Tristero

Eli From MoveOn  

One More Reason Not to Go To War  

Separatist rebels fired mortars at an oil refinery in northeastern India, causing a massive fire, officials said Saturday. About 100 workers were evacuated, and no casualties were reported.

We Tried and Tried To Tell You!  

"If the Democrats had spoken out more clearly in a unified vote five months ago in opposition to the resolution, if the people had gone on to the streets five months ago in these numbers in our country and throughout the world, I think we might have been in a different place today," Pelosi said in a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations.

• We tried by, God we tried! I alone started a Fedex campaign to the Senate among my friends. I forwarded 400 letters to Clinton/Schumer each.


• You were warned: Bush said exactly what he was going to do from SOTU onwards.


• You had been warned for years: Wolfowitz and Perle didn't exactly hide their intentions either.


• No important Dems bothered to come to the fall rallies. As a result the protests were ignored, ridiculed or disgracefully underreported.


• Centrist folks like Albright and Scowcroft never really believed that Bush was dumb enough to do what he said.


• The "liberal/centrist" think tanks merely quibbled with Bush on the details: they couldn't see that the Big Picture was as nutty as a fruitcake.

BUSH FAILS TO JUSTIFY WAR OF CHOICE  

"We Don't Need Permission"
Delivers Series of Disconnected, Memorized Soundbites
Solidifies Reputation as Arrogant Incompetent

The unelected fraud indicated in his press conference that he will initiate a war immediately after receipt of the next inspection report, and would be unwilling to accept a deadline of even a few days or weeks after the upcoming vote for Saddam Hussein to disarm - despite that there would be no imminent threat from Iraq during that short period.

If that turns out to be the case and no amendment for a final timetable is accepted, George W. Bush will have shown he is obsessed with "teaching a lesson" to an irrelevant, insane individual against whom he has a personal vendetta - even though that exercise will mean the murder of thousands of innocent Iraqi children and American servicemen, will yield no additional security for the American people but will likely instead further endanger us, and will further erode the US's credibility worldwide.

Bush refused to answer repeated questions regarding a deadline satisfactorily.  Instead, he responded to the question each time it was asked with the non-sequitur: "He's had twelve years."

If Bush resists a final proposed time limit for compliance, one that enables other countries to join the US in sanctioning force, he will have confirmed everything suspected all along by his critics here and around the world:  that he intended from the beginning to attack Iraq; that his "diplomatic efforts" were therefore conducted in bad faith; that his intent all along was to feign interest in diplomacy, but ultimately thumb his nose at the international community and destroy the UN.  Continued and fortified inspections are optimal, but a refusal to compromise even on setting a deadline will leave no doubt about Bush's intentions from the beginning and his fear of compliance.

Regardless of what final events lead up to the inevitable war, most of the diplomatic damage is done and will be irreversible for decades.  Bush is about to roll the dice and wag the dog in hopes perpetual war will give him his first presidential victory in 2004.  He couldn't care less who or how many it endangers or kills.

What an embarrassment.  What a disgrace.

Letter to Islamic Cultural Center of New York  

March 5, 2003

Imam Omar Abu-Namous
Islamic Cultural Center & Mosque of New York City
1711 3rd Ave
New York, NY 10029
212-722-5234
Dear Imam Omar Abu-Namous,

I am an American citizen who is opposed to war in Iraq and who is increasingly concerned by the rising prejudice against Muslims in my country. The gathering crisis compels me to approach you with a request.

I read in today’s New York Times that the US government charged that money collected at the Al Farooq mosque in Brooklyn was used to fund organizations working or in sympathy with Osama bin Laden. I am certain that you are as repulsed by bin Laden as is everyone who loves peace.

What I ask is that you personally broadcast a statement that publicly, and forcefully, condemns bin Laden and the vile heresy that is “bin Ladenism.” This statement would be especially powerful if delivered by you in English and in Arabic. If the Al Farooq charges are accurate, I also ask you to declare that any who help bin Laden in any way cannot be true followers of Islam, a religion of peace and submission to the will of God. Furthermore, while the United States government and others have sometimes perpetrated great wrongs against Islamic nations, those who are so morally blind as to seek vengeance by killing the world’s innocents are as sinful as the ones who first harmed them.

Finally, I ask that you call for the leaders of all nations to heed the call for peace, for justice in the Middle East, for integrity in dealing with other countries, and for renewed vigor in addressing the complicated and wrenching problems that the world faces. If you are willing to take such a courageous stand, you would be helping the worldwide call for peace which all decent people in the world crave.

I would be honored to discuss this letter with anyone at the Islamic Center.

Give Him More of the Stuff, Until He Snaps Back to Reality Fast  

Two Great Articles In New York Review  

The argument that we succeeded in building democracy in Japan and Germany and therefore can build it anywhere does not necessarily hold. Japan and Germany were countries with a homogeneous population and a long existence as nations. They each were steeped in guilt at the depredations of their soldiers in other lands. They were near to totally destroyed but had the people and the skills to rebuild their cities. The Americans who worked to create their democracy were veterans of Roosevelt's New Deal and, mark of the period, were effective idealists.

Iraq, in contrast, was never a true nation. Put together by the British, it was a post–World War I patchwork of Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds, and Turkomans, who, at best, distrusted one another intensely. A situation analogous to Afghanistan's divisions among its warlords could be the more likely outcome. No one will certainly declare with authority that democracy can be built there, yet the arrogance persists. There does not seem much comprehension that except for special circumstances, democracy is never there in us to create in another country by the force of our will. Real democracy comes out of many subtle individual human battles that are fought over decades and finally over centuries, battles that succeed in building traditions. The only defenses of democracy, finally, are the traditions of democracy. When you start ignoring those values, you are playing with a noble and delicate structure. There's nothing more beautiful than democracy. But you can't play with it. You can't assume we're going to go over to show them what a great system we have. This is monstrous arrogance.

[William Kristol says the] foreign strategy of the US must be "unapologetic, idealistic, assertive and well funded. America must not only be the world's policeman or its sheriff, it must be its beacon and guide."
------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is wrong with this? In the first place, it displays breathtaking ignorance of the real world, as ultra-"realist" scenarios frequently do. Because it confidently equates American interest with that of every right-thinking person on the planet, it is doomed to arouse the very antagonism and enmity that provoke American intervention in the first place (only a hardened European cynic would suggest that this calculation has been silently incorporated into the equation). The authors, like their political masters, unhesitatingly suppose both that America can do as it wishes without listening to others, and that in so doing it will unerringly echo the true interests and unspoken desires of friend and foe alike. The first claim is broadly true. The second bespeaks a callow provinciality

Bush Charms Mexians, Uh, Mexicanians... Oh, Who Cares What They're Called  

I could talk about the foolishness of such blatant bullying — or about the incredible risks, in a multiethnic, multiracial society, of even hinting that one might encourage a backlash against Hispanics. And yes, I mean Hispanics...

But my most intense reaction to this story isn't anger over the administration's stupidity and irresponsibility, or even dismay over the casual destruction of hard-won friendships...What I feel, above all, is shame.   

Oh, That's Hillary and Bill Pretending They're Iraqis Pretending They're Americans  

"Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has ordered the procurement of military uniforms identical down to the last detail to those of the U.S. and U.K. forces.

"Saddam intends to issue these uniforms to Fedayeen Saddam troops, who would wear them when conducting reprisals against the Iraqi people so that they could pass the atrocities off as the work of the United States and the United Kingdom...

Boycott Sesame Noodles!  

And the Password This Week Is...  

Saudi Arabia Has Freedom of Religious Expression Says Powell  

Colleen Rowley, American  

Bin Laden dead AND alive  

Let's Keep the Dem Nameless  

The Conservative Movement Moves In  

Bush's victory sermon  

Blair Wants to Delay War?  

Tales From Bush's America  

Wow. That Will Scare Them  

Misanthropy Runs In the Family  

Unspecified Rought Treatment?  

Bush Antagonizes Steel Workers  

I Knew It  

''The media are better covering events than ideas,'' he says. ''You can see what people think from the polls, but you can't really see what drives them unless you see people marching in the street. There's a difference between 'opposition' and 'an opposition.' ''

The Threatening Storm Downgraded To Drizzle, Showers  

AlterNet: So Bush Wants Civil Disobedience?  

New Yorkers March 5 CANDLELIGHT MARCH FOR PEACE  

Trainstopping  

Thanks to an efficient communication network, protesters, often operating in relatively small groups (20-30 people) set up mobile blockades all along the route, lighting up fires and obstructing the tracks, forcing the train to come to a halt and to change its route several times before it reached its final destination. Their actions didn't go unchallenged, of course, as the police promptly stepped in to clear the route as the train advanced at a walking pace. The train eventually made it to Camp Darby, with several hours' delay.

By the end of day one, it was clear that demonstrators were not going to be alone in their pursuit: rail workers, tacitly supported by their unions, immediately declared the would boycott the trains' operations, refusing to work and providing the demonstrators with all the logistic information required to set up blockades (itineraries, timetables, etc.); the mayors of Pisa and Livorno (the two Tuscan cities near to Camp Darby) formally asked the government to provide detailed information of the military cargo, complaining they had not been notified that such operations were going to take place; and dockworkers in Livorno proclaimed their intention to strike in the event they were asked to load military equipment.

... (Interestingly enough, there weren't reports of any complaints by travelers and commuters affected by the delays, who on several occasions where seen to be very supportive and encouraging, cheering up the activists with rounds of applauses.)

Blockades, rallies, occupations and sit-ins spread like wildfire...

Folie a Deux  

They ... typically have massive rejection-projection and persecution-paranoid reactions to anythng and anyone outside the "folie a deux""double bubble". And they take a highly suspicious, disgusted and attacking approach to everything outside their immediate world. They have a "wall of delusion" about their addiction ... in reaction to interactions or interventions with individuals, systems or situations that arise out of the extremely destructive pattern they are in.

And to complete the picture, they have developed a total inability to delay reinforcement, tolerate frustration or endure effort or discomfort.

Paranoiacs, unlike birds of a feather, do not flock together. The mental trouble in his followers is very different. They have surrendered their judgment and right to reason to their leader. They have acquired their belief in [the paranoid leader's] exalted nature, not by their own intellectual operations, but as the result of their extreme credulity and infatuation. It is the result of suggestion made to them by the dominant mind of [the paranoid] who believes in himself. They have sunk their individuality and they entertain few ideas except at the dictation of or by permission of [the paranoid leader]. It is probably true that few have reached this state of complete subjection without experiencing at times great mental agony. So great that some have rebelled, others have lost their reason. We have no good English name for this curious mental malady. The French call it Folie a Deux which may be translated as contagious insanity. It often happens that a strongly self-assertive personality will impress upon others of his family or his neighbors the strangest beliefs. But the victims of these ideas lose them soon after they pass from under the spell of their insane leader.

The paranoiac is absolutely sure he is right. He takes advice from no one. He is free from doubts, his followers on the other hand hold for the time no opinions of their own. For the time they surrender their common sense until it returns when they are shocked by some strikingly absurd conduct of the leader.

We must remember that an insane man may still possess the ability to deceive and lie. Let us remember also that one who believes he is a deputy of the Almighty, who recognizes no human authority, may justify a petty trick when it serves to further the enormous work of converting the entire world.

Perhaps the most disturbing part of Big Bird’s power over Sesame Street is that he has made Snuffaluphagus real to others. Shared Psychotic Disorder ( Folie a Deux ) involves the transference of a delusion (in this case a large brown creature) from one, who already has a psychotic disorder (the primary case), to others who are involved in a close relationship with the delusional person (DSM-IV, 305). Usually the primary case in Shared Psychotic Disorder is dominant in the relationship and gradually imposes the delusional system on the more passive and initially healthy second person(s). Big Bird is the undisputed ringleader of the " Street ", and thus, has convinced the rest of the cast that Snuffaluphagus does indeed exist. They can now see, hear, and interact with this character that was originally only a part of Big Bird’s imagination.

Call In the Grown-Ups Fast  

Lies Are Truth  

"Here's the Catch-22 that Saddam Hussein has put himself in," Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman, said today. "He denied he had these weapons, and then he destroys things he says he never had. If he lies about never having them, how can you trust him when he says he has destroyed them?"

Newsweek Wins Boogie Nights Fluffer of the Year Award
Blows Away Competition

Monica, you are a rank amateur compared to the clown who wrote this inexcusable garbage for Newsweek.

Al Qaeda Suspect Will Be Treated Humanely, White House Says  

The Hubris of the Liberal Hawks  

Pope urged to act as human shield  

Where Are the Heroes?  

Howell Raines Channels Lewinsky  

A Stalwart of Certainty: Bush Undeterred on Iraq
[SNIP]
Billions of dollars in promised aid have not yet persuaded Turkey to open its bases to American troops. Most members of the Security Council are still demanding both more time for inspections and better evidence that Mr. Hussein cannot be contained except by war. And Mr. Hussein himself — just as the White House predicted — has begun blowing up a few Al Samoud missiles in hopes of averting an American invasion.

Advice To Turkey: Get the Cash Up Front Or You Never Will  

But the overwhelming reason that the measure failed, Turkish leaders said, was the demand of the Turkish people to stay out of the war.

"I hate romanticism in politics," said Mehmet Fehmi Uyanik, a legislator who voted against the measure. "I'm a realist. And every day, I'm not kidding, I got 60 or 70 messages from people telling me to vote against."

The George W. Bush Scorecard of Evil  

Because of War Threats and 9/11 Qaeda Recruitment Up  

to everyone who says making war on Iraq will make the world safer from terrorism should know that al Qaeida recruitment is up all over Europe, and the war hasn't even started yet.

The aftermath of Sept. 11 and the prospect of war in Iraq have increased the numbers of angry anti-American young men who have been pushed into the embrace of Islamic extremism, according to counter-terrorism officials. Extremists are muscling into European mosques, creating new places of worship and winning converts. A war in Iraq could turn many moderate Muslims into extremists and drive many extremists over the line between malicious intent and action, experts say.

The strategy of the terrorists is to create a clash of civilizations,? [Jean-Louis] Bruguiere, [France's top anti-terrorist judge] said. And they will use the war to incite violence against the West. A war will have a direct impact on the level of recruitment.

This is one of my main criticisms against a war with Iraq. There are much better ways of dealing with terrorism, as the arrest of Mohammed shows, than embarking on military adventures with only the most pollyanna-ish of consequences envisioned.

A Letter To the Times  

A Renegade War Is Exactly Right  

A Blatant Example of Distortion  

God's Justice and Scalia's  

Before proceeding to discuss the morality of capital punishment, I want to make clear that my views on the subject have nothing to do with how I vote in capital cases that come before the Supreme Court.

For me, therefore, the constitutionality of the death penalty is not a difficult, soul–wrenching question. It was clearly permitted when the Eighth Amendment was adopted (not merely for murder, by the way, but for all felonies—including, for example, horse–thieving, as anyone can verify by watching a western movie). And so it is clearly permitted today...

I pause here to emphasize the point that in my view the choice for the judge who believes the death penalty to be immoral is resignation, rather than simply ignoring duly enacted, constitutional laws and sabotaging death penalty cases.

These passages from Romans represent the consensus of Western thought until very recent times. Not just of Christian or religious thought, but of secular thought regarding the powers of the state. That consensus has been upset, I think, by the emergence of democracy. It is easy to see the hand of the Almighty behind rulers whose forebears, in the dim mists of history, were supposedly anointed by God, or who at least obtained their thrones in awful and unpredictable battles whose outcome was determined by the Lord of Hosts, that is, the Lord of Armies. It is much more difficult to see the hand of God—or any higher moral authority—behind the fools and rogues (as the losers would have it) whom we ourselves elect to do our own will. How can their power to avenge—to vindicate the “public order”—be any greater than our own?

So it is no accident, I think, that the modern view that the death penalty is immoral is centered in the West. That has little to do with the fact that the West has a Christian tradition, and everything to do with the fact that the West is the home of democracy. Indeed, it seems to me that the more Christian a country is the less likely it is to regard the death penalty as immoral. Abolition has taken its firmest hold in post–Christian Europe, and has least support in the church–going United States. I attribute that to the fact that, for the believing Christian, death is no big deal. Intentionally killing an innocent person is a big deal: it is a grave sin, which causes one to lose his soul. But losing this life, in exchange for the next? The Christian attitude is reflected in the words Robert Bolt’s play has Thomas More saying to the headsman: “Friend, be not afraid of your office. You send me to God.” And when Cranmer asks whether he is sure of that, More replies, “He will not refuse one who is so blithe to go to Him.” For the nonbeliever, on the other hand, to deprive a man of his life is to end his existence. What a horrible act!

Besides being less likely to regard death as an utterly cataclysmic punishment, the Christian is also more likely to regard punishment in general as deserved. The doctrine of free will—the ability of man to resist temptations to evil, which God will not permit beyond man’s capacity to resist—is central to the Christian doctrine of salvation and damnation, heaven and hell. The post–Freudian secularist, on the other hand, is more inclined to think that people are what their history and circumstances have made them, and there is little sense in assigning blame.

The mistaken tendency to believe that a democratic government, being nothing more than the composite will of its individual citizens, has no more moral power or authority than they do as individuals has adverse effects in other areas as well. It fosters civil disobedience, for example, which proceeds on the assumption that what the individual citizen considers an unjust law—even if it does not compel him to act unjustly—need not be obeyed.

The reaction of people of faith to this tendency of democracy to obscure the divine authority behind government should not be resignation to it, but the resolution to combat it as effectively as possible. We have done that in this country (and continental Europe has not) by preserving in our public life many visible reminders that—in the words of a Supreme Court opinion from the 1940s—“we are a religious people, whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being.” These reminders include: “In God we trust” on our coins, “one nation, under God” in our Pledge of Allegiance, the opening of sessions of our legislatures with a prayer, the opening of sessions of my Court with “God save the United States and this Honorable Court,” annual Thanksgiving proclamations issued by our President at the direction of Congress, and constant invocations of divine support in the speeches of our political leaders, which often conclude, “God bless America.” All this, as I say, is most un–European, and helps explain why our people are more inclined to understand, as St. Paul did, that government carries the sword as “the minister of God,” to “execute wrath” upon the evildoer.