidearms after the grunts are disarmed. They're allowed to stay in their barracks, with a small group of Americans/Brits/whomever to watch over them. The US is trying, the talking head says, to avoid having camps full of POWs to clothe, feed and secure.
Before the war, many pundits said it'd take hundreds of thousands of workers to rebuild Iraq. So here's what I'm wondering; might the US be keeping the Iraqi regular army (as opposed to the Repubican Guards and Special Guards) in some state of being?
Think about it - in Iraq today, there are no institutions other than the Ba'ath Party and the military. The Ba'ath's days are rather strictly numbered, of course - but I'm wondering if there might be a benefit to keeping the one, solitary nationwide non-Ba'ath institution going as both a coherent, relatively disciplined labor force on the on hand, and a unifying piece of psychological and social infrastructure on the other?
posted by Mitch Berg 3/21/2003 06:31:20 PM
Goodman - Ellen Goodman's latest column from the Boston Glob is a keeper.
For all the wrong reasons, of course.
In this column, she covers new territory - attacking conservativetalkradio. The funniest quote of the lot is at the end:We go into this war carrying the casualties of the prewar season: a kitbag of half-truths. What medium is now black and white and yellow all over? Stay tuned.
That, of course, after this column:BOSTON -- This is how I spent the week before the war. Driving across the Florida landscape, locked in the alternate universe of talk radio.
Some straight lines are just. Too. Easy.
I tuned in as an act of professional penance, and I'm sorry now that I didn't take my hands off the wheel to make notes. But I took away lasting memories of propaganda, a souvenir list of fact-free opinions delivered by a cast of angry baritones.
But since Ellen didn't take notes, we don't know what facts they lacked, or indeed what voices they were. We'll just have to take her word for it.Somewhere between Orlando and Tampa, a host spent the morning touting the discovery of an Iraqi drone as the smoking gun in the case against Iraq. Reporters on the scene would describe this drone as a "weed whacker with wings."
Ellen Goodman's world is much like ours except that conservative stances never have any context. There was another host, somewhere between Tampa and Fort Myers, who took antiwar women's groups angrily to task on the grounds that the women of Iraq were bitterly oppressed. He didn't seem to know that Iraq -- which surely oppresses both genders -- is a secular state where women are more equal than among our friends the Saudis.
Good thing I'm not driving.
That's right, Ms. Goodman - within the context of a society that has killed a million of its own citizens, imprisons political prisoners by the tens of thousands,where the secret police feed dissidents into plastic shredders as their families look on in mute horror, where wives and daughters are systematically raped by the secret police as their husbands and fathers are forced to watch (and as all wait to be murdered), where the government starves the peasantry to pay for rebuilding the military he squandered in 1991 - yes, Ellen, within that context, women are equal. In the same manner that men and women on a deflating life raft are equal.On the last lap between Fort Myers and Naples, there was the assertion, repeated again and again, that Saddam was somewhere behind the terrorism of Sept. 11. Never mind that the CIA disagrees.
Never mind that it's irrelevant.I am normally protected from talk radio by my day job, but it was no surprise that the hosts were all right-wing. That is, by now, a given. Some venture capitalists are trying to start a left-leaning network, but today it's as if one medium has been thoroughly ceded to the right, and in this case pro-war, wing.
Why is it that the left never analyses that fact beyond its most facile level? Why has an entire subdivision of the American media swung to the right?
It's worth a whole 'nother post to explain to the likes of Ellen Goodman why conservative voices came to revitalize an entirely moribund band of the radio dial; it'll take me hours to write up all the reasons. But one big one is this: to have a place free of Ellen Goodman!.
And her ilk, of course.Remember reading about the Spanish-American War in 1898? Publishers like William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer built a war constituency and circulation in symbiotic frenzy with headlines like "The Country Thrilled with War Fever." According to legend, William Randolph Hearst sent a telegram to his reporter that said, "You supply the pictures and I'll supply the war."
EXACTLY, Ellen Goodman!
The news media of 100 years ago was intrinsically biased, in the pockets of a small number of influential interests. They were unchecked by any independen media - even an opposing, equally-yellow one.
Had they had a "liberal talk-broadsheet" 100 years ago, perhaps the influence of the Hearsts and Pulitzers would have been ameliorated!Today newspapers fret over ethics and hire ombudsmen and run correction boxes. The New York Post may blast the French and Germans with the headline "Axis of Weasel." But most of us have a "one hand" and "the other hand" and often wring them.
And after a day of hand-wringing and ombudsing, the mainstream media still considers Nina Totenberg and the New York Times "objective" and "mainstream", but labels John Stossel and Fox News "conservative".
See the problem, here?I am not saying that this is Talk Radio's War. It's not. It's this administration's war and will be, like it or not, this country's war. There has been enough reason for knowledgeable people with strong moral sensibilities to disagree about the short-term and long-run gains, about the risks of war and the risks of delay.
Absent, of course, is that the mainstream media were unabashedly pro-Clinton, when he was in office. Absent, of course, the vacuous illogic the "mainstream" media tossed at Ronald Reagan - unsuccessfully - during his presidency.
But talk radio has followed the leader. That leader, George W. Bush, has openly rejected nuance, embraced simplicity, applied spin when facts were enough. He has stayed "on message," unembarrassed to tell us that "I don't see many shades of gray in this world." So too talk radio, a medium that is equally black and white, us and them, good and evil. Talk radio has become the Bush National Radio Network, a support system for the pro-war movement.
Present, however, is all of the numbing arrogance that led to the rise of conservativetalkradio in the first place.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/21/2003 08:39:47 AM
McCain - The National Review (via Reding and Sgt. Stryker) has this wonderful speech by Senator McCain, responding to Robert Byrd's (Klan, WV) anti-Bush speech:
Madam President, there is one thing I am sure of, that we will find the Iraqi people have been the victims of an incredible level of brutalization, terror, murder, and every other kind of disgraceful and distasteful oppression on the part of Saddam Hussein's regime. And contrary to the assertion of the senator from West Virginia, when the people of Iraq are liberated, we will again have written another chapter in the glorious history of the United States of America, that we will fight for the freedom of other citizens of the world, and we again assert the most glorious phrase, in my view, ever written in the English language; and that is: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, and among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The people of Iraq , for the first time, will be able to realize those inalienable rights. I am proud of the United States of America. I am proud of the leadership of the president of the United States.
A commentator on Reding's site asked Jay "So all it takes for McCain to get back on your good side is one war-mongering remark? After running his name through the mud for his clearly unacceptable 10-15% annual rating of dissent from the ranks of the GOP leadership, you're willing to forgive him just for one blast of Robert Byrd?"
It is not an easy decision to send America's young men and women into harm's way. As I said before, some of them will not be returning. But to somehow assert, as some do, that the people of Iraq and the Middle East are not entitled to those same God-given rights that Americans and people all over the country are, that they do not have those same hopes and dreams and aspirations our own citizens do, to me, is a degree of condescension. I might even use stronger language than that to describe it. So I respectfully disagree with the remarks of the senator from West Virginia. I believe the president of the United States has done everything necessary and has exercised every option short of war, which has led us to the point we are today.
I believe that, obviously, we will remove a threat to America's national security because we will find there are still massive amounts of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Although Theodore Roosevelt is my hero and role model, I also, in many ways, am Wilsonian in the respect that America, this great nation of ours, will again contribute to the freedom and liberty of an oppressed people who otherwise never might enjoy those freedoms.
So perhaps the senator from West Virginia is right. I do not think so. Events will prove one of us correct in the next few days. But I rely on history as my guide to the future, and history shows us, unequivocally, that this nation has stood for freedom and democracy, even at the risk and loss of American lives, so that all might enjoy the same privileges or have the opportunity to someday enjoy the same privileges as we do in this noble experiment called the United States of America.
On this issue, on this day? Yes.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/21/2003 07:53:33 AM
Thursday, March 20, 2003
Victory - No, not in Iraq, but for me, almost as much fun to announce.
"AntiSmoking Youth"...er, I mean, Target Market", is shutting down. "I think there's a very strong feeling of resignation among staff members," said Toni Wehman, the group's press secretary.
As a Minnesota taxpayer for whom the Tobacco Lawsuit was ostensibly intended to refund excessive healthcare costs, and who saw millions poured down black holes like "Target Market", all I can say is "Thanks, Governor Pawlenty".
The future of the group has been uncertain since February, when Gov. Tim Pawlenty proposed draining the state's $446 million tobacco endowment to help fix the state's $4.2 billion budget deficit.
The endowment is the group's sole funding source. The Legislature must still approve Pawlenty's plan, but Health Department officials have decided it's a foregone conclusion.
"Even if the endowment isn't used in its entirety, there still won't be money to fund a statewide youth program," said John Stieger, department spokesman.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/20/2003 05:40:55 PM
Banner Day - Thanks for all the kind comments so far on the redesign. It's encouraging!
A few people did ask me what are all those pictures, and why are they there? Happy to oblige:
You ask, I answer!
posted by Mitch Berg 3/20/2003 03:24:33 PM
Pro-America, Pro-Liberation Rally- Saturday, noon to 2PM at the Capitol.
I will be there, in the crowd with, I hope, the rest of you.
Fellow MN Bloggers - anyone planning on attending? It'd be fun to have a blog corner, maybe get some pictures.
Write Me, let's talk.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/20/2003 03:04:39 PM
Decapitation? - Reports are bouncing about the 'net that Hussein may have bought it,, or at least be incommunicado and not directing his military.
UPDATE: OK, maybe not.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/20/2003 12:10:49 PM
Payoff - For two months, Israel's Debka, the "Drudge Report of the Defense world", has been reporting that US, UK, Australian and Jordanian special and psyops forces have been engaged in trying to get Iraqi units primed to surrender en masse when the balloon goes up.
Today - according to NPR via Jay Reding, it may be working. The report is uncomfirmed, of course, but gives us hope that we can avoid some of the bloodletting that happened 12 years ago.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/20/2003 11:19:39 AM
Some Dare Call It High Drama - Do you remember the good ol' days of the Clinton Administration, when some that even we Republicans called "people with issues" circulated lists of involved conspiracies involving the Clinton Administration? It spawned a sub-genre of comedy for a while - the Vast Rightwing Conspiracy of Dittoheaded Diggers after Skullduggerous Plots. Vince Foster and Ron Brown were exhumed - rhetorically, anyway - enough times to cast a thousand "Nights of the Living Dead".
But the beginning of the war has brought out the real experts.
Bill Berkowitz is a writer for "Working For Change". which describes him as "Bill Berkowitz is a longtime observer of the conservative movement. His WorkingForChange column Conservative Watch documents the strategies, players, institutions, victories and defeats of the American Right."
A simple search gives a more complete picture; Berkowitz is a fulltime purveyor of conspiracy theories about conservatives.
This article's been making the rounds among some of my left-of-center friends: War with Iraq opens door for accusations that continuing protests are anti-American and un-patriotic
Note the context: Berkowitz mentions perfectly legitimate counter-terror investigation of potential Iraqi agents in the US, to link it later in the article to the anti-war movement - trying to buy martyrdom by association.
ABCNEWS reported on March 18 that "the government will begin detaining dozens of suspected Saddam Hussein sympathizers in at least five U.S. cities this week.
According to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, "Iraqi state agents, Iraqi surrogate groups, other regional extremist organizations and ad hoc groups, and disgruntled individuals may use this time period to conduct terrorist attacks against the United States and our interests either here or abroad." What will happen to the US anti-war movement when the bombs start falling on Iraq?
Berkowitz's memory is both selective and defective.
As Paul Loeb and Geov Parrish recently wrote on this site, before the 1991 Gulf War "major protests surged through American and European cities, hoping to stop the war before it started. But once the war began, mainstream debate over the wisdom of war quickly became supplanted by the insistence that anything other than relentless cheerleading was disloyal to the troops -- and to the country."
Yes, the mainstream opinion turned against the protestors - because Americans supported the war! Absolutely nothing guarantees the protestor an easy time or instant acceptance by the majority!If massive protests continue after U.S. bombs start pounding Iraq, expect the anti-war movement to be lambasted by President Bush's pro-war minions. Radio and television pundits will crank up the volume, labeling protests un-patriotic and anti-American. Some may equate dissent with treason. Expect long-winded one-sided debates on the Fox News Channel, MSNBC and CNN focusing on the nature of treason.
Because debating is what they do! Especially when they can't fill their schedules with actual news - as we're seeing now.With even the mildest Congressional condemnation of war with Iraq stifled, the Bush Administration will take advantage of a jingoist climate and try and rush through the Justice Department's newly drafted "Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003," aka PATRIOT Act II. This draconian measure would expand the government's powers to gather intelligence on the home front; increased surveillance and the prosecution of American citizens could become the order of the day.
And herein lies Berkowitz' only legitimate point - we do have to be vigilant about our civil liberties.Over the past few months, as the US moved closer to war, pro-war columnists and radio and television gas bags began a campaign to demonize protesters, labeling them anti-American, Communists, or apologists for Hussein.
Berkowitz is being incredibly disingenous. The "gas bags" (name-calling does wonders for your credibilty, Berkster!) did a lot more than "label" the organizers of the protests. They did what any good journalist does - they traced the paper trail. They followed the money.
In the case of the Anti-Bush protest movement, they linked the organizers of the biggest wave of protests - A.N.S.W.E.R. - had their pro-dictatorship records fairly clearly exposed, and their links to the Stalinist "World Workers' Party" exposed. This is not "Labelling", this is "prosecution"!
Berkowitz is wrapping the protestors in a mantle of victimhood. It doesn't go with the blood on their shoes.Religious people and groups speaking out against the war, Hollywood celebrities, dissenting academics, "human shields" in Iraq, people committed to non-violent civil disobedience, and the all-too-few-but-gutsy politicians have all come under fire from pro-Bush critics.
Yes, indeed - they have.
Critics - on talk radio, the blogosphere, and all over - have criticized these groups for their faulty logic, the hypocrisies of their stances, and the skeletons in their respective closets. It's a "target rich environment", in the parlance of the day.# For quite some time, the Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly has been saying that dissent reflects America's freedom of expression before the advent of hostilities -- but after the war starts, anti-war protesters should take their signs and go home.
Yes. It's one man's opinion. O'Reilly is an entertainer, whose medium is yammering about the news. Neither he nor any of the other convenient conservative boogeymen - Limbaugh, Hannity, Jason Lewis - has any more mindshare than the public is willing to give them. Just like Mr. Berkowitz. People vote with their feet - and remotes. And they are speaking, today.On a recent edition of his nightly program, O'Reilly said that "Once the war against Saddam Hussein begins, we expect every American to support our military, and if you can't do that, just shut up. Americans, and indeed our foreign allies who actively work against our military once the war is underway, will be considered enemies of the state by me.
OK, Mr. Berkowitz - so what?
"Just fair warning to you, Barbra Streisand and others who see the world as you do. I don't want to demonize anyone, but anyone who hurts this country in a time like this, well, let's just say you will be spotlighted. Talking points invites all points of view and believes vigorous debate strengthens the country, but once decisions have been made and lives are on the line, patriotism must be factored in."
It's an opinion, in a medium that thrives on controversy. Turn the channel!# In early March, Fox News reported that Senator Lindsay Graham had asked Attorney General John Ashcroft "to provide him with a legal assessment of those Americans headed to or already in Iraq to offer themselves as 'human shields.'" Graham compared Americans acting as human shields with John Walker Lindh.
Yep. There are laws against giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Don't like them? Get them changed. It's a free country.
"It is my opinion that any American who voluntarily engages in conduct to impede a potential American military operation, and who thereby endangers the lives of our nation's men and women in uniform, is participating in a program designed to weaken the power of the United States to wage war successfully. I strongly believe efforts to impede a potential military operation against Iraq should be strongly dealt with and I am seeking your assistance in this matter."A recent column by conservative columnist Michelle Malkin echoed Senator Graham's sentiments: "What color is a human shield?" Malkin writes. "Crayola needs to invent a new hue weaker than lemonade and paler than jaundice: Traitor Yellow." Malkin says that the human shields are as "willfully treacherous as American al Qaeda enemy combatant John Walker Lindh. The only place that's fit for these stateless turncoats to call home is a detainee bunk bed at Guantanamo Bay."
Mr. Berkowitz - the last I checked, the lovely and talented Michelle Malkin's writings do not, as yet, have the force of law.
We're still allowed opinions.
Right?# In "An Open Letter To The Hollywood Bunch" dated March 4, the Nashville-based country western singer Charlie Daniels wrote: "Sean Penn, you're a traitor to the United States of America. You gave aid and comfort to the enemy. How many American lives will your little, 'fact finding trip' to Iraq cost? You encouraged Saddam to think that we didn't have the stomach for war."
And...?
So Charlie Daniels disapproves of your side. So burn his albums in a furor of righteous indignation, and sin no more!# As demonstrators were preparing for the February 15th anti-war rally march in New York City, the conservative New York Sun ran an editorial referring readers to Article III in the Constitution which says, "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court." The editorial suggested that "'anti-war' protesters -- we prefer to call them protesters against freeing Iraq -- are giving, at the very least, comfort to Saddam Hussein."
Indeed they are. But you, I, and the Sun all know that it's not actionable as Treason. So relax.# The Web site of Michael Savage, host of a popular daily talk-radio show and a weekly television program on MSNBC, features a banner headline: "The Sedition Act -- Time to Act. Time to Arrest the Leaders of the Anti-War Movement, Once we Go To War? We Must Protect Our Troops! Sponsor The Paul Revere Society!"
Yep. Michael "Weiner" Savage is another entertainer. He earns his keep by provoking people. That's what he's doing.Although right wing hectoring has not deterred the anti-war movement, you can bet that folks like Richard Perle, who recently labeled journalist Seymour Hersh "the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist"; Ann Coulter, whose new book -- set to be published sometime this spring -- is called "Treason"; and talk-radio's Rush Limbaugh and Savage will crank out the vitriol. In the name of "patriotism," their goal will be to silence dissent.
Really?
Because I think their goal is to get ratings and sell books, by simultaneously provoking and givng voice to the opinions of their listeners and readers.
And again - none of it has the force of law!And while the Bush administration has repeatedly portrayed anti-war protests as evidence of our very freedom, the US has in equal measure a history of suppression of dissent. Between 1917 and 1919, Congress passed legislation aimed at suppressing all forms of dissent....According to The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition, 2001, these laws were "vaguely worded and broadly interpreted, [and] they resulted in over 2,000 prosecutions, mostly against radicals and the radical press."
Indeed. The Espionage and Sedition Acts were grave mistakes. They were also 85 years ago, and at a time when the media was thoroughly pro-government, and only sporadically performed its function as a counterbalance to government excesses.
Can you say that's true today? A mid-March report by United Press International pointed out that "The most contentious provisions in the draft [of Patriot Act II] would allow the government to collect DNA from suspected terrorists or other individuals involved in terror investigations, and the power to revoke the citizenship of, and deport, naturalized citizens suspected of terror activities or of providing 'material support' to terrorist groups."
Indeed. And those same Americans need to make sure that the rhetoric of the Anti-Bush left doesn't go unscrutinized.
Robert Higgs, a senior fellow in political economy at the Oakland, Ca-based Independent Institute told UPI, "In my mind, if that doesn't absolutely epitomize totalitarianism I would like to know what does. They can categorize the most innocent action -- from signing a petition or making a charitable contribution -- as an act of terrorism."
Americans who care about democracy and civil liberties need to make sure Higg's nightmarish vision does not become reality. Silence will be our biggest enemy.
Although at times it might be your greatest asset.
Feedback is welcomed.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/20/2003 10:36:37 AM
Bigger News - I've been wanting to redesign this site since...well, ever since it went live, pretty much.
I'm actually sort of happy with it now.
Let me know what you think!
Now, on to the news of the day.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/20/2003 09:35:17 AM
Big News - Back to the drawing board on my redesign - there's work to do.
Oh yeah - and that war thing, too.
I'll be catching up on that, plus a couple days' reader email, after I get the kids on the bus.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/20/2003 07:22:22 AM
Wednesday, March 19, 2003
The Value of Life - Left-Style - I just read this quote from an Anti-Bush protester, who was busy blocking commuter traffic:
"The civilians in Iraq are losing their lives and one day of work is worth a thousand lives," said Leone Reinbold, an anti-war activist in San Francisco.
Figure the average worker in San Francisco earns about $60,000 a year - roughly $28 an hour. That means a typical day's work earns $230.77.
A thousand lives in exchange for a day at work, therefore, makes the value of one human life $0.23, according to Leone Reinhold, San Francisco leftist and, presumably, the rest of them as well.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/19/2003 06:59:12 PM
Pro-Next-War Rally? - Iranians in the Bay Area apparently want their country to be next in line:
"I think most everybody here is for it," said San Rafael resident Iraj Zolnasr, 40, who left Iran in 1975 to study accounting at San Francisco State University, of the nearly 1,000 attending the festivities on a crisp night under a full moon.
And this quote, from another woman at the event, who supports the invasion of Iraq, ""if there's a glimmer of hope that they might overthrow the government of Iran."
Upon graduation, and after the Islamic Revolution overthrew Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi in 1979, Zolnasr stayed in the United States because men his age were drafted to fight Saddam Hussein in a war from 1980 to 1988. Many Iranians at the celebration, he said, likely still harbor resentment toward Hussein because of the war - during which chemical weapons were used. But he said the main reason they support an American invasion of Iraq is because it could lead to the liberation of Iran.
Even though he still has family living in Iran, he said he supports a U.S. war because that part of the world desperately needs democracy. The militant administration ruling the country fosters suicide bombers by not providing decent homes and jobs, he said, and does not represent how the majority of Iranians feel.
"Most people don't like them," he said, referring to the Iranian government.
The phrase she used was "Glimmer of hope".
Iranians? Meet A.N.S.W.E.R. Discuss amongst yourselves.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/19/2003 04:44:47 PM
The Waiting Is The Hardest Part - ...and all I have involved are some high-school friends.
More isolated reports; air raids, commando actions, defections, bluster from Iraq...
Almost surreal. The way the media's playing this, the actual war should be an anti-climax, almost.
It is 2AM in the Gulf right now. Things should start happening soon.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/19/2003 04:37:00 PM
First Casualty - Protester falls from Golden Gate Bridge.
Last words: "No Blood For Patchouli!"
Cruel? Hey, I could have just called the post "Culling the Herd". I'm not a complete animal, you know.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/19/2003 04:22:06 PM
Morality Reform - I had a big, long article written this morning about the status of the Minnesota Personal Protection Act - the "concealed carry reform" bill.
Murphy's being disingenuous. Vickerman (who got drafted to author the proposal because he's retiring, ergo will take no political flak for it) has given us a poison pill bill, designed to screw up public perception of the bill and dilute and distract support for concealed carry.
The DFL is playing some serious back-room politics here - and you all need to not only know about it, but make sure you tell any of your friends that are involved.
The Strib reported the story this way, yesterday:...leaders of the DFL majority switched their strategy for countering the Republican proposal that already is moving through the GOP-controlled House.
The DFL in the Senate has had two approaches to this issue so far this session.
Like the Republican proposal, a bill introduced by Sen. Jim Vickerman, DFL-Tracy, would strip police chiefs and sheriffs of most discretion they now have in issuing permits to carry handguns to law-abiding, mentally competent adults. This is a key provision as well of the rival Senate bill sponsored by Sen. Pat Pariseau, R-Farmington.
Outstate DFLers, and even some Metro area Democrats, know that being a gun grabber is a long walk off a short pier in Minnesota these days. But Vickerman's bill, modeled after Texas law, also would tighten eligibility rules and mark certain places off-limits to guns far beyond anything Pariseau has offered.
In other words, it riddles the bill with so many exceptions that the law-abiding citizen would be doing well to carry a firearm any more legally than they do today.
I see one legislator who will be on the wrong end of the gun lobby's wrath next election: But with at least one Republican member -- Sen. Mike McGinn of Eagan, a former St. Paul police commander -- voicing opposition to the Pariseau bill, it appeared unlikely to pass the panel.
McGinn is wrong, of course, as are the following:More than two hours of testimony Monday was dominated by criticism from school, police, business, medical, church and local government groups.
Grabarski! People with concealed guns are already present; they're just all criminals now.
"We cannot conceive of any situations where our employees, visitors, customers or patrons would feel safer knowing guns were prevalent in our marketplace," said Sam Grabarski, president of the Minneapolis Downtown Council. "How would the Holidazzle Parades be safer for families with concealed handguns present?"
And ask the citizens of Florida, Pennsylvania, Washington, Texas, Arizona, Oregon, and 24 other states what effect "shall issue" laws have had on their social lives, while we're at it.The Rev. Stan Sledz said the state's Roman Catholic bishops oppose the bill because it would endorse the idea that "it's OK to use a gun to resolve conflicts" and "feed the fear that paralyzes our communities."
The whole subject of the social views of American and Minnesota Catholic Bishops is subject for another whole post. Suffice to say, "Catholic Bishops" have no credibility with me when it comes to moral lecturing. LIke my Scottish Presbyterian forebears, I've heard about enough from them.
So somebody might ask, "why do you oppose Vickerman's bill?" Vickerman proposes prohibiting permit holders from bringing their guns to bars, churches, hospitals, nursing homes, schools, government meetings and polling places. The Pariseau-Boudreau bill would specifically bar guns only from schools.
For good reason! Creating "gun free zones" is no different, in terms of deterring crime, than posting a "Mass Murderers Start Right Here" sign.
The point of concealed carry reform is not to "put guns in the street". It's to deter crime. If criminals know where guns aren't, we're no better off than we are today.John Caile of Concealed Carry Reform Now, Minnesota's leading handgun-rights group, said the Vickerman bill rated "an F-minus." .
And the Senate DFL caucus gets a D - for devious, or maybe despicable.
Here's where all of you come in; Pariseau's bill, despite the best efforts of the DFL and some turncoat Republicans, has the votes to pass in both houses. But bills like Vickerman and Murphy's are attempting to split the voter's attention span. It must not work! So if you're a carry reform supporter, please:
Two-minutes drill, hogs. Let's put this one away.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/19/2003 03:48:01 PM
London Calling - Fighting has begun, according to This Is London:
British and American troops were involved in fierce fighting near Iraq's main port today as the war to topple Saddam Hussein began.
In other words, troops are moving into jumping-off positions well ahead of the Kuwaiti border.
The firefight broke out near Basra as men of the Special Boat Service [the British equivalent of the SEALS] targeted the strategically vital city and the oilfields in southern Iraq.
At the same time allied troops were flooding into the demilitarised zone on the Iraqi border with Kuwait 40 miles away to take up positions for an all-out invasion.
Cruise missiles were also loaded onto B52 bombers at RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire, a clear sign that the bombardment of Baghdad could be only hours away.
British troops taking up "forward battle positions" were ordered to switch off satellite phones and allied warplanes bombed targets in Iraq after coming under fire in the no-fly zone.
By lunchtime, allied forces were in position to strike from the moment the 48-hour deadline set by President Bush for Saddam to quit Iraq expires at 1am British time tomorrow. But the White House had refused to rule out a strike before that.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/19/2003 03:03:16 PM
New Looks - A bunch of Minnesota blogs - Powerline, Fraters Libertas, and Jeff Fecke's Blog of the Moderate Left to name three - are sporting new looks these days.
It must be a Minnesota thing - spring is springing, new life, casting off the winter blahs...
Ironic, really, since I'm just about to change "Shot"'s look, too.
And I'm still thinking real hard about having a MNBlog get-together, one of these days. Stay tuned.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/19/2003 10:28:47 AM
Grrrr... - A crash this morning ate a series of posts, all of which disappeared without a trace.
A zillion errands to run, but I'll reconstruct this morning's posts this afternoon.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/19/2003 10:09:58 AM
Tuesday, March 18, 2003
And They Shall Call Him Nancy - Charges were filed today against Brian David Mitchell and Wanda Barzee in the Elizabeth Smart kidnapping.
I predict an early date with a shiv for Brian Mitchell. That, or 20 years as the Aryan Brotherhood's party favor.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/18/2003 09:00:40 PM
Belgian Orphans - There's this notion among the Anti-Bush left that most of us who support the war are guileless dittoheads, ripe sucks who've just fallen off the intellectual turnip truck; people who are just not sophisticated enough to read between the lines of what they consider callow propaganda.
I, for one, am an inveterate "show me" skeptic, especially on matters of war, and wartime propaganda. I recall the "Belgian Orphans" atrocity stories in World War I, where German soldiers in Belgium were reputed to have burned and bayonetted orphanages full of children while advancing toward France. All untrue, of course, and object lessons in the power of wartime propaganda.
So it's hard to read things like this, and while not particularly doubting their veracity, certainly wonder about their timing (this from Ann Clwyd of the Times of London, via Andrew Sullivan this morning:“There was a machine designed for shredding plastic. Men were dropped into it and we were again made to watch. Sometimes they went in head first and died quickly. Sometimes they went in feet first and died screaming. It was horrible. I saw 30 people die like this. Their remains would be placed in plastic bags and we were told they would be used as fish food . . . on one occasion, I saw Qusay [President Saddam Hussein’s youngest son] personally supervise these murders.”
So there's the thinking person's conundrum; World War I showed us the folly of guileless belief; the Holocaust showed us the danger of dogmatic skepticism.
No answer, here, really. Just hoping we, as a nation, are both critical enough consumers of information to discern truth from manipulation.
I wonder if there's enough crossover between "endemic post-ironic cynicism" - which we have in spades in our society - and "healthy skepticism" to do the job?
posted by Mitch Berg 3/18/2003 10:22:44 AM
What's In A Name - For the last several months, I've been trying to come up with a snide, pithy yet apt moniker for the "Anti-War" movement.
I've been through "Pro-Dictator", "Pro-Genocide" and "Pro-Oppression", but none of them exactly rolls off the tongue. And putting "anti-war" in sneer quotes certainly works on my end, but I'm not sure it gets the whole idea across.
But it occurs to me that the appellation that best sums up the full breadth of the "movement", from the flea-bitten college "students" to the plush-bottom, correctly-grayed, properly-organic Mac-Groveland matrons in their Volvo 740s with their pre-printed signs and dogma to match, is the "Anti-Bush" movement.
Quid Pro Quo - It's not only illogical for the anti-Bush movement to distinguish between wars on Hussein - it misses a key point. Twelve years of failed, misguided "containment" are integrally related to the rise of Bin Laden and Al Quaeda:We know that if nothing else Saddam and al Qaeda share the common goal of punishing the U.S. and driving us from the Mideast. In his famous 1998 fatwa endorsing the murder of Americans, "civilian and military alike," Osama bin Laden mentioned two main complaints: First, that U.S. troops were deployed on the Islamic holy land of Arabia, and second that U.S. planes continued to bomb Iraq while enforcing the U.N.'s no-fly zones.
Such honesty would rattle the complacency of many on the Anti-Bush left.
Osama's jihad--and therefore September 11 itself--is in other words one direct consequence of the past 12 years of U.S. "containment" of Saddam. Without his continuing threat, American troops would not need to be stationed in Saudi Arabia and U.S. fighters would not still patrol the skies over Iraq. While fretting about the costs of going to Baghdad, those who favor a policy of sanctions and diplomacy have never been honest about the real costs of containment.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/18/2003 08:52:29 AM
Monday, March 17, 2003
Blogalanche - Holy cow - did I really write that much today?
Hm. Maybe that's an idea; I'll hold a Blogajobathon. I'll blog nonstop until someone gives me a gig.
OK, I'm seeing a flaw in the plan, but...
posted by Mitch Berg 3/17/2003 08:27:56 PM
Linked? - Here's another Al Quaeda/Iraq link, courtesy of the Spaniards.
More ammo to toss at the skeptics around the water cooler tomorrow.
An alleged terrorist accused of helping the 11 September conspirators was invited to a party by the Iraqi ambassador to Spain under his al-Qaeda nom de guerre, according to documents seized by Spanish investigators.
Yusuf Galan, who was photographed being trained at a camp run by Osama bin Laden, is now in jail, awaiting trial in Madrid. The indictment against him, drawn up by investigating judge Baltasar Garzon, claims he was 'directly involved with the preparation and carrying out of the attacks ... by the suicide pilots on 11 September'.
Evidence of Galan's links with Iraqi government officials came to light only recently, as investigators pored through more than 40,000 pages of documents seized in raids at the homes of Galan and seven alleged co-conspirators.
It's becoming a carpet bombing.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/17/2003 07:53:30 PM
Hosed - My prediction, that is.
Bush is giving Hussein two days to get out of Dodge.
Tale of Two Democrats - To wit:
Take your pick.
"Saddened that this president failed so miserably at diplomacy that we're now forced to war. Saddened that we have to give up one life because this president couldn't create the kind of diplomatic effort that was so critical for our country. But we will work, and we will do all we can to get through this crisis like we've gotten through so many." .
posted by Mitch Berg 3/17/2003 07:28:28 PM
Dizzizzixie Chissixizzle, Pizzart Two - An email correspondent wrote to a couple of local country western stations - one in the Twin Cities, the other in Saint Cloud.
Without naming any names, two of the stations responded to the emailer, who was kind enough to send me the responses.
The first response - from a Twin Cities C'nW station - was pretty bland. But I liked the one from the St. Cloud station:Thank you for your thoughtful letter.
The guy put well (and, presumably, is bucking for a career in talk radio someday). Nice to know someone's thinking, out there.
Requests for the Dixie Chicks have been at about the same level as before.
I can't answer whther or not Traveln' Soldier would have been released without 9/11. I imagine we have all changed our plans a little since then.
Her company has been couseling Natalie to be less outspoken, since long before 9/11. She believes it is her right as an American to express herself, as I believe it is my right, and apparently you believe it is your right.
You and I live secure in the knowledge that no one will try to destroy us economically for our opinions. Natalie expresses herself, knowing full well that some people will try to hurt her.
We do not endorse Natalie's views. We do not endorse her decision to go public with those views. However, we do believe that our freedoms are the very thing that our President, our nation, and our armed forces are trying to defend. Osama bin Laden awakens every day plotting to destroy those freedoms.
We do not intend to undermine our freedoms at home while our troops prepare to fight and die to preserve them.
Patriotism is not measured by which President or policy we agree with or disagree with. Patriotism is measured by our committment to the constitution and to what America stands for, including the right to express unpopular opinions. That means your rights and mine and yes, even the Dixie Chicks'.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/17/2003 06:41:23 PM
Turkey Update - As I guardedly predicted a few weeks ago, Turkey will probably allow US troops to use Turkey as a base, even a jumping-off point, against Iraq.
Turkey's top political and military leaders called on the government to take urgent action to allow in U.S. troops.
How to read between those lines? Let me count the ways:
The announcement came at the end of a meeting that included the leaders of Turkey's new government, President Ahmet Necdet Sezer, and top generals.
The United States has repeatedly called on Turkey's government to quickly resubmit to parliament a resolution that would let thousands of U.S. soldiers deploy at Turkish bases. Washington had sought Ankara's approval for the deployment in order that U.S. troops could open a northern front against Saddam Hussein's forces in an Iraq war.
"Our government will make the necessary evaluation urgently," presidential spokesman Tacan Ildem said.
Look for a vote shortly - followed by a couple 72-hour days of unloading transports, and some serious traffic jams in eastern Turkey.
Blame Canada - Prime Minister Jean Chretien says Canadian forces in the Persian Gulf will not participate in any upcoming invasion.
I'm sure all 30 of them will be sorely missed in coming days.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/17/2003 04:29:28 PM
Whew - Long day, both of job-hunting and blogging.
Tomorrow may be a light day - I have a rather important job interview in the morning. Prayers/wishes/good karmic vibes, as always, eagerly solicited.
Off to try to enjoy the day - MPCA willing - and get some exercise. Lord knows I need it after nine hours in this @#@#% chair.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/17/2003 03:07:04 PM
Bias - NPR's ombudsman on the perceived anti-war bias in NPR's coverage.
The article compares - accurately - the relative tentativeness of the pro-liberation voices heard on NPR with the relative stridency of the anti-war viewsEven the tone of pro-war voices on NPR seems to be filled with self-doubt and subtle if anxious reasoning.
And it adds this rather frank call to action on NPR's part
Recently, All Things Considered aired an essay by commentator Kelli Kirwan. The program described her as "the wife of a Marine and the mother of five children." Ms. Kirwan spoke of her doubts about the war, her anxieties about domestic terrorism and her concerns for her husband's safety...But what seems to be missing from other NPR's commentaries/interviews is the unabashed and unconditional support (and there is lot of it) for the administration.Whenever that opinion is heard on NPR as it did when NPR interviewed Secretary of State Colin Powell, NPR receives e-mails by the score, all asking: "NPR! How could you?"
The gullible midwesterner who grew up liberal thinks "Hey - all right! They're figuring it out!" The cynical city guy I've become wonders if their last pledge drive didn't include a few pointed reminders in the pocketbook.
Part of the problem for NPR and for many listeners who look to us to reinforce their opinions is the range of "acceptable" opinion. Radio is a unique and intensely personal medium. People listen, in my opinion, in order to recognize an aural landscape that they know and feel is theirs. When they hear ideas or voices with which they disagree, they can feel a sense of betrayal.
That puts NPR in an awkward position. As an audio companion, NPR needs to remain recognizable to its listeners; but as a news service, it needs to present a range of opinions that reflects reality -- no matter how uncomfortable that reality may be.
(Via Andrew Sullivan)
posted by Mitch Berg 3/17/2003 01:50:31 PM
Dixizzie Chizzle - From a friend on one of my email discussion groups:
"Pssst. Natalie. You do realize you named yourselves to the record buying public - without an iota of irony, I might add - as the *Dixie* Chicks, right? Take a moment to reflect on that hon, while I grab your tap shoes."
News from France - First: this story was apparently translated from the original French by some sort of automatic translation utility, possibly designed by the people who do the voice-dubbing for bad Hong Kong Kung Fu movies. Aix-en-Provence (AP) - Three cagoulés criminals engraved a star of David with a cutting metal object on the wrist of 21 years a Jewish coed after to have attacked it Tuesday evening in its residence of Aix-en-Provence (Rhone delta), one learned Wednesday from legal source.
Still, reading through the atrocious translation, one wonders; these are the people who we're supposed to suck up to in the UN?
The tracks of a racist act or a personal conflict are evoked by the investigators of the police station of Aix-en-Provence.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/17/2003 12:59:09 PM
Not In My Name - Bloggers Asymmetrical Information have an excellent article on the differences between Martin Sheen, and fake president Bartlett.
Bartlett (proceeding to his desk): Mr. Ambassador, sorry to keep you waiting, I was just in the White House situation room.
Without the paperwork? Not in my name, Marty!
Amb. Tiki: The U.S. is trampling on the sovereignty of my country, and on behalf of President Nzili -
Bartlett: I've just taken your airport
(A pause. The ambassador looks as if the President has extracted a large reptile from his posterior and is mounting it for display in the Rose Garden)
Bartlett:...clearing the way for the 101st air assault to take the capital. 7000 troops, 25 battle tanks, 15 Apache attack helicopters and 3 destroyers. Strictly speaking, I've conquered your country without the paperwork.
Note the hypocrisy; Clinton-era policies (at least at the make-believe level), combine with Bush-era execution...on TV. But not in real-life, not in Aaaaron "Shroom!" Sorkin's world.
An aside for all the military-history geeks: Sorkin's illiteracy about militaria never ceases to amuse.
Aaron! Destroyers are Navy vessels, not normally assigned to Air Assault divisions! And, being water-borne, they are not normally employed in "taking capitals", especially land-locked ones.
Also - "battle tanks" are neither employed by "Air Assault" divisions, nor do they travel in groups of 25 (4, 14 or 54? Sure. 25? Nuh uh).
But keep 'em coming!
posted by Mitch Berg 3/17/2003 12:49:47 PM
Noblesse Oblige - Just when I was about to give up on the dailies' editorial pages as sources of good blog-fodder, the Strib steps into the breach. As usual, they don't disappoint.
These are troubling days in Minnesota for many reasons, but the Citizens League has produced a report that crystalizes the most important deficit now facing the state. It's not a financial shortage, but a shortage of belief in the common good.
We've been through this before -Laurie Studevant had a long, atrocious article on the subject right after the New Year.
Now, it seems the Strib editorial board has taken up the cause for themselves. "Doing the Common Good Better" is the product of 56 diverse minds from across political, economic and cultural lines, each with an unsettled feeling, according to the report's authors, that there's something terribly wrong in this once-special place. They've put their collective finger, we think, on the primary reason: Citizens who were once informed and engaged are now acting more as an audience, one that has either disengaged from politics, or been captured by the half-truths and simplistic sound bites of political extremists.
When you read the Citizen's League's actual report, the usual boogeymen are trotted out on cue - Talk Radio, "polarization", and the usual code phrases that, deciphered, mean "conservatives", or anyone who doesn't believe government is the fount of all wisdom.
The report itself is long, and deserves its own separate fisking - whichn I'll try to get to later this week. Indeed, the report begins with a dangerous assumption that there still exists a "public life" and a "public good" in this state. You'd never know it by listening to talk radio's unrelenting assault on government as the enemy of a people whose only hope resides in the private sphere.
Strib Editorialists: Why do you suppose talk radio has quadrupled its audience in ten years? Because people just aren't bright enough to know they're being manipulated?
No. Because people - real people - are sick to death of being treated as afterthoughts by Minnesota's "public class", the people with the boundless time, energy and, yes, money, to get their "communal" civic vision imposed on the rest of the state; a vision that is usually imposed in the most condescending terms. Like: Minnesota's complex problems cannot be solved by libertarian "garage logic," or by the narrow interests of DFL subcaucuses. These unfortunate forces have filled a vacuum created by important social changes: a decline of noblesse oblige, greater demands on work and family time, a sprawled suburban landscape, marginalized political parties, globalized corporations, a "personalized" media and a decline of civic organizations.
Note the condescension: Noblesse Oblige? Indeed - we have a nobility in Minnesota?
Sprawl is a problem? Although you couldn't make me live in a suburb, Jason Lewis has one thing right - "sprawl" is a reaction to the sort of "civic society" that the Citizen's League, and the Strib editorialist, pines for.
And the "personalized" media - what could the Strib be talking about? Such downward trends place Minnesota in particular jeopardy, the report rightly argues.
"Downward trends" - indeed. As we've said many times, this is a cold, remote place made special only by the collective endeavor of energized citizens, without whom there would be no cultural assets, no big-time sports, no exceptional schools, universities and public services, all of which have made Minnesota a Midwestern magnet for economic success. California and Colorado have the climate and geography to compete and prosper with ordinary public assets. Minnesota does not.
But the Strib - and the Citizens League - make the fatal leap, linking all these good things to an overweening, suffocating public sector, which they seem to equate with "common good", as if that noble confluence of public spirited activism must be managed by the government, or it doesn't count.That's why the current Republican drive to cut Minnesota down to the level of its neighbors, to make it more like every place else, is so risky.
And so enters the traditional Minnesota superiority complex. Some of "our neighbors" do some very good things; North Dakota weathered the recession vastly better than Minnesota did; by all rational measures, North Dakota's public schools are the equal of Minnesota's, on a fraction of the budget. The Citizens League report, of course, doesn't get partisan on these matters.
It doesn't need to - it has the Strib to cover that watch. What it does propose is a statewide summit on citizenship. Among the topics: Find a way to change the caucus system so that politics invites the participation of moderates as well as extremists.
Read: transfer political power from those who show up, to those who don't.
For all my criticism, the report is worth a read. I'll blog about it tomorrow, maybe Wednesday. But no good idea can pass, unspun, through the Strib editorial board.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/17/2003 10:45:20 AM
Ratzen Fratzen Inspectors - So Bush says he'll give the UN Weapons "Inspectors" three days to get out of Baghdad.
So maybe my prediction (March 18, Baghdad time) is hosed.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/17/2003 09:10:40 AM
CCW Rolls On - On top of last week's news that Ohio's Concealed Carry reform law is progressing nicely (albeit possibly doomed to a veto that the legislature may not opt to override), Colorado's law should be moving to the Governor (possibly after one more trip to the Senate), according to Coyote at the Dog Show.
How long until Minnesota joins them?
Sigh.
The problem, of course, is getting through the DFL-controlled Senate. The DFL wants to be listed as the author of every bill going through the Senate - and Senator Pat Parisau (GOP, Farmington) is understandably reticent about letting a DFLer take over (and potentially hijack) the bill she's shepherded through the legislature this past seven years.
Worse? The DFL has floated its own, terrible, version of a concealed carry reform bill. A group of anti-gun DFL legislators have written a bill that is so bad, it could only count as a "poison pill" bill. Sen. Jim Vickerman is listed as the author - the only author (very unusual). The reason, of course, is that he's retiring after this term - and any legislator attaching his/her name to this piece of bilge will be getting a solid F- from every gun rights organizations in the next round of elections.
To quote a Concealed Carry Reform Now bulletin on the bill: the bill is about 25% MPPA, 25% the worst of Texas law, 25% the worst of Michigan law, and 25% Sen. Sheila Kiscaden. The legislation is full of internal conflicts and contradictions, contains items that even MN law enforcement don’t want, is, once you start to read the fine print, discretionary, and requires applicants to relinquish their constitutional rights for the opportunity to commit a Felony just by standing in the wrong place!
We all knew that the DFL-controlled Senate would pull out the stops in attacking the Personal Protection Act, and the very idea of concealed carry reform. We'll still probably come out of this session with a concealed carry reform law - but nobody said it'd be easy.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/17/2003 07:34:38 AM
The Bush Plan - The first priority, obviously, is winning the war. The second part, the left reminds us ad nauseum, is "winning the peace" (which some on the left remind us we've already lost, but I digress).
Two points:
The WSJ said this:The Bush plan, as detailed in more than 100 pages of confidential contract documents, would sideline United Nations development agencies and other multilateral organizations that have long directed reconstruction efforts in places such as Afghanistan and Kosovo. The plan also would leave big nongovernmental organizations largely in the lurch: With more than $1.5 billion in Iraq work being offered to private U.S. companies under the plan, just $50 million is so far earmarked for a small number of groups such as CARE and Save the Children.
Watch for the "non-profit community" to squeal like stuck cats over this.
And yet doesn't it make sense? This war is partly being waged over the UN's dead administrative body - why include them? Why would they want to be included?
And since part of the aim of this war is to create a free-market democracy, what sense would it make to entrust the rebuilding of the nation to people who hold free-market democracy in contempt?Washington is under international pressure to broaden a postwar rebuilding effort, even as it continues to do battle with traditional allies over the merits of launching a war on Iraq. The administration recently has signaled it may seek down the road to give the U.N. and other countries a larger role.
Indeed.
I'd suspect as much. The President's entire approach has been to play good cop/bad cop with the UN and our pricklier "allies".
And the UN can't afford to lose this fight. They have to know how perilously close to irrelevance their opposition to Bush on this war has made them; being counted out of the rebuilding of Iraq might just seal the UN's irrelevance for good. President Bush, after a one-hour summit in the Azores Islands, said yesterday that if it comes to war he plans to "quickly seek new Security Council resolutions to encourage broad participation in the process of helping the Iraqi people to build a free Iraq."
Hm.
But U.N. officials said they still have no clear indication how the administration might involve the international body, especially if many of the large rebuilding tasks are already farmed out to U.S. companies directly answerable to Washington.
Note to the UN - if you hadn't spent the last six months Blixing up, you might have been able to work on that...
posted by Mitch Berg 3/17/2003 07:12:00 AM
Bloggered - Blogger.com - the site I use to publish this blog - has been hinky again. Hopefully this post will go live eventually...
Deja Vu? - Rachel Lucas makes an interesting point:I was thinking of something the other day, regarding the French. Don't correct me if I'm wrong, because this is just a vague idea, but it seems to me that the Iraqi people of today are like the French from 1940-1944. Held prisoner by a hated leader, etc. And yes, I am fully aware that the situations are different in some key ways (Saddam is not a foreigner who invaded and occupied Iraq and most of the rest of the neighborhood), but if anyone out there can prove to me that the Iraqi people are less miserable/oppressed/abused than the French were under the Nazis, I'll be impressed.
Of course, what Rachel misses is that there was such an opposition in the US; they figured we had no business intervening in a foreign country like that. Some even thought Hitler wasn't all that bad!
So I was just thinking, what if Britain and the United States had viewed the Nazi occupation of France in the early 1940s the same way the French view the current situation in Iraq? What if we'd insisted on diplomacy rather than defeating Hitler and his regime? What if we'd passed some resolutions, ordered "inspectors" into France to see if Hitler was lying about...whatever, passed some more resolutions, run away sheepishly when Hitler kicked us out of France, sat around for a few years, and then passed some more resolutions and held "talks"?
What if, 12 years and 17 resolutions into this fiasco (around 1952), some countries like, say, Australia and Switzerland wanted us to help them (or even just allow them) to bust into France to liberate the people and oust Hitler from power, but the United States and Britain insisted they not do so, because we just hadn't had enough diplomacy yet? And that gosh, we wouldn't want to make all the Nazis mad at us because it might create more little Hitlers?
Of course, unlike today, that crowd was basically regarded as a pack of nutbars, rather than in control of the media and Hollywood.
The Air Out There - An email correspondent wrote about my Friday post about the weather:...you made some comment about going outside to enjoy the weather.
I think it was Nietzche who said "If a crappy day didn't exist, mankind would have to create one".
Then, this AM as I am up writing my Sunday School lesson, I see the Star Tribune is telling us that the MPCA is saying: "Hey, it might be nice but don't be out there too long, it's polluted air people. Too much exhaust from vehicles (like SUV's) and power plants (hey, what are you using energy for anyway) and fireplaces and other fine things that all you people need and use."
Something stinks, Mitch. The nicest day in the last 120 days or something, and we have to wear our 3M dust filter masks when we go outside for the first time without our Eddie Bauer Sub-Antarctic Polar Fleece Down Lined Thermalite Flannel Snowsuit?
posted by Mitch Berg 3/17/2003 07:00:08 AM
Sunday, March 16, 2003
Tomorrow - Dinner time. Just like the last Gulf War.
Baghdad is nine hours ahead of US Central time. Word is the President wants to address the nation tomorrow night. I have a hunch that'll happen as the Tomohawks are landing all over Iraq.
I could be wrong - I have been many times. But if it's not tomorrow, it'll be Tuesday, right around dinner time here in the Twin Cities.
As the guys from Fraters Libertas say in quoting Churchill, may we indeed deserve victory.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/16/2003 06:29:19 PM
Manifesto - Dexter Van Zile writes as able a Western, anti-Islamofascist manifesto as I've seen, in the Washington Dispatch.
You've blamed the United States, Israel and the West in general for the inability of Muslims to create a place for themselves in the modern world. The poverty from which the Muslim world suffers has nothing to do with the existence of the state of Israel, the presence of American troops in Saudi Arabia or the alleged Godlessness of the West, but has everything to do with the contempt you and those like you have for knowledge, ideas and the free expression of the human spirit.
The whole thing is worth a read.
Your people are poor not because of what the West has done to them, but because their leaders have squandered the opportunity to build just and vibrant countries afforded to them by the presence of oil in their region. Consequently, the Muslim communities that have the highest standard of living reside in that part of the world you most despise -- the West. Just as our wealth is the consequence of our values, the poverty of the Muslim world is the consequence of the fatalism that underpins your thinking.
You've mistaken our secular system of governance for Godlessness and to cure us of this, you would force us, through violence to embrace a system of belief contrary to our traditions, temperament and long-held beliefs. You will not succeed.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/16/2003 06:21:29 PM
Costs of Action/Inaction - Yesterday on the Minnesota National Issues discussion list, , someone posted a link to this website. It's one of those things that tries to show all the (inevitably social) programs we could afford if we weren't paying for (inevitably military) programs.
Some of the math is hilarious; I'm sure North Dakota elementary school teachers are amused to see they're averaging nearly $42,000 a year in salary. And California's share of a war with Iraq would pay for 5 million California kids to go on state-paid healthcare. That is, of course, more kids than there are in California, bidding one to wonder where these people are getting their numbers from.
But let's briefly suspend disbelief, and take their numbers at face value. According to the website, Minnesota's share of the tax costs of a war in Iraq would pay for:
That, of course, doesn't cover the cost of building the 1,000 schools it'd take to put them al the teachers in - not to mention the 677,184 students (at 24 per class) we'd need to import to keep them working. Or the 1,000 firehouses we'd need to build, and the 24,000 firefighters we'd need to hire - many more than exist in the entire state already. As to the numbers of children in Head Start or on government medical assistance...
But OK, that's one take on the costs we'll face if we go to war. Fair enough. Now, the costs we'll face if we don't depose Hussein.
SCENARIO 1: 2006.
Uday Hussein decides to avenge his late father's humiliation in 1991. He moves into the Northern and Southern No-Fly Zones, and begins brutal subjugation of the Marsh Arabs and Kurds, again.
The "world community" responds to the armed advances with a withering fusillade of UN resolutions and "strong statements". After three months of dithering at the behest of the French and Swedes, the UN passes a slightly stricter set of sanctions - and Hussein makes his move.
He tells the world to sod off - or he'll launch a barrage of long-range missiles over the immense oil terminals at Ras Tanura, Bahrain, and elsewhere in the Gulf, loaded with Sarin and VX gas, and aerosol Anthrax cultures.
Instantly, world oil markets panic. Oil prices spike immediately over $100 a barrel. World markets react accordingly, diving into an immense, worldwide panic.
Liberals in the US chuckle as their hated nemeses, the nation's SUV drivers, are shortly paying gas prices of over $7 a gallon (sometimes more) - but the chuckling stops as companies slash their capital investments, throwing hundreds of thousands out of work. Tax revenues plummet, as the most productive citizens (the private sector) clamps down on all spending (voluntarily or otherwise), leading state governments to slash social programs and lay off so many state workers that people recall the relatively piddling state layoffs of '03 as "the good ol' days".
And it's worse elsewhere. The European economy crashes. The crash sweeps in xenophobic "populist" governments - which combine rabid socialization with the worst anti-immigrant measures seen since the thirties. In France and Germany, the fight is legal; in other countries, bloodshed is widespread.
Israel, of course, is inundated with further terror attacks; the Palestinians, bankrolled as ever by their Syrian, Iranian and Iraqi benefactors, pin the blame for their burgeoning misery on the Israelis, and launch a wave of terror attacks that strain the fabric of Israeli society.
And the Third World? Deprived of oil AND export markets, the third world economies are eradicated. Many nations fall to extremist, authoritarian coups, which creates immense food panics similar to the 1942 Bengal Famine (in which there was plenty of food, yet hundreds of thousands died). Around the world millions starve or die in economy-driven conflicts. Islamofascist governments rise in Turkey, Syria, Jordan and Egypt, while India and Indonesia are riven by the bloodiest civil wars in history.
In Minnesota, a total of 28,216 Elementary School Teachers were laid off, 6,636 Fire Trucks decommissioned, 222,603 Head Start Places for Children removed, and 459,612 Children ejected from various Health Care programs.
Millions of lives lost. Hundreds of millions plunged into even worse misery than they'd had before.
No missiles were ever launched.
SCENARIO 2: 2005
A group of Saudi, Quatari and Chechen Islamofascists, enraged at what they consider Al Quaeda's "excessive moderation" and "willingness to sell out to the West, in comparison to us", makes back-channel contacts with Iraqi intelligence. Flying underneath the radar (because the US left has forced the nation's intelligence and military services into an artificial focus on Al Quaeda to the exclusion of other terrorist groups), the group drives the parts of a tactical nuclear device out through Saudi Arabia, load it into a container ship in Aden, Yemen, and assembles it in time to load it onto a truck in Biloxi, Mississippi.
The terrorists know that it'd be great to blow up some immense landmark, like the Capitol or the Empire State Building. But the security in these places is too tight to risk, these days (albeit at immense cost to American civil liberties, the Islamofascists chuckle). And there'd be a huge advantage to hitting America in the Heartland, too - creating the "if I'm not safe HERE..." effect.
They pick a spot deep in the heartland on their map - and, a week later, on a bright summer evening, set off their bomb in downtown Minneapolis, during a Twins game. Intantly, everything within a third of a mile of the van is vaporized or pulverized into nothing; most everything within 1.5 miles is pummeled flat. People five miles away get flashburns from the thermal pulse, while buildings are severely damaged and people terribly injured out to seven miles away.
The bomb, a groundburst, left a plume of radioactive fallout starting in downtown Saint Paul, and stretching a hundred miles into Wisconsin. The radiation takes years to completely clean up.
Probably 100,000 die instantly; tens of thousands more die of injuries and radiation sickness downwind from the burst. Long-term health effects are nearly incalculable. Downtown Minneapolis is mostly destroyed; the bomb was placed blocks from the Metrodome, which was obliterated (drawing a "glass is half full" editorial from Joe Soucheray), along with most of the east edge of Downtown, Cedar-Riverside, and most of the U of M. The IDS is a denuded steel skeleton; the Norwest (Wells Fargo?) tower sheds its top 25 floors. Downtown is a mass of wreckage - no actual street plan is still visible above Franklin Avenue..
The Twin Cities are evacuated, causing untold human misery and dislocation. 28,216 Elementary School Teachers are laid off or killed, 6,636 Fire Trucks decommissioned or destroyed, 222,603 Head Start Places for Children lost or vaporized, and 459,612 kids put in health care plans for acute injuries or radiation poisoning.
The national and world economies, of course, crash (see Scenario 1). Civil liberties in the US are suspended to a degree that makes people think of even the worst caricature of John Ashcroft as "not so bad, really".
Noam Chomsky cheers, as do certain Green politicians. Sean Penn declares that "it's really our fault".
Sound fanciful? Of course. And in 1938, when Neville Chamberlain led his era's version of the world's Alec Baldwins and Phyllis Kahns to grovel at the altar of appeasement, people like Winston Churchill and Hector Bywater were popularly regarded as "paranoid" and "warmongers".
History proved them right, of course - it usually does.
There is, however, no way to calculate the costs of our being right this time. The stakes are higher now.
Your feedback is appreciated, as always.
posted by Mitch Berg 3/16/2003 08:49:26 AM
In attacking the reasons for war, no liberal commentator is capable of addressing more than one of the justifications at a time; to do so would introduce a context in which their argument can not survive
Best Shots
American Bankers and the Media
Blogs
Big Media
Niche Media
Other Blogs from my Kids and I
Mental Shrapnel
Current Issue
Contact Me!
Support democracy and human rights in Iraq!
Everything on this site (c) Mitch Berg. All
non-quoted opinions are mine.
Tanks for the Memories!
The Untouchables
The Class System
The DFL Deck of Cards
For The Children
The Pope of Bruce
The Blogosphere Blacklist
Keillor, Again
Open Letter to Keillor
More...
Links
The Northern Alliance of Blogs
Fraters Libertas
Lileks
Powerline
SCSU Scholars
and the Commish
Frankfurter Allgemeine
St. Paul Pioneer Press
Minneapolis Star/Tribune
Jamestown Sun
Reason
Center for the American Experiment
National Review Online
Drudge
Backstreets
WSJ's OpinionJournal
Toquevillian
Daryll's "Horses and Orlando"
Sam's "Comic Post"
Rock's So Tough - the Iron City Houserockers
Ian Whitney's MN Bloggers
Day By Day
Bureaucrash
CuriousFurious
MN Concealed Carry Reform Now
The Onion
James Randi Educational Foundation
The Self-Made Critic
Book of Ratings
Archives
visitors, more or less, since 9/13/03
