June 24, 2005

GITMO ON MY MIND

"Cesare Borgia was considered cruel; notwithstanding, his cruelty reconciled the Romagna, unified it, and restored it to peace and loyalty. And if this be rightly considered, he will be seen to have been much more merciful than the Florentine people, who, to avoid a reputation for cruelty, permitted Pistoia to be destroyed. Therefore a prince, so long as he keeps his subjects united and loyal, ought not to mind the reproach of cruelty; because with a few examples he will be more merciful than those who, through too much mercy, allow disorders to arise, from which follow murders or robberies; for these are wont to injure the whole people, whilst those executions which originate with a prince offend the individual only."
--Nicolo Machiavelli

"If the enemy is to be coerced, you must put him in a situation that is even more unpleasant than the sacrifice you call on him to make. The hardships of the situation must not be merely transient - at least not in appearance. Otherwise, the enemy would not give in, but would wait for things to improve."
-Karl Von Clausewitz

        Horsefeathers views Iraq as one battlefront in a global war--World War IV. The ‘War on Terror’ is a term designed to obscure the ideological nature of the struggle. This war, in its essence, is no different from our 20th century wars against totalitarianism. Having vanquished Nazism and Communism, we are now challenged by a totalitarian, anti-semitic ideology disguised as a religion, Islamo-Fascism. The principles required for victory are no different than in any war: impose our will on our enemies by force of arms. Those enemies, sensing our superior battlefield strength, realize that our vulnerability lies not in our military capability, but elsewhere, in our highly civilized reluctance to use overwhelming force against our foes.
        Over the years, especially since the Vietnam war, adversaries have learned to go for our soft home front underbelly-the MSM- and opinion shaping academic wordsmith elites. These hothouse flowers of Western civilization believe all conflicts between cultures can be peacefully resolved using words in a psychotherapeutically empathic manner. They believe, like Danny Pearl, that we can all just talk, and thereby resolve our differences. Their model is the happily remembered college seminar for students who scored high on their verbal SAT’s. They graduate to positions in the MSM and, if they attended the right Ivy League schools, may get to sit on the editorial board of the New York Times. Once there, any powers of critical thinking erode in the politically correct liberal smog and David Brooks begins to sound like Tom Friedman, while Maureen Dowd keeps alive the hope that childhood never has to end while her ex-lover, John Tierney bloviates about compassionate conservatism.
        Spurred on by therapeutic Liberalism, we constrain ourselves on the battlefield, seeking to win hearts and minds, to understand the grievances of our enemies rather than to annihilate them. The usefulness of the uproar over Guantanamo is that it exposed the Liberal mind and its utopian view of human nature, vividly, for all to see. We hope the Dick Durbins and Howard Deans keep talking. Through all the crocodile tears he shed, the number two Democrat in the Senate apologized not for the content of his remarks comparing Gitmo to the Gulag, etc., but for hurting the feelings of those delicate souls who took his words the wrong way. And why, after all, should he apologize? Let’s grant the man the respect of acknowledging he meant what he said. His views were laid out carefully in a prepared statement designed to articulate his brand of thinking about our role in the world. The Dick Durbin mindset believes our aims in Gitmo should not include inflicting harsh punishment on murderous Islamist fanatics, and we certainly should not use brutal means to extract information. Instead, our goal should be to show the Muslim world how decent, caring and civilized we are. Regrettably, the Durbin fantasy that we are somehow better, having transcended human nature and risen above such petty human wishes as the desire for revenge, is a dangerous delusion. Durbin will only persuade his fellow true believers and perhaps Kofi Annan, whose job depends on belief in the shared fantasy called the ‘United Nations’. Fortunately, we are quite as capable as the Jihadis of inflicting extreme violence on those who would harm us.
        The Horsefeathers criticism of Gitmo is that it resembles Club Med more than Saddam’s torture chambers. Life at Gitmo should be nasty, brutish and short for the kinds of people held there. These are the folks responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocents at the WTC, for the cowardly slaughter of babies with car bombs, for pretending to be civilians and then killing their trusting victims. It should, in our view, not only be a lot harsher, but its harshness should be unapologetically made known to the Arab world. It would make many Arabs aware we haven’t forgotten, nor are we interested in gaining the good will of those who cheered 9-11. It troubles us that no prisoners have died at Gitmo and that, instead, they are gaining weight, getting excellent medical care, and are given time to pray for guidance in killing more Americans. We’d recommend telling the Islamic head choppers we can equal their savagery—and then go further. Desecration of the Koran, the Mein Kampf of Jihadis? An excellent idea, insofar as it humiliates and causes our enemies to submit to our superior strength. Does this make us, as the Dick Durbin utopians would have it, no better than our enemies? No. Quite the opposite. It simply means we value our lives, our country and our culture and refuse to submit to the Jihadi war on the infidels. Certainly when fighting a treacherous enemy, we had better be able to utilize our savage wisdom, acquired over the centuries. As the saying goes, ‘freedom isn’t free’ and if we wish to keep it we’ll have to utterly destroy its enemies. If we succeed in detaching ourselves from our primitive human nature, we will surely be destroyed by those who are comfortable with their own murderous wishes as they go about killing the infidels.
        Fortunately, their have been among us people like Harry Truman and Winston Churchill. These men were clear about human nature, and able to live with their own aggression, channeling it into the task of defeating the enemies of freedom. The warrior mindset is not the same as the therapeutic one. Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Berlin and Dresden; even we infidels, when backed to the wall, can unleash deadly destruction, rather than empathic interpretation. Human nature, it turns out, is the same on the upper west side of Manhattan as in Fallujah, and calling in the therapists to help ‘work through’ the trauma is not going to help. When faced with those who would kill us, the answer is to kill them first, and in large numbers. Body counts can be meaningful, and each dead Jihadi is one more powerful warning to those considering taking up arms against us. Had the West gone to war and destroyed Hitler in 1936 we know millions of lives would have been saved. Instead, thanks to the ditherings of pacifists and appeasers, eager to demonstrate their moral bona fides, far greater carnage ensued. If politically correct, therapeutic Liberalism and its sexually ambiguous allies among the wordsmith intellectuals prevails, then Western civilization will truly be ripe for collapse. Our criticism of the President is not of his goals. We agree with him: "These terrorists...we have seen their kind before. They're the heirs of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century. By sacrificing human life to serve their radical visions, by abandoning every value except the will to power, they follow in the path of fascism, Nazism and totalitarianism. And they will follow that path all the way to where it ends in history's unmarked grave of discarded lies."
        We greatly appreciate the President’s leadership in the months and years post 9-11 He was re-elected by a public that supported his martial vigor and clarity of purpose. He possessed Churchillian courage and resolve. Yet even Churchill wavered at Yalta. We wonder at the kind of strength it takes for any man to withstand the endless assaults President Bush has endured over the years--from our side, no less! Still, we hope he will not blink. We want him to remember his own words, to hang tough, and get much tougher with Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt. The public wants the bold leader of post 9-11 days. Why has he been so reluctant to grant Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld’s request to go after Syria? We are concerned that the endless assaults on him by the MSM and academic elites have weakened his will to utterly defeat our enemies. We note his reluctance to apply overwhelming force in battle, as in the first siege of Fallujah, and the pride he and his military leaders take in minimizing civilian casualties. We have nothing in principle against minimizing casualties, except insofar as doing so is designed to get the Arab world to like us better and thus hamper our efforts to root out and kill enemies. We prefer warrior pride of the sort shown by George Patton and Curtis Lemay in World War II, over the subtle concerns for Islamic sensibilities expressed by our Kennedy School trained Generals. Aerial bombardment of Syria would let the Jihadis know: they can run but they can’t hide. As currently fought, the enemy swims in the sympathetic sea of Arab hatred of America, hiding amongst civilians who cheered 9-11, confident that we lack the stomach to come after him. Mecca and Medina, as well as Damascus and Teheran should be treated as what they are, sanctuaries for the enemy. After a 48 hour warning to all Jihadis to lay down their arms and surrender, those terror havens should be subjected to the same level of devastation we unleashed in World War II over Berlin and Tokyo. Seeking to win the favor of the multi-cultural P.C. police by pulling our punches is futile, and will lead to far worse devastation down the line. Remember, for all the recent aggravation caused us by Germany, we have had 60 years of peaceful post war relations with our former enemies. No kamikaze pilots have launched themselves against us in those 60 years, nor have any Germans undertaken to kill off the non-Aryans among us.
        Hurry up please, Mister President, it’s time. Do not “to avoid a reputation for cruelty” permit Pistoia to be destroyed. Let’s finish the job.

HORSEFEATHERS WARNS YOU THAT THE NEW ENRON MOVIE IS A SLICK PIECE OF LIBERAL SCHLOCK

If you enjoyed “Farenheit 911” you will love “Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room.” The movie is advertised as “based” on the book by Bethany McLean and Peter Elkind, “The Smartest Guys in the Room:The Amazing Rise and Scandalous Fall of Enron,” which is too bad, because although the movie is a fascinating piece of trash, the book is brilliant journalism, thoughtful, well written and has the ring of truth.

The movie is, as you would expect, not only an attack against the crooks at Enron and their greedy business friends, but an attack against the Bush family (by the time George W. Bush’s administration took over in 2001 most of the bad things at Enron had already happened), the free market economy, the deregulation of the energy business, and by implication all of big business—they’re probably all alike; they’re all crooks.

The film created by Alex Gibney—he wrote the Docu-Prop film “The Trials of Henry Kissinger,” “a film about the war crimes of the American diplomat…”—manages to push all the right buttons to create outrage in the audience—the arrogance, avarice, and hypocrisy of Jeff Skilling, Kenneth Lay, and their henchmen—but it doesn’t hesitate to use similar techniques to those that Enron used in order to game the world—exaggeration, innuendo, omission of facts, and false implications.

Just as the movie obfuscates the issues it targets, the book illuminates and clarifies:

The Bushes and their relationship to Ken Lay began in 1991. Lay was at that time a reputable economist and Washington schmoozer with the city’s power-brokers. He was then also the head of one of the country’s largest natural gas pipeline companies, which was just in the process of becoming Enron, a time when there was nothing illegal going on in the company. Lay and his wife, Texas VIPs, were invited to sleep at the White House and Bush even offered Lay the position of Secretary of Commerce when the incumbent announced he was stepping down.

But Lay was never close to George W. Bush. According to McClean’s and Elkind’s book, “…Lay made a fatal miscalculation with George W. Bush that permanently strained the relationship. In 1993, when Bush was preparing to run for governor of Texas, he had made a ritual pilgrimage to Houston to get Lay’s blessing. Bush asked Lay to serve as the Houston finance chairman for his campaign. Lay, however, rebuffed the candidate, explaining that it wouldn’t be appropriate since he was then serving as chairman of the Business Council for Ann Richards, the Democratic governor….As election day drew near and the polls showed that Bush might well score an upset…the Lays ended up giving far more to Bush than to Richards, [but] Lay’s luke warm embrace left its mark.” The fact is that neither Ken Lay nor Enron got any help from George W. Bush’s administration, and if the first Bush was friendly with Lay it was before Lay began his hanky-panky, and when Lay had a million “friends” in Washington and Houston.

The free market, deregulation, Enron—throughout the film the commentary gets these three hopelessly confused. Over and over again, by implication, by insinuation, even explicitly, the film maker wants the audience to know that Enron=big corporation=free market=deregulation and all of them are bad, bad, bad. In fact the whole system is tarred with the same brush that is used to condemn Enron’s crooks—Andrew Fastow (already tried and convicted, in the pokey for six years), Jeff Skilling, and Kenneth Lay.

The trouble is that the folks who made the movie and many of the folks who make up the audience do not want to hear that the big corporations that make up the S&P 500 have been churning out 8% or 9% annualized returns decade after decade for the past 75 or 100 years to hopeful widows, orphans, and pension funds. And that these same companies have been providing employment for tens of millions of wage earners and their families steadily for decades. And although they exist in a dog-eat-dog environment these corporations have an important economic utility.

Furthermore, Alex Gibney apparently does not know that there is no such thing as a free market. There are only freer and less free markets. All markets have constraints. American markets, arguably the freest in the Western world, are fraught with constraints and impedimenta—just try to read the boiler-plate regulations that come with that new brokerage account you want to open.

The movie wants you to believe that Enron wanted a deregulated energy market, which is true (so did all companies related to the production and sale of energy), and that Enron somehow managed to achieve deregulation on its own, which is completely false. Gas deregulation was largely a fact by 1988, before Enron was born. And Electric deregulation in Calfornia and other states had gone into effect in 1998. California is a major focus in the film because Gibney wants to blame Enron for the electricity shortages which occurred during 2000 and 2001 in California.

The facts are these: The “deregulation” of the energy markets which took place piecemeal over a period of ten years during the eighties and nineties (during both Democratic and Republican administrations) resulted not in a “deregulation” but a “reregulation” of the industry. “In truth for all Enron’s lobbying,” say McClean and Elkind, “the new rules accompanying California’s deregulation were a far cry from what the company had hoped to see enacted….But there were so many powerful competing interests jockeying for advantage that the California Public Utilities Commission, which was in charge of designing new rules, was never going to allow a completely free market….The result was a convoluted mishmash of compromises featuring more rules and regulations than ever.”

This mess of contradictory regulations allowed the clever traders at Enron and five or six other energy companies to spot loopholes to game the system and take advantage of strategies that were not illegal but not exactly fair play either. Enron and the other energy companies made a fortune on those strategies that took advantage of the regulatory loopholes and the California ratepayers ended up getting screwed.

When the Federal Electric Regulatory Commission looked into the matter in November of 2000 their report exonerated the power trading companies, including Enron, and added that “…certain market rules do interfere with the functioning of the market and, taken together, may permit sellers to exercise market power…”—as much of a slap at California’s stupid regulations as at the power companies.

In short, Enron did not create the California crisis but it and its rivals did take advantage of the opportunities created by California’s laws to make profits, a practice as old as the hills. Not too different from your accountant taking advantage of some IRS loophole to save you money when April 15 rolls around.

If you want to find out what really went wrong in the Enron case and how a few greedy men were responsible for thousands of investors and employees losing their nest eggs, Horsefeathers suggests skipping the film and buying the book by McClean and Elkind.

June 23, 2005

EGYPT'S ANSWER TO DR. RICE'S CALL FOR FREEDOM

Egyptian Government Targets Christian as Threat to National Security:

Former Muslim Preacher's Conversion Leads to Imprisonment

WASHINGTON – This week in Cairo, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice criticized Egypt's use of emergency decrees. Christian Solidarity International (CSI) is protesting the arrest and continued imprisonment of Bahaa-Eldin El-Akkhad, a former Islamic preacher from Al Talebiya, Giza, in Lower Egypt.

El-Akkad, 46, was arrested on April 6, 2005 under Egypt's Emergency Security Law for endangering national unity by converting to Christianity. Egyptian State Security Prosecutor Tarek Abdelshakour focused his interrogation of El-Akkad on allegations that he had defamed Islam.

After 45 days of incarceration, El-Akkad was transferred to Mazra'at Tora Prison in Cairo where political prisoners are held. Human rights activists have described Tora Prison as the worst prison in Egypt, because of its rampant torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners.

Though Egypt signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which calls for the freedom of religion, the government continues to arrest Christian converts who leave Islam.

"The Egyptian government has pledged to the international community that it will work for democratic reform, yet it continues to violate its own rule of law when it comes to Christians and the free exercise of conscience," says Fr. Keith Roderick, CSI's Washington Representative.

Amnesty International and the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights have provided extensive documentation on the use of torture against those detained because of emergency legislation.

CSI is demanding the immediate release of Bahaa El-Din El-Akkad and an end to the Egyptian government's policy of targeting those who convert from Islam, apostates, as political prisoners.

El-Akkad is married and has three children. Prior to his conversion, he was associated with the Tabligh and Da'wa Committee in Al Telabiya. The movement, known for its propagation and preaching, began in India and was founded by Imam Muhammad Kandahlawey in 1867.

June 19, 2005

OUR FRIENDS, THE EGYPTIANS

Leading Egyptian Government Daily Al-Akhbar: "Al-Zarqawi is an American Agent"
        In a June 15, 2005 editorial titled "All the Evidence Proves that Al-Zarqawi is an American Agent," a leading Egyptian government daily Al-Akhbar states that Al-Zarqawi is working for the U.S. and is massacring Iraqis in an effort to extend the occupation in Iraq. [1] The following are excerpts from the article:

"All Evidence Proves that Al-Zarqawi Works for America"

"All the evidence proves that Abu Mus'ab Al-Zarqawi is working for America, because his victims are Iraqis and not [members of] the coalition forces under the command of the American occupation forces in Iraq. Abu Mus'ab Al-Zarqawi's official title is 'leader of Al-Qa'ida's faction in Iraq.' Osama bin Laden is the commander of the Al-Qa'ida organization, and this proves that [Al-Zarqawi's commander,] bin Laden, has [also] been an American agent ever since he operated against the USSR forces in Afghanistan in favor of the Americans!
See the rest here.

THE FAILURES OF EUROPEAN UTOPIA

Roger Kimball nicely dissects the collapse of the European enterprise and the disappointment of its liberal utopian supporters.

"The New York Times reports the shocking news: “Failed Summit Talks Expose Union Abyss”.
Something shattered in Europe on Friday night.
The leaders of the 25 European Union nations went home after a failed two-day summit meeting in anger and in shame, as domestic politics and national interests defeated lofty notions of sacrifice and solidarity for the benefit of all."

Oh dear, oh dear! Those evil things, “domestic politics and national interests” once again trumped “lofty notions of sacrifice and solidarity for the benefit of all.” How could that be? Didn't the Europeans scrap human nature when they formed the European Union? Didn’t they transcend narrow self-interest, selfishness, and atavistic sentiments like patriotism, envy, ambition, and greed?
The European Unionists don’t mention the writings of Karl Marx much, but isn’t their vision of a super-enlightened populace all pulling together for the common good (defined, nota bene, by those benevolent, tax-exempt bureaucrats in Brussels) very close to Marx’s Romantic vision: "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs," comrade!

The Times, natch, is somber about the disintegration of the latest experiment in social engineering.

"The battle over money and the shelving of the bloc’s historic constitution, after the crushing no votes in France and the Netherlands, stripped away all pretense of an organization with a common vision and reflected the fears of many leaders in the face of rising popular opposition to the project called Europe. . . .
Most embarrassing for the European Union was a last-minute attempt by its 10 newest members to salvage the budget agreement late on Friday night. They offered to give up some of their own aid from the union so that the older and richer members could keep theirs.

For the new members, that offer was an opportunity to prove their worth. Criticizing the “egoism” of countries driven by national interests, Prime Minister Marek Belka of Poland said, “Nobody will be able to say that for Poland, the European Union is just a pile of money.”

Imagine that! “Egoism,” countries “driven by national interests”: what a scandal. The Prime Minster of Poland got to indulge in some pleasing self-righteousness. Other bureaucrats savored the pleasures of publicly acknowledging their humiliation at being associated with polities governed by such base, such unenlightened passions.
But for the older members, it was a humiliation. “When I heard one after the other, all the new member states--each poorer than the other--say that in the interest of an agreement they would be ready to renounce part of the money they are due, I was ashamed,” Jean-Claude Juncker, Luxembourg’s prime minister and the departing European Union president, told journalists after talks collapsed.."
See the rest here.

Horsefeathers would add that the failure of such noble visions requires scapegoats and the usual anti-utopians are the Jews. George Bush and America have become functional equivalents of the greedy, devious and controlling Jews so we expect anti-Israel and anti-U.S. sentiment amongst EU supporters among our own liberal elites to intensify.

June 16, 2005

PETER PACE, USMC

The incoming chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is the first Marine to hold that position. Peter Pace is one of the military leaders Tom Friedman has been condescending to and Sen. Durbin has been comparing to Pol Pot.

"...Born in Brooklyn, the son of an Italian immigrant, Pace had been raised in New Jersey. His military service had begun with the Naval Academy from which he graduated in 1967. A year later, after a year at The Basic School at Quantico, which molds all new second lieutenants, he was on his way to Vietnam. He arrived in time to be assigned as a platoon leader in Golf Company, 2d Battalion, 5th Marines, then involved in heavy fighting in the Battle for Hue City. It was an experience that marked him forever. He was the third platoon commander in as many weeks. When he joined it, there were only 14 men remaining in the platoon instead of the authorized 43. Under the glass on his desk he keeps a photo of Lance Corporal Guido Farinaro, the first Marine to die while under his command. There would be many more to die. After 37 years he can still reel off their names. He himself escaped unscathed in his 13 months of Vietnam combat.

Five days after the announcement of his nomination, honoring a commitment made almost a year earlier, he spoke to members of the senior class at West Point taking Law 403, Constitutional and Military Law. He told the cadets that he had worried over how he might perform in battle and that he "presumed that you are wondering about the same things." He reassured them, "If you feel fear, it is natural." He went on to say that soldiers want to follow their leaders: "They want you to be good. They will cling to leaders who care about them."

In a speech given a year or so ago to a group of veterans from the Battle for Hue, he said, "This is an amazing country. My dad was born in Italy. His son is the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. You can't do that any place else in the world." He soon will be able to amend that to read that as an immigrant's son, he is now the first Marine to be chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff."
See the rest of the profile here.

SEN. DURBIN MEET COLONEL WYRICK

"...If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime—Pol Pot or others—
that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."
--Sen. Richard Durbin, mouthpiece for Islamo-Nazi terrorists.

Here (Hattip to Bruce Kesler) are words to ponder from our side:

Col. Brett Wyrick is commander of the 154th Medical Group, Hawaii Air National Guard, and is serving as a surgeon in Balad with the 332nd
Expeditionary Medical Group.

“The first rule of war is that young men and women die. The second rule of war is that surgeons cannot change the first rule. I think the third ruleof war should be that those who have given their all for our freedom are never forgotten, and they are always honored.

I wish there was not a war, and I wish our young people did not have to fight and die. But I cannot wish away evil men like Bin Laden and al-Zarqawi. These men are not wayward children who have gone astray; they are not great men who are simply misunderstood. These are cold-blooded killers and they will kill you, me, and everyone we love and hold dear if we do not kill them first. You cannot reason with these people, you cannot negotiate with these people, and this war will not be over until they are dead. That is the ugly, awful, and brutal truth.

I wish the situation was different, but it is not. Americans have two choices. They can run from the threat, deny it exists, candy-coat it, debate it, and hope it goes away. And then, Americans will be fair
game around the world and slaughtered by the thousands for the sheep they have become.

Our second choice is to crush these evil men where they live and for us to have the political will and courage to finish what we came over here to do.

The last thing we need here in Iraq is an exit strategy or some damn timetable for withdrawal. Thank God there was no timetable for withdrawal after the Battle of the Bulge or Iwo Jima. Thank God there was no exit strategy at Valley Forge. Freedom is not easy, and it comes with a terrible price - I saw the bill here yesterday.

The third rule of war should be that we never forget the sacrifices
made by our young men and women, and we always honor them. We honor them by finishing what they came to accomplish. We remember them by never quitting and having the backbone and the guts to never bend to the yoke of oppression.

We honor them and remember them by having the courage
to live free.”

June 15, 2005

TOM FRIEDMAN'S FLAT WORLD

        Horsefeathers argues that the once great body of ideas called 'Liberalism' has become little more than a shared faith, a pose, a stance designed to flatter the narcissism of the true believer. It is rooted in a utopian fantasy that Liberalism would be the happily shared multicultural faith of all, were it not for the malevolent Bush administration, the Christian 'right', and the evil neo-Con propagandists. After all, aren't liberals 'good', 'kind' people who believe in Peace and the United Nations? It is Tom Friedman's brave new flat world, in which all mankind will revel in a shared technological utopia--provided only that they listen to the wisdom of Tom Friedman about how to prepare for that beautiful future.
        When not breathlessly telling us of the need for more technological education in order to share in the wonders of the 'flat world'(Has there ever been a more inapt metaphor to describe the 21st century world?)of high speed internet access, Friedman assumes the pose of a military strategist. Don't bother to ask how he came by his knowledge of war fighting. He has none. It's just a pose, allowing Friedman to fulfill his primary function as an emotional healer whose higher task is to reassure the Liberal wordsmith classes of their own superior intelligence and goodness. There's no need for critical thinking with Tom Friedman around to offer Liberal cant in answer to real world problems, whether concerning Economics or War. The Muslim world hates us? Enemies actually want to slaughter us infidels? Close Gitmo and show what caring people we truly are. In the fantasy world of Liberal utopians we have no enemies, only potential friends who don't realize how nice we are. Have our war casualties been historically minimal? Well let's fight a war with no casualties at all. Then we'll feel so much better about ourselves.
        The function of the contemporary liberal Op-Ed pundit is that of a group therapist, whose main task is to comfort, support and reassure the faithful of their own superior intelligence, and to relieve them of the hard task of critical thinking or self-scrutiny. In the trinity of anti-Liberal evil doers (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld), Rumsfeld is particularly hated as the architect of our wars of liberation in Afghanistan and Iraq. Such wars require choice: “You’re either with us or with the terrorists” in the famous words of the simple minded President. And it turns out to be so; the more the MSM try to discredit our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the more they are clearly helping our enemies. The New York Times is full of such Liberal preachers. Tom Friedman is a purveyor par excellence of Liberal cant for the wordsmith classes. It's an easy formula: when criticizing policies of the Bush administration, always suggest either openly or covertly that you, as a liberal, are so much smarter and better than the stupid and conspiratorial neo-Cons. Tom Friedman is an exemplar of this approach. After his newspaper devoted daily front page stories to the imaginary horrors inflicted on terrorists in Abu Graibh and Guantanomo, he then blamed the Bush administration for causing an image problem in the Arab world! See, they hate us. We do such awful things to their holy Korans. Implied, if not openly stated, is the multicultural faith requiring great respect for Muslim religious symbols, no matter how barbarous or savage their message, while apologizing for the dreadful deeds done in the name of our symbols, like the American flag or the Bible. Where was this chorus of appeasers when the Taliban destroyed the priceless Buddhas of Bamiyan? Today Tom-Flat World-Friedman reminds us how much smarter a military strategist he is than our own military. He does so, without providing any evidence that he has actually considered the nature of the military task and the reasoning behind the strategy. For example, he never takes up the question of whether some of our problems are caused, not by insufficient troops, but by restraint in the application of overwhelming force. Did our P.C. sensitive reluctance to attack mosques provide sanctuary to our enemy at the cost of American lives? If so, thank you NY Times and Tom Friedman for ceaselessly promoting the idea that Islam is a religion of peace. Of course to discuss and even critique such matters means taking seriously alternative strategic arguments and provides little opportunity for posturing as smarter and more caring than Rumsfeld. Friedman completely ignores the nature of the ongoing offensive to cut the supply lines of the enemy. (For a true critical appraisal see Mackubin Owens, a real student of warfare, describing our ongoing strategy here.)Instead, Friedman assumes that the fight is essentially being lost while Rumsfeld continues to withold sufficient manpower. This old idea is trotted out regularly by those who want to turn every American war death into a new Vietnam. However, unlike our liberal journalists, military commanders did learn something from Vietnam: sheer numbers of troops do not answer the problems of guerilla or terrorist style warfare, conducted by a savage enemy that doesn't play by Geneva convention rules. Friedman trots out his worn arguments as if he never heard them answered, as they were repeatedly by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Richard Meyers, in order to score debating points vs. the Bush administration. Get over it Tom, John Kerry lost, and so did Wesley Clark. The title of his column is "Let's Talk About Iraq" and that's what it is, empty talk. It's the mindless blather of an Oprah-fied pundit who sees every problem as an opportunity to just sit down and talk--and score debating points against the administration.

        In the following paragraphs by George Orwell from Pacifism and the War try substituting ‘liberalism’ for ‘pacifism’ and you’ll get the correct measure of contemporary Liberalism.

“Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, ‘he that is not with me is against me’. ..pacifist activities are not permitted in those countries..Germany and Japan...(in both of them the penalty is, or can be, beheading) while both the Germans and the Japanese do all they can to encourage the spread of pacifism in British and American territories. The Germans even run a spurious ‘freedom’ station which serves out pacifist propaganda indistinguishable from that of the P.P.U. They would stimulate pacifism in Russia as well if they could, but in that case they have tougher babies to deal with. In so far as it takes effect at all, pacifist propaganda can only be effective against those countries where a certain amount of freedom of speech is still permitted; in other words it is helpful to totalitarianism.

I am not interested in pacifism as a ‘moral phenomenon’. If Mr Savage and others imagine that one can somehow ‘overcome’ the German army by lying on one’s back, let them go on imagining it, but let them also wonder occasionally whether this is not an illusion due to security, too much money and a simple ignorance of the way in which things actually happen. As an ex-Indian civil servant, it always makes me shout with laughter to hear, for instance, Gandhi named as an example of the success of non-violence. As long as twenty years ago it was cynically admitted in Anglo-Indian circles that Gandhi was very useful to the British government. So he will be to the Japanese if they get there. Despotic governments can stand ‘moral force’ till the cows come home; what they fear is physical force. But though not much interested in the ‘theory’ of pacifism, I am interested in the psychological processes by which pacifists who have started out with an alleged horror of violence end up with a marked tendency to be fascinated by the success and power of Nazism…”

June 12, 2005

NY TIMES' SCOOP: CLASS MATTERS!

WORLD STUNNED

THOUSANDS CONFUSED, SEEK GUIDANCE

Horsefeathers, having only now recovered from the New York Times’ shocking series in investigative cultural journalism, is beginning to grasp what the Times’ subtext is in this front-page/above-the-fold series. When the NY Times editors collect the various parts and produce a book—ready for the Christmas holiday season, no doubt—it will be an expression of the social philosophy of the Times—The World According to Pinch Sulzberger: The Haves are mean-spirited, selfish, materialistic, ruthless, vulgar, ignorant, and benighted; the Havenots are idealistic, kind, generous, noble, educated, and intelligent. And everybody’s wealth but Pinch Sulzberger’s should be redistributed so that the outcome is equal.

No better example of the New York Times’ weltanschauung is the message that comes through in the two front-page stories on Sunday, June 5th: The first, headlined “Old Nantucket Warily Meets the New,” and the second, “Richest Are Leaving Even the Rich Far Behind.”[Horsefeathers would have linked the reader to those respective sites except for the fact that Pinch Sulzberger wants to redistribute your wealth but not his own. You would have to pay to read the stories.] The Nantucket story is meant to exemplify Sulzberger’s Law, which is the theme of the second story: “…a concentration of wealth can turn a meritocracy into an aristocracy….”

It is touching to see the NY Times so worried about the fate of our meritocracy after all the years it has fought meritocracy in favor of “affirmative action”—preferential quotas for various racial, ethnic, and gender groups.

The Nantucket story is cleverly structured to show the very rich at their very worst—not working and creating wealth but spending it in amounts that the average taxpayer would find excessive. Not only that, Nantucket is a place where there is a concentration of people who consume conspicuously, even excessively. It would be hard to find a spot in the United States where aggregated wealth could be depicted more obscenely.

Caught in the grip of the Sulzberger weltanschauung, NY Times “reporters” cannot report the whole truth about life or economics. They cannot say, for example, that selfishness, materialism, vulgarity, and greed are an aspect of human nature and can also be found amongst the middle class in Maplewood, NJ and amongst the poor in Bed-Stuy.

Nor can they say that the Hyper-rich: Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Michael Dell and hundreds more are creative, imaginative, hard working men and women who have created hundreds of thousands of millionaires, who pay billions of dollars in taxes, and who have created hundreds of thousands of well paying jobs so that millions of people can pursue happiness and productivity in their lives.

Thanks, amen, and two cheers for the hyper-rich—all of our lives would be poorer without them, and, who knows, maybe someday….

June 10, 2005

TAKE ME OUT TO THE BALLGAME. THEN READ 'LICENSE TO DEAL'

License to Deal : A Season on the Run with a Maverick Baseball Agent
by Jerry Crasnick
Holzbrink Publishers, Rodale

A Horsefeathers book review:

        License To Deal is a book meant for the serious baseball fan who wishes to learn about the economics of the sport and especially about the expanding role of the player agent. It does offer much fascinating inside information about the business of baseball, however it turns out to be about baseball the way Huck Finn is about rafting down the Mississippi, and therefore deserves a wider audience. Its real subject is human nature: friendship, betrayal, ambition, greed, striving, success, failure and the never reached, endlessly pursued American dream. And it is also about the “foul dust that floated in the wake of Gatsby’s dream.” It is funny, touching and ultimately uplifting. Like Huck Finn, its background subject is this glorious land we live in, home to the greatest game ever invented. And tying it all together is the story of an American original, Matt Sosnick, baseball agent.
        Like a character in a fine novel, we come to know and care for Matt in all his strengths and weaknesses, his incredible mix of naivete and knowingness, innocence and worldliness, generosity and vengefulness, and we watch him mature over the course of a year. Imagine Huck Finn, rolled together with Gatsby with a dollop of Sammy Glick and Henderson the Rain King, with a new age therapeutic mindset thrown in, and that captures about 50% of Matt Sosnick. The heart of the book, for this reader, was the improbable friendship between Matt, the very Jewish, entrepreneurial, manic, workaholic striver, and Dontrelle Willis, the 13 years younger, black pitching prodigy. Willis, in the summer of 2003 became a national sensation as a rookie of the year pitcher for the World Champion Florida Marlins. His joyful demeanor was infectious, and along with his weirdly contorted pitching motion made him an instant fan favorite. Before his rookie season, in the fall of 2002, Dontrelle left his mother’s home and moved into a spare room in Matt’s San Francisco apartment. Matt became a kind of surrogate older brother, father and educator. On their early morning jogs, Matt, a committed Jew and ardent supporter of Israel, would talk to Dontrelle of world affairs, enlarging his perspective on life. “One time”, Crasnick writes, “Dontrelle returned to his old neighborhood in Alameda and began rambling on about Pol Pot and the horrors of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. His “people,” as he liked to call them , looked at him as if he’d grown a second head.”
        Like Huck and Jim, Matt and Dontrelle’s relationship helps each of them mature. We follow their struggles over the course of a fateful year. Dontrelle’s insight into Matt allows him to help Matt deal with his own abundant inner demons. Dontrelle is even keeled, and has a sense of balance about life. He knows there will be downs to go with the ups. Matt is especially vulnerable to disappointment in relationships. He believes that integrity and caring for his clients will be rewarded by their loyalty, and the times when that doesn’t occur wound him deeply. Dontrelle remarks, of Matt, “He’s crazy. He doesn’t stop working. He works until he sleeps. There’s no leisure time. A lot of times I’d say, ‘Hey you gotta relax, dude.’ ..He’s a very intelligent guy. He makes good decisions. Therefore, he feels responsible for everyone.He feels accountable for everyone. And it doesn’t work like that. But you can’t fault a man for that trait. That’s a good trait. It’s the same trait I have. I think that’s why we connect.” Matt competes in the lawless world of agents, full of sharks ready to pounce on their smaller prey. He struggles to do so, while retaining his own integrity. At one point when an unscrupulous competitor steals a player from him, he plaintively argues that such behavior "doesn't add to the goodness or the kindness of the world." Yet over the course of the year we follow him, he does harden enough to do what’s necessary to survive and succeed, while still remaining the incredibly generous and decent person we come to root for.
        This book is as surprising as a 10th inning home run by Aaron Boone. It seems to be about the business side of baseball, but turns out to be about the intricacies of the human heart. In the current literary world where novelists adopt an ironic distance from their subjects, Horsefeathers is delighted to find such an old fashioned and engaging non-fiction portrait of the human condition. Our congratulations to its talented author, Jerry Crasnick. We look forward to the sequel, hopeful that Dontrelle and Matt will remain friends while each of them deals with the bitch goddess, success.

June 08, 2005

UNSUNG HEROES

Every once in a while Horsefeathers encounters a good story that is both surprising, counter-intuitive, and relatively unknown in this part of the world.

When we hear of Jews who have left their mark on the modern world we are most often told about great physicists, doctors, scholars, musicians, bankers. The story I heard recently is about a group of young Jewish men and women who became amateur spies, men and women not only of sensibility but of action, and great courage, a group led by a charismatic leader whose strength and knowledge played a powerful part in the victory of the Allies in World War I in the Middle East.

Before the outbreak of the war in 1914 the Jews of Palestine were poised to be loyal to the Ottoman Empire, which controlled all of the Levant at that time. But as soon as Turkey became an ally of the Central Powers it became apparent that the Germans were the real masters of the country.

It also became clear to Aaron Aaronsohn, the leader of the Palestinian Jewish community, that the German aspirations to seize and control the Middle East would make any Zionist hope of a Jewish Palestine virtually impossible. He decided that the Turkish-German hold over Palestine must be broken, and that the British Government would be the best hope for a Jewish Palestine.

To achieve these ends he formed a group with the name of NILI, an acronym based on the initials of its Hebrew password: Netzach Israel Lo Yeshaqer, “The Glory of Israel shall not lie down,” a phrase from the Book of Samuel. The leaders of NILI were a triumvirate of outstanding men—besides Aaron Aaronsohn, a scientist of international reputation, there were Absalom Feinberg, a brilliant poet and an extraordinarily courageous man, and Alex Aaronsohn, Aaron’s younger brother, who achieved some fame later in America as an author and lecturer.

One of the biggest problems that the leaders of NILI had was to contact and convince the officers of the British Military Intelligence in Cairo that this group of eager amateurs, officially citizens of the Ottoman Empire, and Jews to boot, had something of value to offer the mighty British military. For over a year, from 1915 to well into 1916, Alex Aaronsohn and then Absalom Feinberg made many attempts to get past the gatekeepers of British Intelligence and were met with disdain and insolence on each occasion.

It wasn’t until Aaron Aaronsohn himself decided to break through to the people at the top that contact was finally established. Aaronsohn was not one to be taken lightly. A giant of a man with a booming voice, he was by then world famous as an agronomist and the leading expert in Middle Eastern agricultural science. After a long, dangerous, and secretive journey from Palestine by way of Berlin and Copenhagen, he arrived in London and, through his commanding presence and reputation, he was able to convince diplomat Sir Mark Sykes and through him Lloyd George that NILI was an important source of military intelligence.

Having been a scientific protégé of the Baron de Rothschild, Aaronsohn was used to dealing with important men. Eventually he came to know and work with all of the major players in the Middle East from Djemal Pasha, Governor General of Palestine, to General Edmund Allenby. Here, from his diary, is an excerpt about one of Aaronsohn’s meetings with T.E Lawrence:

“Sunday, August 12th, 1917.
Cairo-Alexandria.

I had a chat with Captain Lawrence this morning. Our interview was devoid of amenitity. He has been too successful at an early age—and is infatuated with himself. He gave me a lesson on our colonies—the mentality of the people—the feelings of the Arabs, etc., etc. As I was listening to him I could almost imagine that I was attending a conference by a scientific anti-semitic Prussian speaking English….One would gather from the above interview that nothing can be done in Judea and Samaria where Faisal will never gain access. There might be something to do in Galilea. But Lawrence will conduct his investigation by his own methods in order to learn of the mentality of the Jews in Galilean colonies. If they are in favour of the Arabs they shall be spared, otherwise they shall have their throats cut. He is still at the age where people do not doubt themselves—happy young man! He is plainly hostile to us…”

What did NILI do to help the Brits win the war in the Middle East? They were able to create a network of “agents” everywhere in Turkish Palestine: Medical officers in the Turkish Army, engineers who were at the head of road building and water supply, recruiting officers, commissariat officers. Others were on the front lines collecting first- hand data about military positions, guns, etc. Even the strategies of the Turkish GHQ were discovered.

The net result was that the British acquired an accurate assessment of the Turkish order of battle by the middle of 1917, as well as a clearer picture of the degree of Turkish disorganization and the poor morale of the Turkish forces. But perhaps most important of all was what Aaronsohn himself was able to contribute strategically because of his knowledge of the Sinai desert. He knew that there was water available in the Sinai and where it was located. This intelligence was crucial in Allenby’s breaking through the Turkish front by a concentrated attack against Beersheba.

Eventually NILI came to be regarded as the Brits’ best and most reliable source of intelligence. This is suggested by Major General George MacDonough, Director of Military Intelligence at the War Office, who gave a lecture in 1919 at the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich: “You will no doubt remember the great campaign of Lord Allenby in Palestine and perhaps you are surprised at the daring of his actions. Someone who is looking from the side lines, lacking knowledge about the situation, is likely to think that Allenby took unwarranted risks. That is not true. For Allenby knew with certainty from his intelligence (in Palestine) of all the preparations and all the movements of his enemy. All the cards of his enemy were revealed to him, and so he could play his hand with complete confidence. Under these conditions, victory was certain before he began.”

A few years later, Raymond Savage, Deputy Military Secretary to Allenby, told a New York press conference: “It was very largely the daring work of young spies, most of them natives of Palestine, which enabled the…Field-Marshal to accomplish his undertaking effectively.”

But despite NILI’s contribution to British Military intelligence, it was Aaron Aaronsohn’s powerful influence on Allenby which shaped the latter’s strategy in the 1917-18 Palestine campaign. Aaronsohn knew Turkish Syria and it rulers as perhaps no other man then did and could articulate a compelling view of the political and military situation which Allenby was able to exploit victoriously.

Aaron Aaronsohn died mysteriously in May of 1919 during a flight over the English Channel at the age of 43. At the time he was an important participant in Anglo-Zionist affairs and had he lived he would doubtless have made significant contributions to the development of Israel.

June 06, 2005

Adding and Subtracting Social Justice

By Rita Kramer

A recent report in Horsefeathers on the way in which education schools like the one at Brooklyn College indoctrinate prospective teachers may have left the impression that the litmus test of “disposition”—evaluating a prospective teacher’s politics—applied only to the so-called soft subjects: the social sciences and—heaven help us—the humanities. Not so. Even mathematics is being taught in the public schools from the perspective of the radical social agenda.

“Teaching Mathematics for Social Justice” is an actual course given at Northeastern University’s School of Education in Boston. According to the course description [click HERE], future teachers of algebra, trigonometry and geometry will be given “an opportunity to contemplate on [sic] the role of the teacher as an agent of change” as they “develop a pedagogical model for teaching for social change…in addressing issues of social justice in mathematics teaching and learning.”

Wonder how it works? Glad you asked. I happen to have some quotations from a text titled “Rethinking Mathematics: Teaching Social Justice by the Numbers.” [click HERE] Here are some topics intended as examples of “how to weave social justice issues throughout the mathematics curriculum”:

Teaching Suggestions: Disparities in Wealth Cartoon.

Driving While Black or Brown: A Math Project About Racial Profiling.

The War in Iraq: How Much Does it Cost?

Is Environmental Racism Real?

Corporate Control of U.S. Media Line Graph.

The Global Capitalist Economy Cartoon.

Poverty and World Wealth: Recognizing Inequality;

Unequal Distribution of U.S. Wealth.

HIV/AIDS Status: Using Statistics to Understand Ratios.

Map of Territory that Mexico Lost to the United States.

Do You Support Invading Iraq Cartoon.

Using math to Raise Issues of Representation…

And on and on. The authors quote Frieda, a ninth-grader in a Chicago public school: “Now I realize that you could use math to defend your rights and realize the injustices around you.” Let’s hope she will also be able to use math to balance a checkbook, make change, calculate a mortgage rate, and perform other ordinary tasks in this unjust capitalist society.

The authors want Frieda and her classmates “to see math as a tool to help make the world more equal and just.” In the past, math has been a tool to help make scientific and technological advances; the higher mathematics required for an understanding of physics or biochemistry might also be considered a way of improving the world, if not exactly making it “more equal and just” in the way these math teachers have in mind.

Whether that level of mathematical proficiency will be attained by pupils being encouraged to think of changing the world “rather than merely regarding math as a collection of disconnected rules to be rotely memorized and regurgitated” remains to be seen. According to a math teacher at one of New York City’s select high schools, writing in the New York Sun earlier this month, his students have a very difficult time understanding, appreciating, and doing math at higher levels. He pinpoints the reason why so many of these brightest of students require private tutoring: the prevalence of the “constructivist” approach that discourages traditional methods of learning and memorizing and practicing rules in favor of encouraging students to “discover” their own methods for solving problems. Both the constructivist and the social-justice approach are flying in the face of centuries of experience of learning in order to pursue ideological goals.

The authors of this text and others like it believe “[A] social justice approach to math is the appropriate type of math for these unjust times. Other, traditional forms of math…are immoral in a world as unjust as ours.” Being guided by ideas of what is good and bad for society is not likely to prove the most fruitful approach to learning subjects like mathematics and science. Let’s hope we can continue to produce world-class scientists despite the fads and fantasies that threaten traditional educational methods.

Rita Kramer is the author of “Ed School Follies:

The Miseducation of America’s Teachers.”

www.ritakramer.com

June 04, 2005

DON'T SEND MY BOY TO HARVARD, THE DYING MOTHER SAID. TRY THE COLLEGE OF STATEN ISLAND INSTEAD

        In post 9-11 America a dawning awareness is growing that our wordsmith intellectual class---the media, university faculties, writers---is effectively allied with our foes, the Islamist jihadis. Increasing numbers of Americans have become aware of the smog of leftist utopian ideas enveloping liberal arts faculties of our elite universities. The self flattering narcissism of the wordsmith class is extraordinary. With the recent identification of 'Deep Throat' we've witnessed a non-stop orgy of self praise by journalists who want us to believe in their noble moral superiority. How many more of these candidates for sainthood will tell us they were "inspired" to become journalists by the example of Woodward and Bernstein? Those of us who've spent our lives outside the circle of wordsmiths see in Woodward and Bernstein, a couple of vain self promoters who attained wealth and celebrity by vastly exagerrating their role in Watergate, but who certainly contributed to the plague of journalists more interested in bringing down Presidents than in reporting the truth.

        Among representatives of the literary wordsmith class, Erica Jong is one of the most celebrated. She wrote one moderately amusing novel, FEAR OF FLYING, funny for challenging some of the shibboleths of the therapeutic culture, then lapsed into left feminist-liberal orthodoxy and became unreadable. She must have seemed like an inspired choice to the faculty and administration who invited her to give the commencement address at the College of Staten Island. Staten Island is a community that lost many of its sons in the attacks on the WTC. They haven't forgotten and they quickly recognized which side Erica Jong is on. If the reaction of the Staten Island grads is at all representative, there's hope for our country.

Best-selling author Erica Jong was booed and told to "Shut up!" and "Go Home!" during her 40-minute speech yesterday at the College of Staten Island's commencement exercises.

As Ms. Jong, best known for her 1973 novel "Fear of Flying," talked about everything from truth in advertising to truth in politics and the shallowness of public relations -- but said precious little about graduation -- some of the thousands in attendance on the great lawn at the college's Willowbrook campus stood up and began to object loudly.

A little less than halfway through her speech, some graduates began tossing around an inflatable beach volleyball. Some even got up from their chairs, just yards from her podium, to go chat with friends and family who were seated behind them...

Ms. Jong's remarks were met with some vehement disapproval.
"She gave a political speech when she was supposed to be doing a pep talk," said the father of a CSI graduate who declined to give his name. "Some graduates wanted to throw stuff at her. Whoever heard of a commencement speaker talking about body bags?"

Dorothy, a 48-year-old mother of a CSI graduate, categorized Ms. Jong's speech as "all-around bashing.

"It was disgusting, despicable," said the Fort Wadsworth woman, who would not give her surname. "She called politicians liars, called us all liars. She trashed America. Mostly, she just wanted to talk. It was personal spewing. There was nothing about graduation..." Horsefeathers offers special kudos to Dorothy!

See the rest here.

OUR FRIENDS THE SAUDIS

Don't expect to find this in the MSM. Our high minded journalists, emulating their role models, Woodward and Bernstein, are too focused on exposing the horrors of the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld gulag at Gitmo.

SAUDI ARABIA LAUNCHES BIGGEST CRACKDOWN ON CHRISTIANS IN A DECADE:

All Eyes on U.S. State Dept. as Final Deadline for CPC Sanctions on Saudi Arabia Nears

For Immediate Release
You are free to disseminate the following news. We request that you
reference International Christian Concern, and include our web address
www.persecution.org

(ICC - June 2, 2005) - The Washington, D.C. based human rights organization International Christian Concern (ICC) is getting reports of 46 confirmed arrests of Christians, with some sources citing in excess of 100 Christians arrested. From last Friday through yesterday, Saudi authorities engaged in a major crackdown involving a joint effort of standard police forces and Muttawa religious police. In the last couple of days the raids have spread from the capital, Riyadh. This is the largest crackdown in a decade by the religiously oppressive country.

The crackdown comes in the wake of allegations against the United States for desecrating the Qur'an at the Guantanamo Bay detention center. During the latest wave of arrests, Saudi authorities have been ransacking houses and destroying any Bibles found in the victims' possession. Last weekend ICC confirmed reports that 8 Christians were arrested and documents naming other area Christians were seized.

On Saturday, May 28. 2005 at 8:30 p.m. Chittirical John Thomas Passport # A9757690), an Indian national, was pulled from work in Riyadh by Saudi Muttawa authorities, dragged to his home, and beaten in front of his maid and 5 year-old son. The Muttawa gathered his Bible and all religious paraphernalia, and took 37 year-old Thomas to the Shemaissy Detention Center. Thomas's wife, who is 5 months pregnant, has not heard from her husband since. In addition to John Thomas, 7 other Indian nationals were arrested in similar fashion and detained for their faith as Christians while they were asleep on Saturday night.

Valiakalail Samuel Daniel (Passport # Z1101522), Koil Pillai Vijaykumar (E3188388), Mutham Plackal Mathai Thomas (E2584732), Pathivadathil James George (U3128086), George Matthew (E7881606), Biju Thomas (E4201849), and Georgekutty Thomas (A5717194) are the confirmed names of the others arrested. These arrests followed the detention of Samkutty Varghese's detention outside of his bible study on March 22, 2005. Varghese (Passport # E8421022) possessed the names and numbers of other Christians attending the same fellowship group. ICC has received credible reports that Varghese was sentenced to 10 months in prison along with numerous lashes.

This pogrom-like sweeping of the Christian minority in Saudi Arabia is a great disappointment to the United States' State Department, and shows deficient resolve in enforcing sanctions on "Countries of Particular Concern" (CPC). The United States has allowed over 2 months after the initial deadline for implementing direct action against Saudi Arabia for the CPC status. Now, they only have 10 days left to act under the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998. The inaction of the world's leader in promoting freedom is reprehensible, and risks breaching the line of irrelevance on matters of religious freedom and human rights. This latest crackdown on Christians is inexcusable and highlights the oppressive regime under which all religious minorities live and work in Saudi Arabia. The United States and the broader international community need to hold Saudi Arabia accountable for egregious violations of religious freedom.

ICC is a Washington, D.C. based human rights organization that exists to help persecuted Christians worldwide. ICC delivers humanitarian aid, trains and supports persecuted pastors, raises awareness in the US regarding the problem of persecution, and is an advocate for the persecuted on Capitol Hill and the State Department.

June 03, 2005

"ESCAPE TO THE MOVIES"? NOT IF THE NEW YORK TIMES HAS ITS WAY

How many who saw the movie, Seabiscuit, were appalled by its flag-waving pro-Americanism? None of you? Well,Manola Dhargis, the New York Times's new movie critic was. The Times's latest addition to its roster of politically correct reviewers is relieved to find that Cinderella Man has no such shameful pro-American themes. Ron Howard is praised, mostly for what he has omitted from his film- anything that might be interpreted as celebrating America. Furthermore, the movie's theme of a good man triumphing against the odds is, in Ms. Darghis's view, unsuitable to the world situation today where, she reminds us, we are living in America, the world's "political nightmare". Aren't we fortunate to have Ms. Darghis as an addition to the Times's roster of critics, all of whom will root out and expose for the rest of us any deviations from the P.C. agenda.

"...Like Gary Ross's "Seabiscuit," the legend of the little Depression-era horse that could, "Cinderella Man" is a shamefully ingratiating old-fashioned weepie. To his credit, Mr. Howard does not wave the flag as vigorously as Mr. Ross, though the new film's tagline ("When America was on its knees, he brought us to our feet") prepares you for the worst. In any event, given that Mr. Howard and his writers would be hard-pressed to bend this underdog narrative to our current political nightmare, it's a good thing they don't venture down that path..."
See the rest here.

<< Back to Horsefeathers