Midnight Sprint

A satricial essay

2010-03-26T12:27:00.003-05:00

After receiving a link to Paul Krugman's recent OpEd piece "Going to Extreme" I wrote up this satirical response:

What does some Nobel Peace Prize winning economist writing for some liberal rag know about A-mur-ik-a? Nothin'. Just like a liberal to take a handout from a foreign country, cuz he hates the USofA!

Glenn Beck is a man of the people, even if he is Mormon, and he told me that the Democrats are tyrannical-socialist-
communist-Nazi monsters that are going to send me to death panels while they practice witchcraft and drink the blood of all the babies they kill every year. A man of the people wouldn't lie, only weak-willed closet Muslim-socialists and gays lie; only people that go to churches that preach social-justice lie. Jesus hated social justice, but you know who loved it? Hitler, Stalin, and Mao! All loved social justice and all evil - how do you know? Because they didn't wear an American flag pin, that's how.

Besides, Fox News interviewed 4 old people and they didn't want the new health care bill to pass, that's a 100% disapproval rating!! 100>50 and I know that's true because I saw it written on Sarah Palin's hand! You just don't like the cross-hairs of justice aimed at you because you want to take away our right to bear arms; placing gun-related markers on the office of public-elected officials in retaliation for passing legislation through legal means is not provoking violence, it's standing up for our God-given right to blow a 6-inch diameter hole into whatever animal or minority we see trespassing on our lawn! Just like you yellow-belly liberals to try to take away my guns.

I don't care if Dwight Eisenhower, Teddy Roosevelt, and Abraham Lincoln wouldn't recognize their own party anymore. We don't need them. We have Pat Robertson, Baby Jesus, and Rush Limbaugh! Real American Heroes!

Now if you'll 'scuse me Pinko, while I go drink my tea 'cuz I'm a Tea Bagger a.k.a. I love everything about America except what I disagree with a.k.a. a true Patriot; even if the lefty conspiracy writers say the original Boston Tea Party used the tea as a symbol of tyranny and anti-democratic ideals from England that needed to be destroyed to send a message that we prefer freedom.

But I don't believe that bull-honky for one minute because in Texas, all we did was learn about how the Founding Fathers were God-fearing Conservative Christians- that's what a masonic Deist means, right? - that loved Ronald Regan and startin' wars and hated free-thinking and progressive ideas.

Fartleks: April 2009

2009-05-04T14:19:00.005-05:00

The Director's Cut commentary track on the most memorable Tweets of the month:

warrenellis: Okay, now I need to find some clothes. Wait, no I don't -- I'm a writer!
(It's funny cuz it's true; oh to have the life of a [famous and well-paid] writer)

warrenellis: Menacing foreigners is tiring, thirsty work. Time for a pint of espresso, and to sit and think about the world. (And take off my pants.)
(Even though it was three days later, Mr. Ellis was still part of the No Pants lobby. My love for this one can be found in the first sentence; the idea of going out and 'menacing foreigners' is funny to me. I suppose that is because I'm not the one being harassed.)

warrenellis: HATE! HATE, I SAY! NNNNG HATEGASM
(Mr. Ellis was expressing his anger re: Twitter's recent inability to handle their new popularity. A 'hategasm' is a good word; I think I shall use it.)

aplusk: I just tried to update my twitter status by programming my microwave. and I'm pretty sure it @ replied me
(I actually laughed out loud when I read this tweet. At times, Mr. Kutcher throws out a gem that makes following him, and his frequent tweets, worthwhile.)

warrenellis: No-one ever gets me a death ray as a holiday gift.
(Given Mr. Ellis' admitted fetish for menacing foreigners, it is probably for the best that he isn't armed with villainous weapons.)

oopspow: How come Cyclops never uses his laser eyes to just saw peoples' heads off from like 200 yards away? That's what I'd do.
(This tweet not only asks a good question, but lead to a brief back-and-forth re: the Summers brothers and Phoenix. Geek much? 'Nuff said.)

oopspow: @schuettn Shueyville got a new Pope?
(I must give Adam praise for his witty response to my tweet that proclaimed white smoke was rising from Shueyville. A religion joke gets two thumbs up.)

schuettn: White House on high alert after protester tea bags the White House. http://is.gd/sDDL
(The 'scrotal humor' as Jon Stewart referred to it was too much to pass up. The entire tea bag protest was ridiculous; the Republicans continue to act like children after losing the White House.)

ThatKevinSmith: And I don't mean queer in that awesome, mano y mano cock-sucking way. I mean queer as is "He's super-queer for Gretzky." Old school queer.
(Offensive and funny; sure to be a party favorite!)

Inksmith: Angelina, seriously, mix in a condom, maybe a pill, and stop trying to bring half of Africa over here one child at a time.
(The celebrity adoption fetish is disturbing. What is wrong with adopting American children?)

warrenellis: It's one of those "lift skull-lid and pour Red Bull on my naked brain" days.
(It just so happened that I could really empathize with Mr. Ellis on that day. Hopefully the Red Bull-straight-to-brain method avoids the upset stomach and bad after taste I get from Red Bull.)

StephenAtHome: fun-sized candy bars? they're slaughtered before they can grow to full size--what's 'fun' about that?
(A fun play on words that led to a chuckle from me.)

StephenAtHome: this is not supposed to be its own tweet. it's a support-tweet for the previous tweet. good job, previous tweet.
(Again, just another chuckle inspiring tweet from Mr. Colbert.)

schuettn: Sent in my time sheet and my resignation from the Daily Iowan. $20/mo ain't worth it.
(It was a long time, or so it felt, coming. I was never an editoral writer for the money, but the time it took versus the low wages and budget problems they have made the entire thing too onerous to keep with it.)

schuettn: My dog likes pretzels; in other shocking news, the Cubs are losing, Pujols hit a HR, ppl die needlessly in Iraq, and our President is black.
(Oscar will eat almost anything that isn't a raw vegetable, that's why this is funny.)

neilhimself: Is there anywhere I could order a clutching dead zombie hand that would stand up to midwestern outdoors weather? It's to perk up a headstone
(From anyone else this might be a very odd and concerning request. From Neil Gaiman, it's par for the course.)

Inksmith: Lapsus Calami, now with commenting abilites! Same great suckage, without the discouraging indifference!
(A funny and self-deprecating plug for Nate's new blog. http://lapsuscalami.tumblr.com/ )

warrenellis: You know what I need? Another cigarette, and to punch myself in the junk eight or nine times. Be right back
warrenellis: Not at the same time. I might drop my cigarette.
(Funny cuz it's true)

oopspow: Took some vitamins yesterday, which perfectly achieved their one desired effect: neon green urine.
(Personally peeing a color reserved for Gatorade is always a bit alarming, but the tweet is on-point.)

escapepirate: Storm's comin'. I can hear (and feel) the thunder in the distance. The last ribbon of sunlight is swallowed by the gathering darkness. Rain.
(So ominous and brooding... must be all the hate pirates are getting lately.)

warrenellis: Swine flu reaches Australia: Australians unsure how to deal with something they can't fuck, drink, deport or barbecue
(Another offensive and hilarious tweet. More on topic is the utter hatred I have for the alarmist media coverage of the swine (yet-can't-get-it-from-eating-pork) flu.)

UIMT does it again...UI doesn't care

2009-04-23T12:47:00.004-05:00

The 2008-2009 mock trial season has finally come to a close. All of the evidence has been submitted and the jury has returned a verdict. Northwood University from Midland, Michigan is the new national champion. Congratulations to Northwood!

UIMT finished a strong season with another top 5 finish. The 1271 team ended the tournament tied for second place after facing Claremont McKenna College, University of Alabama-Birmingham, University of Pittsburgh, and University of California-Berkeley. 1271's only loss was by one point; they also had two ties. Four points stood between 1271 and finishing 8-0. Ravi Narayan earned an All-American Attorney award on the defense, while his teammate Kaitlyn Evans just missed the honor by one point on the plaintiff.

A young 1272 team finished with 2.5 victories; Kathryn Beary finished her first season of UIMT with All-American Witness honors on the plaintiff.

Once again UIMT finishes in the top 5 (this stretches the streak of Des Moines top 5 finishes to seven). In fact, since the 1999-2000 season the Hawkeyes have finished in the top 15. Of course, no one in Iowa City seems to care. The press release went out and even the Daily Iowan ignored it. Surprising? No. The back-to-back championships in 2002 & 2003 were greeted by a blurb that was barely too long for Twitter.

Every year we succeed despite a lack of funding or campus support outside of the Honors Department. The tournaments get more expensive, farther away, and yet the students continue to pay out-of-pocket. The dedication and determination of the students is admirable and inspiring. However, the burden is categorically unfair to the students.

Debate has a room at the Communication Center for all of their materials, trophies, and practice needs. UIMT practices in hallways, our trophies gather dust in basements, and our case materials clutter trunks.

I have no grand notion that my diatribe will amount to anything. It is a shame, however, that the University is likely to lose a great program in the near future and no one will care or fight to keep it alive. With my pending departure to Ohio it's likely UIMT will become a student run program with no connections in AMTA and no guidance on how to argue the law or succeed in the mock trial archetype. A program I helped build will crumble without so much as a whimper from the University.

I understand budgets are tight, but a university is supposed to be about building strong skills for a bright future. Mock trial promotes teamwork, public speaking skills, analytical thinking,and complex problem solving skills. At least it does right now; in a few years students around the country will continue to hone crucial skills that will help them in their careers. In Iowa City, the University will continue to care more about the drinking students do privately than aiding a program that creates stronger students and successful alums.

I'm Back

2009-04-23T12:22:00.002-05:00

Well... the resignation is in and I'm no longer working for the Daily Iowan Editorial Board.

I had some fun, met some really interesting people, and now it's time to move on. One can only write about chicken ordinances and blindly ignore the death of the newspaper industry for so long before you can't take it anymore.

I will try to think of some weekly columns to post in the coming days.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

It's nice to be back.

Fartleks: March 2009

2009-03-31T10:57:00.004-05:00

The Director's Cut commentary track on the most memorable Tweets of the month:

schuettn: Living in the Midwest is like being in an abusive relationship with Mother Nature. Today she's saying she's "sorry & has changed."
(Being a Midwestern means waking up to 60 degree weather and going to bed with 30 degree ice storms. Mother Nature is a real bitch, and she knows it.)

schuettn: With such a deep fantasy baseball league, my draft strategy is going to like Hamas: pull the trigger and hope I hit something of substance.
(Appropriate? No. But it did aptly describe my fantasy draft strategy. The season starts this weekend!)

schuettn: I love Monday crosswords; it always makes me feel smart.
(Unfortunately, yesterday, my intellect was weighed, measured, and found wanting by the crossword.)

schuettn: Smoke rings are a simple pleasure in life.
(It's small victories for me. Hookah smoking is a guilty pleasure.)

escapepirate: Bizarro SAMSON. (So I'm not all that versed in biblical spelling...)
(Instant Classic)

escapepirate: Not good with small talk, or chit-chatting. My responses: "uh huh" and "yep."
(It's funny because it's true.)

Inksmith: Evidently Rudy Giuliani was mayor of New York on 9/11! Who knew? He should have mentioned that in his campaign.
(It's funny because it's not true.)

Inksmith: See ya, Coach K. Don't let the door hit you in the nose, you arrogant tool. You and your spoon-chested cracker-assed team.
(I also twatted/tweexed on this subject, but this was more apropos. Coach K felt the need to criticize Obama for filling out a bracket; perhaps he was just sore the President picked UNC? It seems with good cause.)

Inksmith: Snow, why are you here? Go somewhere else. Mother nature, youre a worthless cunt.
(Great minds think a like; idiots never disagree. The moral? Mother nature is bi-polar)

schuettn: Feeling refreshed like an Irish Spring; oh wait I use Dove...Feeling freshed like I was just released from an animal-filled ark
(I thought it was witty. Besides, mixing modern commercials with the Bible is fun for all ages!)

warrenellis: good morning sinners
(Funny because it's true, part II)

schuettn: Doing my best to save the economy one take-out meal at a time.
(Exotic India is very tasty. Unfortunately, my economic bailout plan will also lead to me needing an aortic bailout eventually.)

escapepirate: In the mood to fight futuristic robots with a hammer while the fate of humanity hangs in the balance.
(I don't ask... I just chuckle.)

**Yes, I know I am copying Escape Pirate's "Escaping Thoughts" with this segment but at least it will keep me posting here**

Quick Peek

2009-03-18T11:37:00.002-05:00

Things have been rather hectic lately. Preparations for the pre-national tournament for collegiate mock trial sucked up most of my time that I wasn't working multiple jobs or sleeping.

This week is a bit better because the University of Iowa is on Spring Break, meaning no practice to be had. I can finally get back to the gym without feeling like I'm letting down my students (okay, so it's an excuse to not go to the gym; sue me).

However, tomorrow the wifey and I leave for Ohio. It's part business-part pleasure. I will be the AMTA rep at the Hamilton ORCS and we will be checking out Oxford as a potential future home. Big weekend!!

I intend to keep better accounts of my thoughts and goings-on (again); perhaps I will have more time when the mock trial season is over in mid-April. I suppose my busy life is partly my fault, if the team wasn't successful our season would have ended in February.

DI Reprint: 02-04-09 (Part 3 of 3)

2009-02-04T08:37:00.004-06:00

Shadowboxing the Bush Doctrine
Part three of a three-part series

"We seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect," proclaimed newly inaugurated President Obama to the world. Specifically, Obama prefaced this statement by addressing "the Muslim world." If Obama can turn his words into policy, then the next four years will be a stark contrast to the last eight. The neocons at the helm of the Bush administration were too focused on their Middle East domino-democracy theory to consider whether their grand plan was respected or in the interest of the people whose countries they occupied. If Obama wants to win the war against the "far-reaching network of violence and hatred" referenced in his speech, then he will have to reclaim the respect our country has lost in the global community, especially in the Muslim world, since our invasion of Iraq.

The cycle of violence and charged rhetoric promulgated by the Bush Doctrine cannot be easily undone. For seven years we have forced our agenda on the world without asking. Our war on terror has pushed the attacks from our shores to the streets of Kabul and Baghdad. The Bush Doctrine has set in motion a cycle of violence that needs to be completely thrown off course, not just held in abeyance, if we are to be safe from the Sword of Damocles that demented men such as Osama bin Laden hold over the free world. If we continue down our current path, there may never be an end to the acts of reprisal, and we may never regain our moral standing in the global theater.

The perfect example of the cyclical war that could continue between the United States and the militant jihadi organizations can be found in the Holy Land. Hamas terrorizes Israel through rockets; Israel bombs Gaza, so Hamas lobs more rockets - rinse and repeat while civilian deaths mount. Israelis insist they are just defending themselves, but killing Gazan civilians only leads to more street-level support for Hamas' defiance of Israel and galvanizes Hamas' recruitment efforts. Israel's pre-emptive and disproportionate responses aren't going to end the cycle of violence; it only adds fuel to the fire.

The United States' foreign policy toward the Middle East must rebrand itself. If Obama's administration aims to truly "reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals," then it's time we stop paying mere lip-service to the ideals of freedom, equality, and tolerance in our foreign policy. The Bush administration promised democracy and freedom in Afghanistan; now, we are considering giving the Taliban back at least a portion of control in the government. As soon as the neocons could fabricate WMD in Iraq, we abandoned a poor and war-torn Afghan populace to their own fate.

We heralded our policy as progress and a battle against evil; meanwhile, we continue to pay the oppressive Saudi government billions. We consider an Egyptian government that has been in "a state of emergency" for decades, led by an "elected president" who aims to pass on the office of president through nepotism, a democratic ally in the region. We snuffed out the democratically elected government in Iran, ushering in the Islamic Revolution.

If we want the people of the Middle East to believe that the United States is more than the "Great Satan," then Obama must follow through on his promise to promote mutual respect and mutual interests. We must supplant hypocrisy with accountability. The Bush administration chastised - even threatened military force - against Iran and Syria for supporting terrorism, yet we continually fail to hold Saudi Arabia and Pakistan accountable for the Salafi and Wahhabist factions within their borders that provide aid to such terrorist groups as Al Qaeda. Why should the Muslim world trust us when we left the Afghans to the warlords, arm Israel's use of disproportionate force, and turn a blind eye to some corrupt governments while admonishing and sanctioning others?

In the end, however, change in the Middle East must be a homegrown movement; it cannot be forced upon the region. Appealing to the virtues and elements that are established in Islamic jurisprudence or a Qur'anic Sura will foment support faster than forcing Western enlightenment philosophy onto the region. Islamic scholars have written volumes on the importance of acting just and fighting corruption. The Prophet Muhammad wrote one of the world's first constitutions in Medina. Democratic principles should be repackaged as the Islamic concepts of ijma (consensus) and shurah (consultation). The rhetoric must be refocused on local terminology and should embrace Islamic values and culture instead of promoting a clash of civilizations.

Hopefully, Obama will heed his own words, "our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead … our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause."

Originally published in The Daily Iowan

DI Reprint: 02-03-2009 (Part 2 of 3)

2009-02-03T09:07:00.005-06:00

Shadowboxing the Bush Doctrine
Part two of a three-part series

The parallels between the Bush Doctrine and Al Qaeda's Islamist jihadi doctrine extend beyond military tactics and strategies. The "war on terror" is more than a physical battlefield; it is an ideological war as well. The no-compromise military strategy used by the Bush administration and Al Qaeda also extends to their rhetoric, once again creating a never-ending cycle of conflict.

The national-security strategies of 2002 and 2006 detailed then-President Bush's long-term and short-term goals regarding the "war on terror"; conversely, Al Qaeda detailed its goals through a series of letters and speeches to the American public. Both sides made it clear through their rhetoric that the final battles in the "war on terror" will be for the minds of the people. Bush commonly referred to this ideological struggle as the "battle of ideas."

The rhetorical tactics, weapons if you will, used in the "battle of ideas" are strikingly similar. The core elements of both parties are dualism, a duty to defend, protection of core values, and triumph through cultural expansion. It is at the point of intersection between these four themes that the rhetoric and propaganda are at their most powerful; it is within this nexus that the "battle of ideas" is being waged.

In a game of persuasion, the advocate must portray her or his side as the morally just or empirically valid position in order to present the most persuasive argument. Without the vilification or invalidation of the adversary, the audience may weigh both sides of the debate equally, a fatal proposition for winning a rhetorical exercise. The "battle of ideas" follows the same road map. The Bush administration and Al Qaeda are quick to condemn the beliefs and actions of their adversaries. Each presents an argument designed to efficiently demonize its "evil" enemy. Thus, the rivals are quick to classify the "battle of ideas," usually by way of historical analogies, as a part in the eternal struggle between good and bad, light and dark, and heaven and hell. Thus, any action taken on behalf of the "good fight" is just; conversely, any action taken against the "good" is malicious and wicked. The brilliance of the duality scheme is that there is no in grey area; neutrality is just as sinful as opposition.

The process of vilification is a prerequisite for the subsequent self-appointed label of "Great Defender" employed both the Bush administration and Al Qaeda. Without a malevolent adversary threatening the core values and people of their respective society, the need for a "Defender" is nonexistent, and the use of a first-strike defense policy is unjust. Both organizations present their cases to the world that they were attacked first; war was brought to their soil, and thus, they must respond to save their respective societies. However, each side is careful to represent itself as more than a legally - be it based on Shariah or the U.N. charter - justified defender. A legal right has a logical and legally defined course of action and conclusion, whereas moral obligations are nebulous appeals to subjective reasoning leaving more room for broad interpretations of what is "necessary" and "warranted" in the face of evil. Water-boarding, extraordinary rendition, and attacking noncombatants are presented as defensible means to a just end, ignoring the fact that they are illegal and no less "evil" than the initial terrorist attacks or economic sanctions that lead to the deaths of Muslim children.

While the Bush administration and Al Qaeda substantially differ on political, sociological, and economic policy, they agree on the fundamental pillars of society. For both organizations, the principles of freedom, justice and human dignity are worth defending even if it means the use of force and a great loss of life. In the end, both adversaries are fighting to "defend" the same core principles of society. Unfortunately, they wage war to defend the principles as interpreted by their respective societies, rather than a global community. Thus, the freedom Al Qaeda fights for means the subjugation of American values. It's not human dignity we "champion" as argued in the 2002 national-security strategy by President Bush, but American dignity. Torture and killing civilians does nothing to further dignity, freedom, or justice within America, the umma, or globally.

Whether it is categorized as "expanding liberty," "advancing freedom," "bringing democracy," "establishing justice," "defending the oppressed," or "enjoining the good," both doctrines present victory to be reliant upon the abrogation of their adversaries core values with their own. If cultural domination is the death blow, then the self-imposed "moral defender" label turns out to be nothing more than a pretext for cultural expansion and homeland propaganda aimed at ensuring popular support for aggressive military policies. In the end, the Bush administration's rhetoric justifies the ridiculous accusation that we are waging a "war on Islam" rather than defending our right to live free from terror.

Originally published in The Daily Iowan

DI Reprint: 02-02-2009 (Part 1 of 3)

2009-02-02T10:00:00.003-06:00

Shadowboxing the Bush Doctrine
Part one in a three-part series

In the days after Sept. 11, 2001, then-President George W. Bush and his neoconservative administration developed a modified version of the international anticipatory self-defense doctrine under the precept of self-preservation. The so-called "Bush Doctrine" was designed to eliminate all current and future threats to American military personnel and civilians. However, the "war on terror" as implemented by the Bush administration was not a viable option to accomplish the very goal it continually espoused, protecting the American public from future terrorism. Seven years later, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri remain at-large; Al Qaeda continues to kill American soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq; and the threat of harm to American civilians abroad still exists, as demonstrated by the recent Mumbai terrorist attacks.

For the last seven years, the Bush administration has waged a war on its own reflection. While the media and the White House went to great lengths to portray our "war on terror" as an unambiguous battle of good versus evil and a straightforward example of self-defense against provocation, a more in-depth examination of the strategies and tactics employed by both the United States and the jihadi Islamist factions reveals significant similarities between the quintessential adversaries. Militarily and rhetorically, the two foes employed strategies that were mirror images of each other creating a never-ending cycle of violent acts of reprisal.

At their cores, both the Bush Doctrine and the jihadi military doctrine are self-defense strategies; both doctrines are modified versions of an anticipatory self-defense doctrine. The Bush Doctrine is a modern adaptation of the Caroline doctrine; Al Qaeda reinterprets classical jihad jurisprudence to justify its military operations. The common revision in both doctrines is the reshaping of the "threat" element of anticipatory self-defense. A state must face an imminent threat that leaves the state with no time for deliberate or alternative means of defense to justify the use of preemptive military action. Without a threat, an "act of self-defense" is unwarranted. The jihadi defense doctrine requires Muslims must be attacked because of their faith for aggression to be justified.

In order to justify the use of force, both the Bush Doctrine and Al Qaeda's doctrine argue that the threshold is not an "imminent threat" but an "emerging threat." No longer must the United States or the umma, the worldwide community of Muslims, be a victim of an attack to justify the use of defensive measures, a threat of violence is sufficient to justify force; a first-strike policy is portrayed as a defensive response. Thus begins the bloody tit-for-tat cycle of violence in the "war on terror"; reports of a pre-emptive strike by one adversary are viewed as an emerging threat by the other. Unlike the Cold War, in which the threat of an armed response created a stalemate, the "war on terror" uses the threat of an armed response as justification for using "defensive military force."

Perhaps the acts of pre-emptive force could be better contained and force a tenuous Cold-War-like impasse if both doctrines didn't also espouse "guilt by association." Al Qaeda, and other jihadi Islamist factions, continually equates the actions of Israel against the Arab world with those of the United States. This amalgamation is evinced by the recurrent label of "Zionist-Crusader coalition" by bin Laden when he references the United States. The "guilt" is also extended to any of America's allies, as evinced by the bombings in Madrid, London, and Baghdad. No country that aids the United States in their "war" will be safe. According to the speeches of bin Laden and al-Zawahiri, you are either with them, or against them. Sound familiar? Bush said, "We make no distinction between terrorists and those who knowingly harbor or provide aid to them." Rightly, the Bush administration made clear that the United States was willing to defend itself and its allies from terrorist activity. In other words, the United States is willing to defend its "umma" from outside threats.

It is not my intent to argue that the rationale or morality at the foundation of these doctrines is the same. Clearly they are not equivalent. Rather, my comparison rests in the means by which each doctrine intends to achieve victory. Both doctrines are designed to reject compromise and reconciliation; victory is attained only through vanquishing the Great Adversary. If both doctrines espouse a determination to continue their struggle, their jihad, as long as the enemy or threat of harm exists, we must examine whether the means will ever achieve the desired end. Punching your reflection in the mirror isn't going to destroy your mirror image; it will only shatter and fragment the glass. The Bush Doctrine may have kept America's shores safe over the last seven years; however, it failed to secure long-term stability and protection from terrorist threats.

Originally published in The Daily Iowan

Revisiting the Past

2009-01-13T11:17:00.002-06:00

It's not uncommon for my current playlist to go through substantial shifts in genres and/or eras. My playlist isn't always a direct reflection of my mood. I rarely use music to deal with emotional swings. My selection of songs is more accurately a reflection of the activity I am participating in while listening to my Zune or laptop.

Recently, I have been revisiting bands who were at their peak in the 1990s; the mid to late 1990s is a more accurate as most of these bands were at their height of stardom while I was in high school or early college. Most of the bands of that era have a "Best of" album on shelves. Instant top 40 gratification.

Currently on rotation on my laptop are The Cranberries, No Doubt, Stone Temple Pilots, and Eve 6's first two albums. The latter band pushes the playlist into the new millennium but the style of music is still very late 1990s. So far the mix has been quite enjoyable; non-radio favs are always fun to rediscover, even 10-15 years later.

I'm still waiting for the Bush "Best of" album to drop. Perhaps Gavin is too busy with his new pop album or just wants to forget about the glory years; however, I wish there was a concentrated playlist of Bush singles and best songs. Most of the time I find a song on a compilation album I didn't even know/had forgotten was sung by that artist. (E.G. "Days of the Week" by STP)

As more and more nineties bands seek to recapture their former glory (Candlebox, Alice in Chains, STP, Gin Blossoms, Smashing Pumpkins) it's nice to revisit the reason for their successes. From time to time I try to forecast which songs and bands will make up the future "oldies" stations. Green day seems an obvious choice given their popularity 15 years later. The remaining potpourri is a bit more ambiguous. Regardless, my sojourn back in time has been a nice break from the modern day top 40 cycle that gets overplayed on free-radio these days.

2009 B.C.E.

2009-01-02T07:44:00.003-06:00

Well Sprinters, it's another year gone by and I'm still unsure what to do with this blog. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

I intend to cross-post more from The Podium so that this place doesn't look so bleak and boring. My current project is a series I intend to write for the Daily Iowan about the Bush Doctrine and the war on the terror. It's based off of a seminar paper I wrote in law school. I will make sure I cross-post it here.

Also:

I will be participating in a friendly "get healthy" challenge with my friend. You can check out the progress based on the chatter at his blog "Loss and Health, Pirate"

Hopefully I get more original pieces done this year (either here or at The Podium). The life with the wifey is dire need of direction for both of us and we are hoping to figure it all out in the coming months. Do we stay in Iowa? If so, Iowa City? Buy a house? Start a family (biped not quadped like our current "children")?

Hopefully, before I hit the three-decade mark a bit more is settled.

Podium Piece Reprint: 11/10/08

2008-11-23T08:54:00.006-06:00

A Great Weekend to be a Hawkeye

By now every corner of Hawkeye nation has heard the echo of the victory drums after this weekend's historic upset of Penn State. Fans and players alike braved the cold weather under the common banner of black and antique gold, the same banner that both parties raised as thousands flooded the field after the game-winning field goal of Daniel Murray split the uprights and gave the Hawkeyes their biggest upset in the Kirk Ferentz era.

Three hundred miles to the north of Iowa City a bevy of undergraduate Hawkeyes braved the cold for a different, yet competitive, purpose. Over thirty University of Iowa students climbed into a caravan of University Fleet Services vehicles Friday morning and drove to the Twin Cities. They returned in the dark of Sunday night victorious, even dominant. However, unlike their Kinnick-playing brethren the victory of these students will go unnoticed. Their efforts will not be covered by web sites or newspapers. Their representation of the black and gold means little to anyone but their peers and parents. The title of "undefeated tournament champion," and placing four teams in the top ten of a forty-four team tournament will, for no other reason than they don't play at Kinnick or Carver, earn these students absolutely no respect from the University community.

Every year upwards of fifty University of Iowa students compete in a season that lasts longer than college football and college basketball combined. They spend an average of nine hours a week, all extra-curricular, honing their skills and practicing while balancing their heavy course loads and jobs. By the end of their season these students will have traveled to both coasts and many cities in between, sometimes four to five weekends in a row. Unlike their west campus peers, they pay for almost all of the expenses out of their own pockets -whereas most of their adversaries boast school-provided budgets in the tens of thousands of dollars. Distinct from their west-side peers, these students graduate - many with multiple degrees, and with honors. Contrary to their peers who play at Kinnick and Carver, over the last ten years this competitive Hawkeye squad has not only made it into post-season play, they have consistently placed with high honors.

Even though their banners are not hung from the rafters of Carver; their accolades are not carved in brick, marble, or metal; their plentiful stock of trophies and medals gather dust in an unadorned cabinet, or various apartments closets, rather than being displayed with the fanfare of a three-story hall of fame; and even though their historical back-to-back national championships and seven year national top five finishes streak will not be used to recruit anyone to our institution, these students will continue to strive for greatness and will work tirelessly to uphold the name of "The University of Iowa." The University of Iowa Mock Trial students have pride in what they do for the University community, even if the substantial majority of campus and alumni refuse to honor their accomplishes and efforts. They bleed Black and Gold just as much as every person that was able to watch the football team win at Kinnick this weekend; and they deserve the same recognition for their accomplishments and success just as much as those that wear an Iowa jersey.

To all the students that competed over the last month in St. Louis, Des Moines, Washington D.C., Mt. Vernon, and St. Paul, that continue to earn the respect of other schools across the country, and uphold the level of competitiveness associated with "The University of Iowa", I would like to say, "Thank you. Keep doing what you do." It truly was a great weekend to be a Hawkeye!

Originally posted at: The Podium
Published in the Daily Iowan.

Update

2008-10-21T13:02:00.002-05:00

I am currently working for the OpEd Board of the Daily Iowan. Thus, most of my posts can be found on The Podium Blog. A few of the blog posts have been published in the DI already. Look there for more current posts.

I will update this site with posts from time to time.

What a difference a year makes

2008-10-08T09:53:00.004-05:00

Heading in to the primary season last year I would have never guessed how this election process has turned out. I thought Romney would win the Republican ticket and that Clinton was a solid lock for the Democrats. Of course, this is why I am not a political analyst, and why I don't gamble.

Twelve months ago I wasn't even registered to vote. My view of the American political system was jaded, cynical, and bordered on a frustrated feeling of complete hopeless and powerlessness that lead to a strict stance of indifference. Two elections have come and gone since I was of legal age to vote. I had no part in either of them. I was a proud political conscientious objector. My indifference was my voice to the government. I was an educated non-voter; I followed the debates, the issues, and all of the different policies. Yet, I was never inspired to be politically active; I never felt as if there was a reason to exercise my right to vote or that my views would be heard.

All of that changed this year. As this political maelstrom that we call the race for the White House has grown larger and larger - sucking in various politicians' careers, American integrity, ethical behavior, and billions of dollars - I decided to register to vote. This was the first race that was interesting, inspiring, and made me feel as if I should be involved since I turned 18. Bush v. Gore? Bush v. Kerry? Boring. Uninspiring. Continued hopelessness.

This country is at a vital turning point. In 27 days, the people of this country will tell the coming generations what America truly stands for in the 21st century. At least, this is what the media tells me on a daily basis. I do believe this election is paramount, but not just because there will be a female vice-president or a minority president in the White House on Inauguration Day.

When Barack Obama and John McCain were selected to represent their respective parties I actually felt that no matter who won, America would have a strong, bright, respectable, and ethical man in the White House to lead us through the next four years. I may be a "secular progressive". I may have caucused for Obama. But if Clinton had won the nomination, I may have voted for McCain. Not because I believe Hillary isn't capable, but because I despised the campaign she ran. My dismissal of the American political system is rooted in my hatred for misleading and false ads, politicians that stir the racial-religious-social prejudice pot, empty campaign promises and platitudes, and self-interested politicians. Certainly a candidates stance on the economy, foreign policy, and domestic policy will guide my vote; however, for me the "big issues" are just as important as whether or not I respect the candidate.

I am a proud American. I am proud of this country's core beliefs. I am proud of what we have accomplished in this country, especially over the last 100 years. In turn, I want to be proud of the elected leaders of this country. I want to be proud of the actions of my fellow Americans. Lately, I have pride in neither. The mob-mentality of American voters over the last month has been abhorrent. The character assassinations and manipulations of social prejudices during the race for the White House has been repugnant.

On November 4th, 2008, we will be choosing more than just an elected official. We will be choosing more than just whether or not a Republican or Democrat sits in the Oval Office. We will be choosing whether or not, we as Americans, will tolerant our leaders to be elected via unethical and socially divisive politicking. I firmly believe that when your back is to the wall, your true character surfaces. Over the last couple of weeks each ticket has its back against the wall. The finish line is insight, time to dig deep and find the strength to sprint. Both campaigns have flip-flopped - which honestly is better than being too stubborn to admit you're wrong or acknowledge that society and solutions are in constant flux - both campaigns have pointed fingers, and both have used misleading statements to woo voters. Neither side's hands will be clean when they take office; however, it is John McCain that I have lost respect for, not Obama.

John McCain ran in 2000 as the reformer; the Maverick; the man who wasn't afraid to stand up to the Republican base even if meant he was unpopular. He stuck to his morals, his values, and it probably cost him the party domination. I can respect that. He fought for his country abroad and in Washington. I can respect that. In February, when the Clinton-machine was throwing mud and shit as fast as it could at Obama, and the right-wing media used Obama's middle name in a clear attempt to foment prejudice McCain denounced Bill Cunningham's "Barack Hussein Obama" mantra. I can respect that. Hell, I can vote for a man like that, even if he means "four more years of Bush in office" - and I foster extreme dislike for Bush, the Neo-Cons, and the Bush Doctrine. McCain's "Country First" slogan seemed real. Yet, today, I am left asking what happened to that John McCain?

In the last week he has had multiple opportunities to take the high ground, and failed to do so. When someone shouted "terrorist" at his rally he should have denounced the defamatory comment then and there on national TV. The use of Obama's middle name is a much more subtle reference to extremists and "evil"; yet, McCain quickly killed it. Where is that John McCain now? Multiple reports of derogatory comments by supporters at McCain/Palin rallies have been reported; even the possibility of a death threat - it doesn't matter if it's a real threat or not - was screamed at a rally in Clearwater, Florida. Accusations of treason have been lobbed at Obama. These are serious and frightening events. A person that values "Country First" and promises "Change is coming" should squash this uneducated, juvenile, bigoted, and odious behavior quickly and decisively. Instead, McCain's ads and silence only galvanizes and condones the bigots, the extremists, and the hate-mongers. What kind of America is he putting first? Does he want to be in the White House so badly that he is willing to ride the votes of people that believe Obama is the Antichrist, a black who doesn't know his place, or an Arab terrorist secretly plotting to give the United States over to his Muslim cabal?

I used to have a lot of respect for John McCain. I embraced his nomination instead of another puppet of the Christian Right; however, I was embracing the bipartisan John McCain circa 2000. The McCain that challenged Bush, the established Republicans, the Neo-Cons, the Christian Right, and stuck to his own beliefs over the clear desires of his party base. I was embracing the John McCain that confronted unfounded accusations and dirty political games head-on. A real Maverick would have told the Christian Right to get lost and would have nominated Lieberman instead of Palin. A real Maverick would tell his supporters that if they are voting for him solely because he's white, that he doesn't want their vote. A real Maverick would take the high road even if it's a harder and ultimately a losing road to the White House. A real Maverick values his own ethics and morals over political office. A real Maverick would accept losing if it meant that he was still respected. A real Maverick wouldn't want to win if it meant he was guilty of character assassination and galvanizing uneducated bigot rhetoric. A real Maverick brings positive change of reform through his actions and not just paying the lip-service to the idea through a campaign of platitudes and promises.

I wanted so hard to believe that McCain v. Obama would be different. I wanted so hard to believe America was ready to usher in a new era of open-mindedness and tolerance - that we truly are the greatest nation on Earth. I would have really enjoyed a race between McCain circa 2000 and Obama. I would have really enjoyed having to toil with who to vote for in my first time in the booth. I would have really enjoyed being proud of both candidates. I would have enjoyed believing that politicians do care about "Country First" instead of themselves and their cash flow. I would have really enjoyed seeing America change for the better. I really wish I still had "Hope" that "Change is coming."

Originally posted at: The Podium
Published in the Daily Iowan.

The loss of a "friend"

2008-09-24T11:44:00.005-05:00

Last night I was "de-friended" on Facebook by a high school classmate. I haven't actually seen this man in over 10 years; Facebook was the only "interaction" we have had in the last decade. I will admit that lately the correspondence has been one-sided, and perhaps even a little aggressive - but it's an election year, right?

In the course of the last month I have responded to various attacks on the Democratic party by "friends" who post items or notes through Facebook. My attacks are never personal, and usually nothing more than an attempt to play Devil's Advocate or counter the partisan post. My language is never vulgar; my arguments never defamatory. I view the interaction as an attempt to exercise the my right to free speech and the necessary process of political discourse when it is brought up in a public forum; especially in an election year with as much pandering, platitudes, and potshots as this race has witnessed.

I don't usually respond to Facebook notes, items, or even pictures. I may peruse the various posts of my friends, but rarely do I voice my opinion on political issues on Facebook. This summer has seen a stark change in my reserved behavior; mainly due to a lack of anyone else trying to fight the clear fallacies spread about Obama - this includes Obama himself, causing me much ire.

My first real venture into the political debate with - for all intensive purpose - an almost complete stranger was last month when I fired back at posts by a friend's sister-in-law. The sparring went back-and-forth with red herring and straw man arguments from her side, and simple questions of where she found her information from me mixed with challenges of her arguments. In the end, I was told I was childish and if I didn't didn't like her posts, then I shouldn't read them. She claims she has a right to post as she sees fit because of the First Amendment; evidently, I don't have a right to rebut her claims as I see fit under the same Constitution.

My other sparring match was with the aforementioned "casualty" of Facebook friendom. This gentleman posted snide comments about Obama's campaign being like China for boycotting and protesting a radio program in Denver during the DNC. When I countered his argument that no free speech was being silenced and then brought up the RNC riots and arrests of reporters, he never responded. He would post notes and items attacking Obama and I would riposte leading to no response until last night.

Why post items on a public forum such as Facebook, if you cannot handle defending your positions? I have posted many articles recently and I willing to discuss with any willing person as to why I posted them and discuss the arguments contained within those op-eds and news articles. It's not a matter of "if you don't like it, change the channel", so much as it is "if you can't handle the heat, then get of the kitchen."

Just when you think you're out...

2008-09-24T11:35:00.005-05:00

Well Sprinters, I'm back. Oddly enough, it's been exactly a year since I posted last and what a year it has been.

The presidential campaign, cowardly media, slanted radio hosts, financial crisis, and continued Middle East turmoil have pulled me back into the blogosphere. This time, however, I'm angry. Angry at the politicians that gave me hope, angry at the opposing politicians for being so self-serving even at the cost of America's success, angry at the media for letting the politicking, smears, blatant lies, and bigotry go unpunished, angry at Americans for being so blind, partisan, and cowardly, angry at our government for letting the average American drown in debt while bailing out corporate execs, and angry at myself for how powerless it makes me feel.

The mad dash to midnight seems looming and the race has picked up pace.

Ramadan Challenge Update

2007-09-24T11:11:00.001-05:00

Hello Friends,

Well I'm not too good at the Ramadan thing. I am about 4 ajiza behind and fasting is completely out the window because of a nasty chest cold.

I still fully intend to catch up on the ajiza readings and finish the Qur'an cover to cover. I will have more time in a few weeks to play catch up during my international flight and my more relaxed schedule in Paris.

While in Paris I hope to see the Parisian mosque. I will probably wait until after Ramadan though as not to interrupt.

Later my fellow sprinters

TGIFF

2007-09-14T10:22:00.000-05:00

Tawhid: 13-Sept-07 ed.

2007-09-13T12:11:00.000-05:00

Tawhid is a series on the Middle East, Islamic jurisprudence, and Islamic theology. The word "tawhid" (TAW-heed) roughly translates to "unity" or "oneness".

----------------------------------------

The Ramadan Challenge

Sundown 12-Sept begin the Islamic month of Ramadan in 2007. This holy month is believed to be when Muhammad received his first relevation from Gabriel in the year 610 CE. Every year Muslims around the world celebrate this month through fasting and prayer. Because the Islamic calendar is a lunar calendar the month of Ramadan starts on a different date each year (vis-a-vis our Roman calendar).

Observant Muslims fast from dawn to dusk during the month of Ramadan; smoking and sexual relations are also to be avoided during the fasting period. Age, illness, travel, and menustration are acceptable reasons for not observing the fasting period. Travel and menustration usually are treated as temporary stays in fasting, with most observant Muslims "making up" the fasting, prayers, and Qur'anic readings after the end of Ramadan.

Concomitantly, most observant Muslims seek to read the entire Qur'an during Ramadan. The Qur'an is broken in up into chapters and verses (suwar and ayat respectively in Arabic) much like the Judeo-Christian Bible. However, if you read the Qur'an you are not reading the suwar in chronological order - the order in which they were revealed to Muhammad. Instead the Qur'an's layout is by lenth of the surah (the singula form of suwar). The suwar decrease is length as the Qur'an progresses. The only exception is the first surah, - The Opening/Prologue - the Islamic analogue to the Christian Lord's Prayer. This surah is recited during daily prayers and is a statement of the Islamic faith.

In order to facilitate the completion of the Qur'an during the month of Ramadan the Qur'an is read in 1/30 sections called juz' (ajiza (pl)). Juz' do not run surah to surah, as the Qur'an contains 114 suwar.

Last year I tried to fast and keep up with my juz' readings. I failed to complete the process for the entire month, falling about 12 days short. My fast ended because of illness, and my readings failed when the fast ended. This year I intend to again try to keep up with the Ramadan readings and fasting. I will admit now that my fast will end early and that I intend to drink water during the day - thus my fast will not be a true fast - as I am still not 100% healthy. My wedding and honeymoon fall within the month of Ramadan. Travel is the excuse, however I don' t know that I will "make up" my fasting days. However, I intend continue with reading a juz' per day.

I challenge my readers to keep pace with me, thus the tile, "Ramadan Challenge". An online copy of the Qur'an in English can be found here or here. Most Qur'ans have a marker in them to inform the reader where a juz'begins and ends. Given that some English translations and the online translations do not have this marker, a breakdown of the length of each juz' and the corresponding ayat can be found here. The site also has some explanations of the first couple ajiza.

While I have read large portions of the Qur'an, I am yet to read the entire book. I hope to rectify that situation over the next 30 days. I hope some of you take the journey with me.

TGIFF

2007-09-07T22:12:00.000-05:00

TGIFF

2007-08-31T09:26:00.000-05:00

Wowzers

2007-08-31T09:24:00.001-05:00

It's been a busy week at work with getting a new office and some late night projects. Add in a sick puppy and mock trial recruitment and that makes for a quick and busy week. I do intend to post some Tawhid articles soon.

Have a good weekend!

TGIFF

2007-08-24T09:55:00.000-05:00

Tawhid: 23-Aug-07 ed.

2007-08-23T19:57:00.000-05:00

Tawhid is a semi-weekly series on the Middle East, Islamic jurisprudence, and Islamic theology. The word "tawhid" (TAW-heed) roughly translates to "unity" or "oneness".

----------------------------------------

New Doses of ”Westoxification” in Iran

Iranian barbershops are the most recent target of anti-Western sentiment by the Iranian government. It seems that the barbers are being forced to close and under threat of license revocation because they gave "Western" haircuts, offered tattoos, and plucked eyebrows of their male clients.

It appears as if the Iranian government is intimating that Iranian or perhaps Islamic men must sport a uni-brow in order to remain true to their roots. They article doesn't expound upon what the Iranian government considers to be a "Western" haircut, and honestly I don't know that there is a single haircut that defines Western culture. While I was in Egypt the men's hair didn't differ greatly from the styles of men's hair in the West.

I have read no hadith (sayings of the Prophet Muhammad) or Qur'anic passages that forbid a man to pluck eyebrow hairs. While Muslims are supposed to practice modesty, is eyebrow plucking crossing the line into temptation?

Continued oppression of personal expression is only going to foment further resentment of the hardline religious scholars that rule the government. If the ayatollahs wish to rid themselves of everything Western then they should get rid of automobiles, computers, electricity... you get the picture. While religoius officials certainly have the duty to regulate the behavior of their religious community, splitting hairs over eyebrow plucking only serves to diminish any remaining legitmacy the ayatollahs claim (not necessarily a bad thing if it sparks a revolution). Moreover, stories like these only serve to further paint Islam as a backwards religion and social order. If the Iranians wonder why the West doesn't think they are responsible enough to wield a nuke, perhaps they should examine the money and effort they are focusing on whether or not their citizens are plucking their eyebrows.

Oscar (not so much a Grouch)

2007-08-22T17:31:00.001-05:00

My delinquency this week can be blamed on our newest member of the family, Oscar. He's a twoish year old Beagle that we adopted from the Humane Society in Cedar Rapids.

I hope to write a Tawhid tomorrow and I will definitely have the weekly TGIFF up Friday.

Truant!

2007-08-20T09:36:00.000-05:00

Sorry for the delay in posts to those that use this blog as a - even if brief - way to pass the time. I had planned to get caught up on some things this weekend, however my honorable plans were derailed when Melissa brought home her brother's Wii on Friday night. Between Wii, wedding invitations, and playing around with my fantasy team/"watching" online games for the Premiership, I've neglected my blog. Hopefully this week gets me back in swing of things.

TGIFF

2007-08-17T08:51:00.000-05:00

Tawhid post delay

2007-08-13T16:57:00.000-05:00

My Tawhid post will be delayed one day. If I get enough time to work on the "A Letter to..." series I will just cancel Tawhid for the week and begin that the "Letter" series.

U.S. Troops Iraqi Training Update

2007-08-13T10:27:00.000-05:00

In an update to a previous post on the training received by U.S. troops in the past on the subject of Iraq, I wanted to let everyone know that instead of the 1940s slightly offensive manual, we now build mini-Iraqi towns for the U.S. troops as cultural training.

We don't just give them pamphlets with drawings anymore. Now they get their own summer camp.

TGIFF

2007-08-10T10:19:00.000-05:00

It's not uncommon to stumble across articles ranging from lovable and quirky to downright bizarre during the week. TGIFF - Thank Geebus, It's Freakin' Friday - is an amalgamation of short blurbs dedicated to the oddities I stumbled across during the week.

----------------------------------------

Biblical Action Figures

According to this article, beginning in just a few short weeks Wal-mart will carry a full line of faith-based action figures. Of course, by "faith-based" they mean Christian. Soon your child or young relative can throw away He-Man and replace him with Sampson or Goliath. My favorite part of the whole idea is that these toys are supposed to represent "God honoring toys" based on "Christian morality." [Which is probably why no David toy was mentioned, he wasn't the most moral of men] I'm sure when little Paul James Wellington III sits down to play with his toys he'll be thinking about God's providence or benevolence.

Tales of Glory toys are meant to provide the moral and loving alternative to the "toys and dolls that promote and glorify evil, destruction, lying [and] cheating." If these toys promote positive Christian values, then this can only mean that Goliath is provided as a toy for the sole purpose of being struck down as contrary to God's divine plan... nice, a promotion of intolerance and hate. But at least it's not promoting evil, destruction, lying or cheating, right?

The Ol' Monkey Out of a Hat Trick

A man on his way to New York from Peru surprised fellow flyers when a small marmoset appeared from under his hat. According to the article, the monkey was well-behaved during the flight after he vacated the man's hat. I wonder if the monkey had to wear a seat belt?

I feel bad for the monkey. It had to ride under a hat, then had to put up with crying babies and other airplane nuisances, then gets taken, put in a cage, subjected to tests, gets quarantined for a month, and will most likely end up in a zoo. If the monkey can handle a FL to NY flight without causing problems I say he should get his own place or go home with the guy. I mean that's better than most children.

A real-life Homer Simpson, almost

A German woman's personal trauma mimics that of cartoon character Homer Simpson. The 59-year old recently had a pencil removed from her brain after 55 years. Simpsons viewers will remember that Homer Simpson is the simpleton that he is because of a crayon stuffed into his brain.

The women had headaches and couldn't smell for 55 years. A part of the pencil couldn't be removed as it was too deep and surgery would be too dangerous. Evidently, her parents should have told her not to run with a pencil in her hand.

Killer Mahjong

Hong Kong doctors warn that the tile game Mahjong could be deadly. 23 people have had "Mahjong-induced seizures." The ailment is not just afflicting players either, the doctors say that watching the face paced game can also lead to seizures.

The design, sounds, and cognitive actions of the game can cause a seizure anywhere from one to eleven hours into a game for player or viewers. The only known cure for Mahjong-induced seizures? Don't play Mahjong.

How did you want your penis cooked?

Never had canine penis or bull perineum? Your only a plane ticket away from these delicacies. The Guolizhuang restaurant boasts itself as China's only speciality penis emporium.

The article speaks for itself. It is both slightly stomach churning and intriguing at the same time. I will warn you that there are pictures of penile dishes, so if you cannot handle seeing such things you may not want to click on the link.

Bad, Kitty, Bad

Bangkok police chiefs have decided to deter their police officers bad habits through shame. If an officer is found to have commited minor transgressions, they will be forced to wear a pink Hello Kitty armband for several days as punishment.

The officers will not only be forced to wear the armband of shame, they are also prohibited from telling their fellow officers what policy they violated. Did Bob come to work late or did he fail to timestamp his police report? Ooo the suspense and the shame of it all! Officers that are repeat offenders will be dealt with following more standard protocol as opposed to be forced to carry the Hello Kitty lunchbox, backpack, and cell phone clip while on the beat.

Tawhid: 09-Aug-07 ed.

2007-08-09T11:04:00.000-05:00

Tawhid is a semi-weekly series on the Middle East, Islamic jurisprudence, and Islamic theology. The word "tawhid" (TAW-heed) roughly translates to "unity" or "oneness".

----------------------------------------

We The People: The Democratic Dilemma in the Middle East, Part II

Overcoming anti-West sentiments will not be the sole challenge facing Middle Eastern democracies in the near and distant future. The Islamic world is currently struggling from Morocco to Malaysia on how to respond to globalization. Similar to the Christian movement called Fundamentalism in the early 20th century, many Muslims are resistant to the current direction of modern life. Technological, social, and cultural advancements are viewed to be temptations and are held to be responsible for the moral degradation of society. Accepting globalization, the Internet, and international agreements with non-Muslims are tantamount to heretical actions. Any Muslim that takes part in such activities is deemed a "bad Muslim" or at it's extreme, an apostate. The movement within Islam to return to the original umma - Muhammad's first nation based out of Yathrib/Medina - and to exemplify the lifestyle of the Prophet is called salafism.

The vast majority of violent and extremist Islamists - "terrorists" in the American lexicon - are salafists; the vast majority of Islamists and salafists are also adherents of the Wahhabi dogma within Sunni Islam. Wahhabism is an 18th century religious reform movement - or sect, depending on whom you ask - started by Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab in 18th century Arabia. Wahhabism is a very conservative sect/school of thought; Wahhabism has been the religious doctrine of Saudi Arabia well before it was established as a sovereign nation as it is the doctrine espoused by the House of Saud. It is now the doctrine followed by most of the Arabian Peninsula and some of Africa. Given the amount of money available to the Saudi family, Wahhabism's proliferation - even to America - has been vast in the last century.

The doctrine and beliefs of Wahhabism vis-à-vis "mainstream" Sunnism is well-documented and a topic at the heart of many books and articles. I won't go into it here, but suffice it to say that Wahhabism may be the wealthiest madhhab (school of thought), ultra-conservative, and the source of more media attention, it is not the only option available to Muslim scholars in their choice of law. The dilemma in allowing Middle Eastern countries to democratically elect their governments is rooted in the popularity of salafism in the Muslim world. The example par excellence is Palestine.

In 2005, the Palestinian people overwhelmingly elected candidates supported by Hamas. Hamas, much like Hizbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood, have a social outreach arm in conjunction with the more well known militant wing. Fatah, the other controlling political party in Palestine, is known for looking after itself and it's supporters rather than the families in refugee camps. Hamas, Hizbollah, and the Muslim Brotherhood maintain grassroots support through their social welfare programs. However, it is their militant wings that bring the ire of the international community. With international ire comes sanctions and refusals to open diplomatic channels. When Hamas became a major player in Palestinian policy the United States and other Western countries immediately cut funding, enacted sanctions, and refused to even talk with the Palestinian government because of Hamas' terrorist activity. Israel immediately ceased paying taxes to Palestine as well. The "will of people" lead their country to be ostracized from the international community, and more importantly it prohibited them from receiving vital funds and supplies.

The West fears that if an Islamist group or party were to gain control of a sovereign nation that another Khomeini-lead Iran or Taliban-run Afghanistan will emerge. A nation that is anti-West and will support terrorist activities against Western governments. Their concerns are not unwarranted as Hizbollah's continued existence is largely dependant upon Iran and Syria's funding. The Taliban ran an isolationist government and harboured al-Qaeda as the hid from the United States after their terrorist attacks in the mid-nineties.

The great dilemma becomes whether or not we "allow" the people of the Middle East to choose their own governments. If the purpose of installing democracy in the Middle East is to promote greater connectedness and increase regional economic growth and stability, then isn't it imperative to install democratic governments in the Middle East - that is, true democracies? Governments elected by the people, and for the people; governments based on the values of the people electing the officials. Doesn't installing more puppet governments or cooking-cutter Western prototype governments and constitutions stall true democracy in the Middle East? Shouldn't the bastions of democracy in the West allow the Middle East to experiment with democracy on their own terms just as we did? We've been trying to figure out how to run our government for over 200 years. However, I am not suggesting we treat the Middle East as some sort of pet ant colony, sectioned off from the world as we watch them develop or fail. Obviously geo-political and military policies must be in place to ensure regional and global stability while the Middle Eastern countries determine how to integrate Islamic society and jurisprudence with 21st century technology and international relations.

Allowing the people to elect Islamist candidates may not be as bad in the long-term as predicted by some doomsday naysayers. Salafist - even militant - groups may hold the public's heart as a viable and welcome alternative to a corrupt government currently in power. It's easy to criticize the government from the outside. However, once the salafists take power they now become responsible for running a nation. They're now required to have solutions to the public's plight. If economic stability does not come forthwith, then popular support for their socio-political agenda will fail. They too will be considered no better than their predecessor. Hamas' recent failure as a legitimate party is prime example; however, their recent coup is also a prime example of what may happen when diplomacy fails. If an Islamist government refuses to interact with non-believers, then they will quickly find themselves isolated in the global community and economically moribund. The best policy with respect to extremist Islamism and salafism may be to step back, allow it to gain power, and then fail spectactulary. The final blow to Communism was internal systematic failure, not victory on a philosophical battlefield.

There is no easy answer. However, there are steps that need to be taken in order to ensure positive development.
1) Promote grassroots reform through Muslim voices not exclusively Western talking heads and pro-Western expatriates. Education and reform from within - Muslim voices - will hold more legitimacy. Their is a burgeoning population of Euro-Muslims that have experienced the benefits of Western government and society, while at the same time are rooted in their own religious traditions.
2) The proliferation of Salafist and Wahhabist dogma out of Saudi Arabia must be addressed directly. We cannot allow our money for petroleum to promote and finance terrorism. The more money we give Saudi Arabia the more money we're giving to anti-West sentiment and resistance to Western-style governments
3) Our presentation of democracy must be done in Islamic terms/paradigms. Islam in the Middle East isn't the same as religion in the West; there is no division between public and private life. Islamic law and Islamic values play a vital role in politics, culture, and everyday life. We must talk to Musliims with terms and values that are meaningful to them. The tools to communicate to the majority of the Middle East through Islamic terms exists. The more we can distance policies and philosophies from Western roots the more viable they will become.
4) We must look to the golden rule: Treat others as you wish to be treated. It's time to start treating Middle Easterners as our equals. If we wouldn't allow ourselves to be ruled by corrupt leaders, why do we continue to trade with and invest in governments that are horribly corrupt and oppressive? Muslims and Middle Easterners are not inherently inferior to the West; they don't enjoy living in poverty any more than we do.

Ultimately, the battle between salafism and mainstream Islam is not the West's battle. Unfortunately, the Middle East doesn't exist in a bubble. Our best option is to encourage democratic and economic growth in the region that benefits the majority of the population instead of a select and corrupt few. Islam is not inherently incompatible with democracy, the first step is getting the umma to come to that realization on their own. Our efforts - however benevolent they may be - will always fail if salafists can easily turn the people against it merely because it is "Western."

No. 756

2007-08-08T10:13:00.000-05:00

Last night Barry Bonds broke, arguably, the greatest personal record in the game of baseball - and maybe all of American sports. During his third at-bat against the Washington Nationals, Bonds crushed a 3-2 pitch into left-center field to break the tie between him and Henry 'Hank' Aaron for total (career) home runs. Aaron held the record for 33 years after surpassing George 'Babe' Ruth's previous record of 714 career home runs. I was watching ESPN when they cut into Sportscenter to televise Bonds' at-bat live. A piece of sports history was made last night whether you like the man or not. I'll be able to tell my children I watched it happen (I have to thank Colbert for not being very funny last night. Otherwise I wouldn't have switched the channel to ESPN).

After Bonds completed his trot around the bases, a small ceremony was held in which his teammates, family, and godfather, Willie Mays, congratulated him on his historical achievement. Aaron was broadcast on the giant screen over center field with a pre-recorded congratulatory message for Bonds.

Much time will be spent over the coming weeks and years talking about whether or not an asterisk should be added to Bonds career home run total (whatever it will end up being) or whether it should even be allowed to stay on the books. The "steroid era" of baseball will always cast a shadow onto Bonds' achievements, regardless of his personal culpability. Steroids certainly make you stronger, but they don't make your swing fluid, they don't tell you whether to lay off the high fastball, nor do they allow you to identify and hone in on a hanging breaking ball. If Bonds did take steroids, I am undecided about the recourse available.

If baseball didn't have a policy prohibiting the use of performance enhancing drugs in place, then in my opinion Bonds' record should stand even if he admits to knowingly taking steroids. He didn't break any rules. Does it still leave a bad taste in my mouth? Yes. An asterisk should only be added, however, if he admits to knowingly taking performance enhancing drugs. David Oritz of the Boston Red Sox recently admitted that he doesn't know if he took performance enhancing drugs in his native Dominican Republic because there isn't a governmental institution that tests dietary supplements. He stated, however, that he no longer takes supplements from the Dominican Republic. The reason people are less angry with Ortiz, Gary Sheffield, Jose Conseco, Raphael Palmero, and Jason Giambi is because they have come clean. Bonds continues to shirt the issue and his trainer continually gets placed in contempt for pleading refusing to answer the grand jury's questions. It just creates the air of impropriety.

If Bonds did take performance enhancing drugs, it's likely the pitchers he was hitting home runs off of were also guilty of the same ethically questionable, but not officially illicit, activity. We'll probably never know the list of names of every player that took some sort of performance enhancing drug over the last decade or two. Major League Baseball would have to erase every record broken in the last 15-20 years just to be safe. Of course, that isn't to say that big leaguers from eras past weren't hopped up on substances that are no illegal but weren't during decades past. MLB needs to look at more than Bonds and this record; unless they do, then Bonds is right, he's just a scapegoat.

My personal antipathy for Bonds stems more from his pompous character and his constant need to make everything a racial issue. He was quoted (I'm paraphrasing) around the time he broke Ruth's record to the effect of: "Now we can forget this old dead white guy even existed because I broke his record." His argument is that Ruth's record is tainted, or even meaningless, because Ruth didn't have to play against the African-American players still relegated to the Negro Leagues. It's a valid point of contention, but certainly doesn't diminish the impressive career and stats of Ruth. Ruth may not have played against his African-American counterparts, but there is nothing to say that they were inherently better pitchers just because they were black. Moreover, Ruth didn't have the modern dietary and training benefits of Bonds. Ruth certainly got larger in his later years, just like Bonds. However, Ruth's girth was due to hot dogs, women, and alcohol not weight training, supplements, and strict dietary regiments. Furthermore, the ballparks of lore were generally deeper than the modern corporate parks (except of course for Yankee Stadium which has always had short porches).

Even Aaron didn't have the benefits of modern athletic technology like Bonds; hell, even his bat mechanics were different. Aaron hands were crossed when he swung, instead of on top of each other (i.e. if you are right handed - like me, switch if you're a lefty- you hold the bat with your right hand on top, your arms are fully extended and straight when you swing; Aaron's mechanics would place his left hand on top, meaning his arms crossed during the swing, severely effecting the power generated). Simple mechanics of a swing can make it that much easier to hit home runs, let alone the effects and benefits of weight training and dietary regiments.

In the end, it's hard to compare eras and career statistics, even if numbers are numbers. Ruth, Aaron, and Bonds are clearly three of the greatest hitters in baseball history. Bonds is 80 hits away from 3,000 career hits, a remarkable number in itself. I will reserve my judgment of his home run record until the allegations of steroids are admissions or findings of guilt. I may not like the man because of the way he presents himself in the media, but that doesn't mean I can't acknowledge his grand and historical accomplishment.

Congratulations to Barry Bonds.

A-Rod, you've got next. Go get 'em.

Tawhid: 06-Aug-07 ed.

2007-08-06T08:31:00.000-05:00

Hear the Roar of the Lions of Mesopotamia

2007-08-04T18:16:00.000-05:00

Here is a BBC article on the celebration hosted by Iraqi leaders for the Asian Cup champions.

The victory earned the players a diplomatic passport and a $10,000 bonus. Three players were asbent, including the captain, because they feared for their lives.

Tawhid: 02-Aug-07 ed. Retroactive

2007-08-04T11:55:00.001-05:00

Tawhid is a semi-weekly series on the Middle East, Islamic jurisprudence, and Islamic theology. The word "tawhid" (TAW-heed) roughly translates to "unity" or "oneness".

----------------------------------------

Rebuilding the Middle East

The Bush Administration has unveiled its latest policies regarding the Middle East. Since the Neocon "Big Bang" theory with respect to Iraq and democracy in the Middle East seemingly moribund, the Administration has decided to use broad military aid packages as it's new policy.

Included in this new agenda is a strategy to give almost $10b (combined) in aid to Saudi Arabia, other Gulf states, Israel, and Egypt annually. Needless to say, Israel and many members of Congress are not pleased with the Bush Administration's new strategy. Specifically, many are opposes to the vast amount of aid to Saudi Arabia. Some were even quick to point out that almost 4/5 of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian.

The Saudi Arabian arms deal announcement comes during a time of great scrutiny and displeasure regarding the Saudi Arabian impact on Iraq's current sectarian strife and unstable future. Zalamay Khalilzad, U.S. ambassador to the UN, accused Saudi Arabia of pursuing a destabilizing policy in Iraq.

Moreover, the deal is announced amidst great consternation over the amount - or lack - of progress politically and economically in Iraq by the Iraqi government. If the U.S. Defense Secretary is going to admit that the Bush Administration underestimated the level of mistrust among sectarian factions in Iraq, why do they think it's a good idea to give large amounts of military aid to the world's megaphone and grand supporter of Wahhabism, salafism, and anti-Shi'a dogma? Where does the Bush Administration think the Sunni factions are getting their funding? It's obviously not Iran or Syria. Is it Egypt and Jordan, presumed allies and co-benefactors of U.S. military aid?

The Iraqi government is corrupt, inept, incapable of withstanding heat - never mind the soldiers, police force, and civilians that must live and die in the heat, and unwilling to manage vital social programs - even programs and facilities started and financed by the United States. The Sunni bloc just resigned from the government amidst complaints of prejudice, slander, and corruption. Meanwhile, the United States continually fingers Iran and Syria as the reason for sectarian strife and instability.

It appears that the Bush Administration's great theory of current tyranny falling like dominoes to the democratic governments of the future of the Middle East has not only failed, it is being replaced by a strategy to arm everyone to the hilt à la Cold War v.2.0. Except we aren't protecting democratic countries, we're arming oppressive regimes and trigger-happy adversaries. What sort of message are we sending to the Shi'a government of Iraq when we arm Egypt, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf States but in the same breath tell Iran and Syria the are not only the cause of the problem but cannot increase their military?

Asking the Saudis to be "more supportive" of the U.S. campaign in Iraq isn't going to stop the sectarian strife any more than the new policy to arm sectarian factions with U.S. weapons. Arming Israel and Egypt isn't going to remedy their unstable and violent region. Giving unstable and corrupt governments more weapons won't lead to greater and long lasting peace. It just leads to more violence, tyranny, and oppression.

I hope Congress rejects the "new Middle East" vision of the Bush Administration. The billions of dollars a year the Bush Administration wants to give to corrupt governments should instead be used to help the common man, woman, and child that are under-educated, impoverished, and dying of hunger, curable diseases, and sectarian suicide bombers. Arm the people with knowledge and a better life and the installation of democratic governments in the Middle East will happen. Offer the people a stable and bright future and they'll fight to keep it; offer them decades more of oppression and despotism and you'll only encourage more violence and poverty.

Tawhid: 30-Jul-07 ed. Retroactive

2007-08-04T11:50:00.000-05:00

Tawhid is a semi-weekly series on the Middle East, Islamic jurisprudence, and Islamic theology. The word "tawhid" (TAW-heed) roughly translates to "unity" or "oneness".

----------------------------------------

Iraqi Victory

The great hope of a war-torn nation triumphed over the pride of an oppressive and rich regime. The Iraqi national football team overcame all odds and reason to shock the Saudi Arabian team 1-0 on a goal by Iraqi Captain Younis Mahmoud in the 71st minute (I had predicted 2-1). A fact that epitomizes the level of achievement reached by the Iraqi team through this Cup win: the Iraqi national team hasn't been able to play or practice at home (in Iraq) in over 17 years.

Iraqi citizens celebrated through out the country, just as they had done after upsetting powerhouses Australia and South Korea earlier in the competition. As they took to the streets, they celebrated as one nation, rather than as Sunnis, Shi'ites, or Kurds. The team and it's Brazilian coach were quick to dedicate their victory and jubilation to the Iraqi people. Hopefully the Iraqi government (on a heat "forced" sabbatical) can use this victory and common bond to their advantage in an effort to alleviate the pain caused by sectarian strife.

Homeland v. Global Security

Congress approved a Democratic bill to increase anti-terror grants for homeland security. The legislation approves the increase in funds for states at a higher risk for terror acts, while decreasing the funding for states that are not considered to be at high risk for an attack. The bi-partisan legislation seeks to answer concerns of the 9/11 Commission; the legislation also helps the Bush Administration fulfill campaign promises.

While it's comforting to know that the political polemics that dominate Washington won't stop Congress from spending money on U.S security, this legislation does little to actually rectify the underlying cause of terrorism. Congress is treating the symptoms, not the cause of the disease.

Foreign aid legislation for aid to Middle East countries designed to promote more stable economies and decrease poverty is the true anti-terrorism bill. Until young impoverished and disaffected Muslims have a viable alternative to the grand monetary benefits (to their families) of martyrdom, we will not win this "war." We have to give them a reason to live and means by which to take care of their families. The basic wants and needs of human life don't change just because they have a different religion or fly a different flag.

Yes, Yes, I know...

2007-08-03T09:40:00.000-05:00

Thursday's editon of Tawhid is tardy as well. The dog ate it.

I will try to catch up this weekend. Between moving, work, trying to set up internet, and finding time to sleep I haven't had much time to construct decent articles. I wouldn't want to dissapoint my hoardes of readers out there, now would I?

Working on Tawhid updates and unpacking may also delay the "A Letter to..." series by a week. Luckily I am my own boss re: this blog and I approve the delay.

TGIFF

2007-08-03T08:42:00.000-05:00

It's not uncommon to stumble across articles ranging from lovable and quirky to downright bizarre during the week. TGIFF - Thank Geebus, It's Freakin' Friday - is an amalgamation of short blurbs dedicated to the oddities I stumbled across during the week.

----------------------------------------

All of this week's articles are from Wired.

Life after 50

It's always a bit uncomfortable to read an article about the sex lives of senior citizens. Perhaps it's because it makes us think of our grandparents, usually figures of kindness, love, wisdom, and innocence, that we don't like the idea of this country's nanas and papas bumpin' ugly. However, someday it's going to be our generation with all the wrinkles, humped backs, and insane crossword puzzle skills. Realizing that your sex life isn't exchanged for AARP benefits is an important step in the ongoing maintenance of a healthy intimate relationship.

I found two points in the article to be of particular interest:
1) The shame and immaturity of our elderly regarding prophylactics
2) There are elderly Wii bowling leagues!!!

The article isn't smutty or filled with unnecessary details; I found it to be thought provoking - especially the Wii leagues.

"Hot Fruit-on-Baked-Good Action"

The title of this blurb is a hilarious quote from an article about censorship in cartoons. Censors are actually worried about sending subliminal sexual messages to schoolchildren via free-floating bananas and donuts.

This article confirms that the censorship committees are comprised of a bunch of namby-pamby overprotective parents whose children have no immune system because everything they use is anti-bacteria, wear helmets when they color, and aren't allowed to play even semi-violent video games or watch anything that has a minor sexual reference but are encouraged to read the Bible with verve. The words that the censors wanted removed - oops, my young readers won't understand such a complicated word, I meant to say "[t]he words the censors wanted scribbled off the paper" - do not require even a high school education to comprehend - at most the child may have to pick up a dictionary. Any complications with those words sounds to me more like poor parenting and poor education than innate child naivety. It seems more likely - given the panel's absurd concern over the word "beseech" - that the censors were instead remov... er... taking out words they didn't understand.

Perv Blockers

Leave it to Japan. Concerned your daughter is the subject of male oglers in her school uniform? Worry no longer, Cramer Japan has invented pervert-proof panties. Yes, that's right; this article discusses panties that are impervious to night vision equipped perverts. They hope to start a product line devoted to "voyeur-resistant" bras soon. (What does that even mean? Bras that don't show nipples? Perhaps the bras will also be resistant to infrared rays; so why are nipple oglers "voyeurs" and panties oglers "perverts"? Aren't they both undergarments aimed to cover areas deemed "private" by society?)

Monday Update

2007-07-30T19:49:00.000-05:00

I am still very busy with moving so no Tawhid post today; look for a short version tomorrow to make it's way up onto the blog in the late afternoon. With Budget calling me and telling me I might not have a truck - a truck I reserved in May - tomorrow morning, my world may be a bit hectic the next couple of days. I take possession of the townhome on the 1st at 3:15pm. Thursday's edition of Tawhid should be up at some point but I don't know when right now.

Take it easy my fellow sprinters.

Project Delay and Weekend Plans

2007-07-28T09:51:00.001-05:00

I can already tell that I won't have enough time in the next few days to properly start my "A Letter to..." series. Moving is going to take up too much time. I will delay it by a week and try to keep up with the Tawhid series on Monday and Thursday.

Given the new anti-terror bill, the results of the pending Asian Cup final match, and the Bush Administration's proposed arms deal with Saudi Arabia there should be plenty to talk about in the interim.

I am off to Boone to see my grandfather as he is not recovering from his heart surgery very well. Then I am back in CR Sunday afternoon to welcome Ms. Lowe back to the United States from Tanzania. Sunday evening I'm watching 300 with Reis before he heads of to law school in Kansas. If I am not doing one of the aforementioned activities, I will be packing and cleaning.

Tawhid: 26-Jul-07 ed.

2007-07-26T16:02:00.000-05:00

Welcome to the first edition of Tawhid! Tawhid is a semi-weekly series on the Middle East, Islamic jurisprudence, and Islamic theology. The word "tawhid" (TAW-heed) roughly translates to "unity" or "oneness".

----------------------------------------

Football and Iraq

The 29th of July will mark a monumental event for the new democratic nation of Iraq. The Iraqi national team will face off against the Saudi Arabian national team for the Asian Cup. The match could rival the 1980 Winter Olympics hockey gold medal match as an ideological tour de force: Democracy v. tyranny; religious plurality v. religious extremism; the great hope of a poor nation v. pride of an oil monarchy. The match, and the game of football, certainly means more to the Iraqi people than just the title of "Asian Cup Champions."

The Iraqi national team has won over the hearts of a war-torn country and crossed sectarian lines. The team is comprised of Sunni and Shi'a Muslims; Arabs and Kurds play together for the pride of their country. Much has been made of the team's ethnic and religious plurality in international news.

The Iraqi people have found a common bond to share among sectarian and ethnic strife. Sunnis, Shi'a and Kurds celebrated in the streets after beating Asian powerhouse South Korea on penalty kicks to advance to the Asian Cup Final; they waved the Iraqi flag and for a moment were able to forget the bloody violence that defines Iraqi life.

However, their celebration was cut short by two suicide bombings. The bombings weren't targeting American, American "puppets", or other foreign forces; instead, they were targeting the Iraqi people for celebrating a moment of national pride and joy.

The bombings only further evince the fact that the United States cannot be to blame for all of the death and violence in the country - nor can we be completely accountable for the violence that will continue once we leave. The radical sectarian groups couldn't even tolerant their fellow Iraqis celebrating something that was totally and completely theirs; only the Iraqis were responsible for this grand moment of international fame in its short democratic history, not the United States, the British, the UN, or Iran. It's as if the terrorists couldn't tolerate happiness or the brief reprise from violence that occurred as the Iraqi people - regardless of religious creeds or ethnic background - gathered together to watch the football match. The Likud party and Hamas have a similar fear of peace and tranquility; both are infamous for causing violence just for the sake of starting strife or baiting a violent reprisal from their adversary during times of extended peace.

It seems football is the only Western export that holds unquestioned legitmacy in the Middle East. If social reforms, democratic reforms, or the promise of increased personal freedoms cannot pierce the veil of Islam's prejudice against the West or rouse public support to stop sectarian violence, it's good to know that nationalism, pluralism, and communalism haven't been completely killed off yet.

I, for one, hope the Iraqi team beats the Saudis. These people deserve something to cheer about, and more importantly popular support for local sectarian groups will hopefully decrease if the terrorist groups continue to kill civilians for being guilty of nothing more than existing in a state of brief peace and joy.

Prediction:
2-1 Freedom and hope trump racism and oppresion

My Great Soccer Quest

2007-07-25T16:58:00.000-05:00

My previous hate-hate relationship with soccer was founded upon the type of people involved with the game at my high school - okay the boys involved, most of the girls were pretty damn cute. Most of them were spoiled brats and acted the the part too; in response, most of the people I knew called them "lawn faeries." A lot of the guys that played soccer were in track and cross country with me, so I'm not speaking to their character or interactions with society without firsthand knowledge of their ass-clownery.

As I have aged and grown away from high school politics and American xenophobia, I have taken greater pleasure in watching soccer. It's no longer the sport to take a nap to, or wholly foreign to me. I always enjoyed playing the NES soccer game as a kid, and now I enjoy the FIFA 2007 game I have for my Xbox. Playing video games of sports has always given me a greater appreciation for the rules. I have learned a lot more about defensive and offensive schemes for American football through playing video games. Anyway, I have come to really enjoy watching soccer and even found myself getting involved in the matches.

I was actually outwardly upset when a referee no-called a sliding tackle by a Mexican player against the United States in the CONCACAF Cup final. Much like the Olympics, I have always enjoyed watching the United States play in matches against countries in the World Cup. However, now I actually want them to win and expect US Soccer to catch up to the global standards, whereas before I viewed it with a detached indifference or even a low standard of expectations. I hope more American fans join the soccer bandwagon in the Post-Beckham era. I recently heard that 20 million American youths participate in the sport, making it more popular amongst children than the "Big Three" (Football [American], Basketball, and Baseball). Although to be fair, girls aren't allowed to play football and are quickly escorted to females-only softball after teeball baseball.

All of the soccer education lead me to ponder the origins of the word "soccer". I couldn't understand why we were the only country to use the term and where it could have come from. Foot + ball is not fuzzy math given the rules and skill of the game; similar to Base + ball and Basket + ball. The equation falls apart with Socc + er, right? Not exactly. Evidently, "soccer" fits that equation perfectly and even has its roots from across the pond.

Wikipedia was of little help on the subject. Typing in soccer provided a vast amount of knowledge on the rules of the game and the history of football, but it did little to answer my question about where "soccer" came from. Luckily, wordorigins.org and the online etymology dictionary were of some assistance.

"Soccer" is a diminutive form of association football. Late 19th century Brits - like the youth of today - liked to truncate words; they also like to add "er" to the end of words. In an effort to distinguish between rugby football and association football they coined the terms "ruggers" and "soccer". Evidently, "assers" wasn't a viable option.

According to my research (online etymology dictionary and answers.com), the reason this British slang term was originally used in the United States was largely pejorative. Baseball was "America's pastime." Until the mid to late-nineteenth century football/soccer was a sport of hooligans and pub patrons. It was lawless and violent until the rules were codified in England. The civilized sport of baseball was chosen and modified from the British games of rounders and cricket as America's sport. Soccer was a sport of foreigners and violence. Football - America-style - became popular through Ivy League sports. The elite promoted the sport and called it "football." You can thank the ivory towers for the need to clarify these days when speaking of "football."

If you are ever harassed by a non-American fan of football/soccer about the American use of the term "soccer", feel free to point out its the Brits fault, not ours.

Biweekly Reports and a New Project

2007-07-25T15:07:00.000-05:00

As the deadline looms for my first installment in my semi-weekly Middle East editorials and reports, I have decided on my first topic. Tomorrow will showcase a look at the impact of football (soccer) on Iraq during their current run in the Asian Cup.

However, I have greater ambitions on the horizon. It will be hard to do more than just regurgitate international news during the biweekly updates without reader participation. It will be much easier if you submit comments or ideas for issues you would like discussed. For example, I thought about using one of the days to talk about doctrines within Islamic jurisprudence or theology. I would love to hear feedback on what would be interesting to read about.

That being said, I may truncate the biweekly posts to weekly posts beginning next week for a three-part series that I am considering. The series will be titled "A Letter to..." and will have one letter each week for three weeks. A moment on the purpose and inspiration behind the series may to help to shed light on why I am taking on this project.

On October 24th, 2002 Osama bin Laden is credited with authoring an essay entitled A Letter to America. (If you would like to read the essay here is one site and a second site that have the transcript in English. Note: "Ummah" is the Arabic word for the entire community of Muslims. Muslims believe that all Muslims, regardless of nationality or ethnicity are members of this faith-based community.) The essay is the first attempt by al-Qaeda to discuss and justify their reasoning behind the 9/11 attacks which occurred just over a year prior to the release of the essay.

What made the document interesting was that it was directed at the American people, rather than the United States government or the Bush Administration. Of particular note is answer (3) to question one ("Why are we fighting and opposing you?"); here bin Laden uses our democratic process and ideals against us in order to advocate that in American there can be no "innocent civilians" or noncombatants.

My three-part series will be in the same vein as bin Laden's "letter", in so much as he was trying to appeal to a certain audience with his message. I intend to write three "letters" to three different audiences. The first "letter" will be to the American people; the second will be to the United States government/Bush Administration; and the third will be to the ummah. Hopefully I can write one each week discussing topics like the war on terror, the future of Islam and the Middle East, and democracy in the Middle East.

I would love to hear your comments and concerns as the process unfolds.

The Crisis of Islam by Bernard Lewis

2007-07-24T09:26:00.000-05:00

Preface: Lewis is a professor emeritus of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University. His works on the Middle East, Islam, and the West's interaction with Islam have spanned the latter part of the 20th century. He coined the phrase "clash of civilizations" that Samuel Huntington made infamous. Lewis is a proponent of Turkey - as the democratic hub in Islam - and largely focuses on the clash of the two monolithic religions - Islam and Christianity.

Review: The Crisis of Islam is a quick read at just under 170 pages. This Middle East primer was written in 2004 as a collection of expanded essays on the basic idea of: "What went wrong in Islam?" What Went Wrong? is actually the title of an essay written for The Atlantic in 2002. Crisis covers a breadth of topics in a cursory fashion to give the reader a better understanding of why the Middle Eastern culture/Islam harbors such hostility and antipathy towards the West.

Lewis makes some good points and "The Failure of Modernity" offers sobering statistics on the economic, educational, and social status of Islamic - or largely Muslim - countries. His brief discussion on jihad is enlightening to those that may be ignorant on the subject. Lewis points out that jihad has been adulterated by radical Islamists/terrorists; he even provides evidence of how suicide attacks and killing noncombatants indiscriminately is not only an innovation in Islamic doctrine, it's an illict doctrine.

While Lewis provides some answers to the "humiliation" felt by Islamic culture, - an element frequently cited by bin Laden, Zawahiri, and other radicial Islamists as justification for offensive and defensive jihad - the reader must remember that Lewis has spent the majority of his academic career speaking of the decline of Islamic culture at the hands of the superior West. Certainly, some of his argument rings true given the difference in GDP and economic development -aside from oil money. However, Lewis places more stock in his belief that Islam's Western envy has more to do with decline than the impact of imperialist rule and poor management after imperialism left the region.

The book has a lot of good nuggets one can take from it and I would recommend it to anyone interested on the subject. It's not a definitive work on the subject of Islam or Islamic relations with the West, but it's a decent jumping off point.

Update

2007-07-23T12:09:00.000-05:00

Sorry for the delay in postings. I have been busy helping with Valerie's wedding and getting ready to move. I hope to have a review of The Crisis of Islam by Bernard Lewis up soon. I also intend to start a biweekly commentary on the Mideast/World politics to be posted on Mondays and Thursdays.

In between the Mideast postings I will throw out any banter or musings I come up with or find of import.

Monty Python's Spamalot

2007-07-18T10:12:00.001-05:00

Last night I went to the opening night of Spamalot in Des Moines at the Civic Center. We were in the middle and in the double letter sections (that means way in the back). Despite the distance, we could still see quite well and I didn't feel as if my Spamalot experience suffered tremendously from my inability to see faces or costumes with hawk-like precision and detail.

Missi and I attended the show with some of her friends, all of whom are big fans of Monty Python - one even being a Cornish immigrant to this country. Missi and I were the youngest in the group and the least exposed to the antics of MP. However, the show follows the 1975 film Monty Python and the Holy Grail quite closely - and I have seen that movie.

The show was funny and seemed to go quite quickly. The first act was under an hour. They even had audience participation at one point and used local lore to make the show more personal. I was most impressed by the use of pyrotechnics and computerized projectors. Broadway musicals are keeping up with the technology of the day.

I found Spamalot much more entertaining than Wicked -even the atmosphere of Broadway and third row seats can't take Wicked over the hurdle. I would pay to go see Spamalot again, I don't know that I would pay to see Wicked again.

Don't be a tit, go see Spamalot!

Sketch

2007-07-16T23:55:00.001-05:00

With birthday money to burn I picked up the Wacom Graphire 4x5 after seeing Josh tinker with it on his blog. After much playing around I still can't draw anything of substance. So I drew/wrote out my name in Arabic calligraphy. Enjoy.

My name is the darker blue; the frills are the lighter blue and swirly lines.

Quatorze Juillet

2007-07-14T09:15:00.000-05:00

Joyeux Fête Nationale! That's right my non-cultured friends, it's Bastille Day across the pond in France. Today they celebrate the over throwing of the King by the elite - not quite a real independence in the manner in which we Americans view it but hey, whatever floats your boat - and the storming of La prise de Bastille.

I got to thinking about what other interesting historical facts occurred on this date and with the help of Wikipedia I have compiled a list of important historical events:

July 14, 1223: Louis VIII is crowned in Reims, France. Three years of turbulance and in-fighting ensue among the Christians, Jews, and French provinces.

July 14, 1789: Storming of the Bastille in Paris, France. Dr. Joseph-Ignace Guillotin would have his surname attached to a vital and historical instrument during the Reign of Terror a few years later - replacing the breaking wheel as the preferred method of capital punishment in France.

July 14, 1798: The Sedition Act was passed by the United States Congress; making a federal offense to write, publish, or say false or malicious statements about the U.S. government. It was one of four laws that comprised the Alien and Sedition Acts. The purpose of the laws were to protect the United States from alien citizens (French at the time) and to attentuate seditious attacks. The Alien Enemies Act is still on the books, allowing the President to "disappear" resident aliens if the U.S. is at war with their homeland.

July 14, 1865: The first ascent of the Matterhorn in the Alps is completed by Edward Whymper + six others. Four die on the descent in an accident; the golden age of alpinism dies with them.

July 14, 1933: All political parties, except the National Socialist German Workers Party, are outlawed in Germany; an act within the doctrine of Gleichschaltung.

July 14, 1958: The British imposed Hashimite monarcy in Iraq is overthrown by Arab Nationalists during the Iraqi Revolution. Abdul-Karim Qassem assumes control of the country and King Faisal of Iraq and Shaykh 'Abd al-Ilāh - ruler of Kuwait - are executed. Qassem rules until 1963 when he is assassinated by the Ba'ath Party.

July 14, 1966: In Chicago, Illinois Richard Franklin Speck kills eight student nurses from South Chicago Community Hospital. His death penalty sentence was overturned and he was ordered to serve 400 to 1200 years in prison. A statute later set a maximum of 300 years for a sentence in the state of Illinois. Speck was believed to have had XYY syndrome, however that was later proven erroneous.

July 14, 1968: In Atlanta, Georgia Hank Aaron becomes the eighth member of the 500 home run club.

July 14, 1969: The Federal Reserve makes the $100 bill the largest denomination in circulation, citing "lack of use" for the removal of $500, $1000, $5000, and $10,000 bills from ciruclation.

July 14, 1980: Kathleen Schuett will give birth to a 5lb 7oz jaundice Neal Darwin Schuett in Des Moines, Iowa after going into labor during the night. At 10:14am, the 15th of July, 1980 many Parisians have a hangover and Neal Schuett is brought into this world.

July 14, 1995: The MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3 - MP3 - format was named.

July 14, 2000: French President Jacques Chirac escapes an assassination attempt during Bastille Day celebrations. (Brings a nice symmetry to the post)

The Crime of Jihad

2007-07-11T15:15:00.000-05:00

I was reading a BBC Article about the extradition of Abu Hamza today when something in the article struck me as interesting. The article in itself is worth the read if you would like to find out more about why were are trying to extradite Hamza - I wonder if his plane will "accidentally" end up at Gitmo? Hamza is currently imprisoned in Britain for inciting violence and race hate.

The line that struck me as interesting was this: "At the earlier hearings, the US government accused Abu Hamza of being part of a 'global conspiracy to wage Jihad against the US and other Western countries'."

We're accusing people of waging jihad now? I didn't realize it was an offense worthy of extradition, or for that matter that you can collude to wage jihad.

The doctrine of jihad is a convulted doctrine that is the subject of much scholarly debate; so is it's role in Islam. I presume that the jihad referred to in the article is the "lesser" or militaristic jihad, commonly referred to as 'holy war' here in the West.

However Hamza isn't being charged with a violent crime against a particular person or group; he's being charged with incitement and conspiracy. It would be like us trying to extradite priests, bishops, and cardinals during the Crusades for inciting violence and conspiring to overthrow the Islamic empire.

I find this all interesting because of the article that I tried to publish in 2005. It examined the jihad doctrine under a constutional lens - as in THE Constitution. One of the scenarios I discussed in the article was whether or not we would prosecute imams for calling their fellow Muslims to fulfill their duty of jihad.

Abu Hamza isn't an American citizen, so he is afforded no protection under the First Amendment regarding his speech or his freedom of religion. However, their are a substantial number of salafi and Wahhabi imams in this country that are afforded such rights. Will the government prosecute them as well?

It's not personal; it's just business

2007-07-11T14:50:00.000-05:00

For those of you that are looking for a new home - which isn't many people these days, leading to the decline of the dollar in the markets - consider yourself lucky because you could be the new proud owner of a piece of cinematic history. The home of the fictional Hollywood director Jack Woltz in the Godfather is on the market. For a low price of $165M, you can have the 1920's era palatial estate - 6.5 acres - complete with 29 bedrooms, 3 pools, a nightclub, tennis court, and cinema. The home was originally purchased for $120,000 in the forties.

The War for Muslim Minds by Gilles Kepel

2007-07-08T21:44:00.000-05:00

Preface: This book was written in 2004 - prior to the London bombings; just a minor fact to keep in mind when reading the book and Kepel's analysis of "Londonstan." Also of note, Kepel is a French political science professor; alors - thus - his analysis of American policy is hardly apologetic.

Review: I liked this book. Despite his critical analysis and tone of American policy post 9/11, I didn't feel the critique was unwarranted or overtly anti-American. Kepel does an excellent job of wading through the different Islamist doctrines and groups to provide the reader with a better understanding of the internal strife within the umma and young Muslim minds. The book starts with the Second Intifada in Palestine/Israel and the failure of the Oslo Peace Accord. He quickly jumps to the influence of the Neocons on Washington policy before addressing the events leading up to and immediately after 9/11. His discussion and explanation of the jihad doctrine is clear, as is his differentiation of Islamist groups like the salafis, the Wahhabis, the Muslim Brotherhood, and al-Qaeda to name a few. He also discusses the power struggle of the within Saudi Arabia between the Islamic scholars and the house of Saud. His ability to cover one topic and tie it back into a later chapter makes the connections of the groups, ideologies, and political jockeying even more clear.

Kepel has been criticiseized for his castigation of the Bush Administration and neocon officals, and for portraying the threat of Islamization as a weak adversary to the Western society. Kepel's critiques of the Bush Administration - and his chapter on the failure in Iraq - are no more harsh than current public sentiment. While he does argue that Islamists are no longer a real threat to Western society, he bolsters his argument with cogent arguments and empirical evidence. Kepel doesn't argue that terrorism from jihadi elements is no longer a threat to our safety, rather he argues that 9/11 failed to galvanize the Muslim world as al-Qaeda had hoped. The umma has turned its back on al-Qaeda, Kepel argues; mainstream Muslims are not interested in martyrdom operations and joining bin Laden's "war on America."

Kepel ends the book with a look at Muslim immigrant communities within Europe - a subject that receives little press in the US unless their are riots. Kepel has an uncanny ability to summarize detailed histories and ideologies in a few paragraphs. The reader can understand the plight of the Muslim immigres in France and Britain, and why the radical views of the Muslim Brotherhood or the salafi imam is more appealing than the status quo. Kepel argues in the end that this Euro-Muslim (my term) youth decides the future of Islam. A generation exposed to and benefiting from Western Democracy will either chose to embrace Western ideals and combine them with their Islamic faith, or they will reject them and embrace the hatred and separatism espoused by radical imams.

I look forward to picking up Kepel's other book: Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam in the near future.

The Anubis Gates by Tim Powers

2007-07-08T21:26:00.000-05:00

Preface: This book was given to me by my friend Josh shortly after my return from Egypt in the summer of 2005 (I believe it was a birthday gift). Time travel, Egyptian gods, and anachronistic hijinx, what isn't to like?

Review: The first time I tried to read the book I was a bit put off by the paragraph-long first sentence. However, this time I paid no attention to the Dickens-like intro and was soon sucked into the adventures of Prof. Brendan Doyle.

As a matter of forewarning, the book was written in 1983, so the "present time" is a time jump in itself for the modern day reader. Doyle is the unknowing pawn of a dying wealthy old man at the beginning of the book. He travels back in time with the help of a super high dose of radiation and the adventures of Prof. Doyle ensue.

Not to spoil the book, but everyone's favorite fuzzy Egyptian god Anubis appears only on the cover; he never actually appears within the story. For your Anubis fix you'll need to watch The Mummy Returns or Stargate.

Powers' book is an enjoyable read and does a fairly good job of keeping the story moving along. At just under 400 pages, it's not your normal summertime or airplane flight read, however it's a story you can keep your imagination wrapped around.

If you have a hankering for historical fiction, time travel, and the cosmic battle between good and evil The Anubis Gates should fill that void in your soul.

The Warrior Prophet by Richard Gabriel

2007-07-08T19:16:00.000-05:00

The Quarterly Journal of Military History (MHQ)
Summer 2007 ed.

Preface:

While I was home in the Des Moines area I stopped by Borders after catching a movie with some family. As I was perusing the magazine aisle I noticed a magazine with a front cover that read: "Muhammad the ingenious military mind of the first insurgent." My first reaction was a mixture of shock, curiosity, and offense.

Review:

As stated above, I did not begin reading this article with an open mind. I expected it to be offensive article. The cover of the magazine - as well as a picture of the relief in our Supreme Court of the Prophet- portrays Muhammad with a sword in one hand and the Qur'an in the other. Most - a product of our right-handed society, mostly - place his scimitar in his right hand, with the last message of Allah in his left. Minor problem: in Arabic culture placing the Qur'an in Muhammad's left hand is offensive because that is the hand traditionally used to clean oneself after defecation.

The article was not as offensive as I feared it would be. The majority of the article is spent discussing the ingenuity of Muhammad's military stratagem. Gabriel makes the fairly obvious argument that if not for Muhammad's military success, the faith of Islam would have either died a quiet death or remained a regional sect.

Gabriel's article is different from the apologist writings that fill the bookshelves these days. Modern day Islamic scholars deplore the categorization of the spread of Islam via "the sword and the book," as the West is keen to describe Islam's impressive conversion rates over the last thirteen centuries - hence the aforementioned depictions of Muhammad. Far from the apologetic and modern day writers on Islam, Gabriel's article embraces the militaristic elements of Islam's roots and the proliferation of the faith.

Despite the interesting military strategy discussion, I had three problems with the article:

1) The label "insurgent"
- While Gabriel's description of an "insurgency" was educational for me, as I do not have an military training, I do not feel the term is correctly applied to Muhammad. Webster's defines "insurgent" as "person who revolts against civil authority or an established government; especially : a rebel not recognized as a belligerent" and defines "insurgency" as "the quality or state of being insurgent; specifically : a condition of revolt against a government that is less than an organized revolution and that is not recognized as belligerency."

I would submit that the so-called "insurgents" in Iraq and Muhammad rise to the level of belligerent. The Qur'aysh (the dominant tribe in control of Mecca during Muhammad's life) viewed Muhammad's military battles to be a matter of war. The Muslims certainly did as jihad doctrine is based largely on the battles with the Qur'aysh (both in the Qur'an and the Sunna). While al-Qaeda or local terrorist cells, as well as Muhammad, may not be combatants under the command of a state they certainly qualify as "inclined to or exhibiting assertiveness, hostility, or combativeness." Regardless of the modern day parallels, the Qur'aysh weren't a nation state either, merely the strongest and most wealth tribe in Arabia. The term "insurgent" is erroneously applied to Muhammad with respect to actions against other tribes. Moreover, the umma was the a faith based community with its own government and military elements. One could - and many have - argue that the umma was a nation.

Parsing definitions aside, the term "insurgent" to the general public is one that carries a negative connotation. I cannot imagine that to state officials or trained military officials the term is positive either. In the end, it is the implied negative representation that was offensive to me.

2) The label "terrorism"
- Much like the negative term "insurgent," the argument that Muhammad used "terrorism" to spread his faith and as the predominant military strategy of his army is again offensive.

"Terrorism seems to be an indispensable element of a successful insurgency, and it was no less so in Muhammad's case. He used terrorism in two basic ways: First, he ensured discipline among his followers by making public examples of traitors and backsliders...Second, Muhammad used terrorism to strike fear in the hearts of his enemies to a large scale."

Acts of treason and military defection punished by death are not limited to Muslim armies. Gabriel references the execution of Jewish tribes - Arabs of Jewish faith - as an example of terrorism against his enemies. However, what Gabriel fails to mention is that the tribes sold out Muhammad to the Qur'aysh - in fact leaving the Muslim army to die - before and during battles. According to Arabic tribal law his reprisal - death of their men for his - is not without precedence. It was less an act of terrorism ("the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion") as it was a matter of retribution. Gabriel also mentions Muhammad's execution of Meccans after he finally conquers the city, however this was limited to "pagans." Converts to Islam or dhimmi - people of the book; Christians and Jews - would not have been killed. Muhammad and his men probably did kill many Meccans after they overtook the city; I am sure that many died at his command. Does that make him any different than any other military conqueror after years of war? (Fallujah anyone?) If the answer is "no" then either every military leader is a terrorist or Gabriel is singling out Muhammad for his own personal reasons.

Despite Gabriel's claim that the faith Muhammad founded and spread should not be measured by the brutality of its Prophet, the tone of the article and the terminology used does little to bolster Gabriel's claim. The last two sentences of the article are:

"Conservative Sunnis, such as the Wahhabis of Arabia, and modern militant jihadis in Iraq and Pakistan still adhere to the traditional doctrine [of jihad]. It is among these militant conservative Muslims that the military legacy of Muhammad is most alive today."

It's not much different than telling the populace of the Middle East that the raping and pillaging campaigns of the Vikings and Genghis Khan are most alive today in the United States armed forces. Or compairing our forces to that of the Crusaders as Islamist rhetoric is quick to do.

3) The last section
- Gabriel ends the piece by trying to summarize complex theological and juristic differences with Islam in seven paragraphs. This section does little to clear up the readers questions regarding Shi'ism v. Sunnism, the legitimacy of the doctrine of jihad, classical v. modern interpretations of the jihad doctrine, and what constitutes jus ad bellum and jus in bello under Shari'a. The last seven paragraphs did nothing more than paint Islam as a religion of blood thirsty torturing heathens. By the end of the article you may believe that Muslim warriors are likely to come out of the closet and kill your children at night for not eating the their vegetables as they complete a nightly raid of your neighborhood.

While Gabriel does acknowledge Muhammad's - and his advisers' - military prowess, he also takes the opportunity to paint Islam as a backwards blood thirsty religion by using terms such as "terrorism," and "insurgent," and by adding convoluted and highly debated theological and legal doctrines into the article. The article is not devoid of merit, but it is also not devoid of polemics.

Irony for the day: Gabriel is the angel that acted as the medium between Muhammad and Allah. The Revelation passed on to Muhammad and contained in the Qur'an are the words of Gabriel.

Independence Holiday

2007-07-03T15:58:00.000-05:00

I will be off for the homeland of Ankeny Iowa soon. I may or not may have an internet connection at my mom's, so there may be a lapse in new musings. I'm sure my small reader community will survive.

I intend to catch some Triple-A baseball and a Barack Obama speech while I am in the Des Moines area, so look for some thoughts when I return.

Have a safe and fun holiday!

The New Boogeyman

2007-07-02T14:22:00.000-05:00

Over the last few days al-Qaeda has been linked to three terrorist attacks outside of Iraq: Yemen, Scotland, and London.

Perhaps I under estimate the power and reach of bin Laden and al-Zawahiri but it seems like anything that goes wrong is linked to al-Qaeda. They are the modern day boogeymen. The Yemenese are blaming al-Qaeda for the deaths of Spanish tourists in an attack that echoes the much deadlier attack at Luxor in 1997. An attack that was not committed by al-Qaeda but Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya and Jihad Talaat al-Fath - while al-Qaeda claims al-Gama'a Islamiyya has since joined the ranks of al-Qaeda they were autonomous in 1997. While the Yemenese government believes "al-Qaeda could be involved" the article also mentions that they are prone to blame unrest on al-Qaeda.

The car bomb threat in the UK is also being linked to al-Qaeda. The UK officials stated that the threat is linked to al-Qaeda personnel or associates in a "general way."

If al-Qaeda is as far reaching and influencial as the media and government agencies tell us then the "war on terror" is going to end up with the "evil" side winning. Al-Qaeda is like The Hand or the Illuminati. They seemingly control the world and are behind every crime committed on the planet. It may be true they al-Qaeda inspires regional groups to cowardly attack civilians but that doesn't mean that al-Qaeda organized it or aided the attack in anyway. If inspiration is enough the United States would be behind every attack linked to al-Qaeda. The United States not only trained and aided some of al-Qaeda's top officials, it inspires them to kill noncombatants through our Israeli support, "immoral" lifestyle, and prescence in the land of Islam's holiest cities.

While linking every terrorist attack on the planet to al-Qaeda certainly rallies the victims to support their repsective governments in their fight against Islamist radicals and the "war on terror", it also has the equally damning result of making al-Qaeda that much more mythic. We are feeding the myth that al-Qaeda can take down the "Crusaders" and the powerful West.

Pack Your Knives

2007-07-02T14:02:00.000-05:00

It seems Padma Lakshmi is in the market for a new 'Top Chef' of her own. At her bequest, Salman Rushdie has agreed to end their marriage. I don't mention this as a matter of gossip, but because I found the BBC blurb to contain unnecessary information.

While I understand the reference to the knighthood and the international row that it caused. I found the mention of the life threatening fatwa and "Islamic condemnation" to be superfluous in an article about a celebrity split.

The article doesn't even place the mentioning of the fatwa in succession with the blurb about the knighthood row. Not to mention that the statement referring to "Islamic condemnation" strikes me as essentializing the Islamic world. Not every Muslim condemned the novel. And when did the BBC News turn into a tabloid rag reporting celebrity gossip?

So it begins...

2007-07-02T09:49:00.000-05:00

The Bush Adminstration has finally stated that Iran is responsible for the death of American troops in Iraq. NY Times article and a
BBC article on the subject.

Prayer to whomever it is you pray that we don't invade Iran.

Mouse Trap

2007-07-01T19:28:00.000-05:00

It appears the Islamists are starting to recruit school children now for their campaign to defend the umma against the "Crusaders and the Jews." The Hamas affiliated TV station in Palestine was using a Mickey Mouse look-a-like to indoctrinate children with Islamist dogma and racism. Farfur's - the Mickey wannabe - last show was Friday after complaints from Israelis and some Palestinians. Of course Farfur couldn't just leave the show to go on a pilgrimage or something benign, oh no. Farfur was stabbed to death by an "Israeli agent" and proclaimed to have died as a martyr.

It's as if Hamas wanted to get the last jab in by making sure Farfar died under the same banner and cause that he lived. It's not bad enough that radical Islamist imams and leaders are indoctrinating poor unemployed young men to kill themselves in contradiction to Islamic law and basic Islamic values, now they are targeting children too. Reaching the disaffected youth of Palestine is hard enough with limited access to a free flow of information about the world. It would be like Big Bird giving speeches about the benefits of waterboarding and why habeas corpus shouldn't apply to the prisoners of Gitmo.

I'm an advocate for free speech as much as the next guy. But using brainwashing techniques on small innocent children to incite them and spread hate speech is not acceptable. If Islamists want to target young adults with their hate filled propaganda, then fine target individuals that have the free will to listen or not. Don't disguise your murder and hatred with giant Mickey Mouse suit. If yours is the "divine" cause then people will be drawn to it because it is the will of Allah not because you are targeting innocent children.

Surf's up

2007-06-29T10:01:00.000-05:00

It appears the "religious police" have arrived in Iraq. Internet cafe patrons are being kidnapped, tortured, and even killed for viewing website that a group of vigilante religious police have deemed "offensive to Islam." Most of the cafe owners or patrons are abducted and killed for accessing chat and/or pornography sites.

Prior to the fall of the Baath regime the "offensive" sites were blocked; however now the access is laregly unrestricted in internet cafes. The article discusses how the Iraqi government or law does not officially prohibit the access of any genre of sites. The government has however, refused to comment on requests for protection of its citizens and private business owners. Schools have started to compile lists of banned sites that are blocked on their computers.

Schools and private business owners decision to ban certain sites is an executive decision; the computers and internet service is their's and they can offer it in whatever condition they want for their customers or students. Hopefully the decision is in the best interest of their students, patrons, or their own well being and not just capitulation to the vigilante repression of freedom of speech and freedom of conscience.

It's easy to understand why the Iraqi government cannot respond to cafe owners concerns with police protection given the violent civil unrest present in the country. However, that doesn't preclude the government from standing up for the rights of its citizens. A statement that this type of terrorism is not acceptable and will not be tolerated may be a hollow statement in that enforcement is less important than stablizing the government and nation as a whiole, but it is a statement that needs to be made if the Iraqi government wants to maintain the appearance of and belief in the foundational elements of a democracy. If the Iraqi government refuses to remain strong in the face of Islamist and hardline religious fanatics, the long-term forecast for the Iraqi government is even bleaker than the military threats suggest.

The Female Form

2007-06-28T15:01:00.000-05:00

I was looking at the news yesterday on the BBC News site and found three somewhat related articles on the first page of the World News section. I found the breadth of news relating to women and how they are portrayed to be intriguing.

A discussion of the revolting use of FGM treatment on young girls in Africa was right next to an article about the return of "Girl Power". And not too far away was an article about how not only is there going to be a witchcraft conference, but that it some regions of the world women are still labeled and killed for being witches. It seemed to be an odd series of articles and topics.

The first article covered the announcement that a complete ban is finally going to be enforced against FGM in Egypt after social unrest stemming from the recent death of a 12-year old girl following the procedure. The article mentions the practice is not common in the rest of the Muslim world, but is mainly an Egyptian (North African) practice and is believed to be founded in ancient Egyptian tradition. Sounds to me like they just want to give "legitimacy" to something that is revolting, dangerous, disfiguring, and completely aimed at keeping women subordinate in the sexual realm. The procedure is referred to as "a rite of passage" for the girl.

Next to this article is one about the worldwide return of "Girl Power" aka the Spice Girls aka sex appeal and eye candy. An article that is covering a group that promotes the complete opposite of FGM - a healthy appetite for sex and promoting the female form. Regardless of your views of the musical talent of the five ladies, there is no question they promoted "Girl Power" in the mid-nineties. Strong females out there having fun and being sexy and liking it.

Juxtapose that with an article about how witchcraft is so prevelant that it's getting its own convention. Withcraft is, of course, historically how men dealt with "Girl Power." We killed them. Women with too much power, influence, or knowledge were labelled witches and "put on trial." Harnessing the power of female sexuality could lead men astray, obviously the men were dupped by the power of darkness and the wicked. Unlike FGM, instead of removing a bodily part to destroy a women's sexual freedom, undermining her "girl power" if you will, - a procedure abhorred by the West and human rights organizations worldwide, and rightfully so - at least in the West we made sure to burn, drown, or stone them will all of their "power" intact, right?

image from www.thefrasergallery.com

The "Other Iraq"

2007-06-27T16:04:00.000-05:00

An advertisement campaign out of northern Iraq is aimed at promoting investment in and travel to the region by English speaking audiences. Erbil is the city that seeks to unseat regional power Dubai as the benefactor of Western travel and entertainment dollars. The campaign refers to the Kurdistan region as "the other Iraq" in order to distinguish itself from its far more violent and unstable sister regions to the south. Millions have been spent to help bring stability and international investors to the region. While the region gives hope that the rest of Iraq may someday turn to multinational investiment in order to provide the Iraqi public with better jobs, social programs, and sanitary conditions, Kurdistan enjoys the luxury of being able to avoid the sectarian strife in the south do to a homogeneous community and having benefited from the no-fly zone established in 1991.

Kurdistan looks to be on the way to a viable economy to compliment it's already existing military force. Many scholars and pundits argue that the Kurds deserve their own country - although none of them are probably Turkish - and if Erbil is any indication of what the Kurds have planned for the future then Kurdistan, not Afghanistan or Iraq, may become the poster child for democracy in the Middle East. The more companies and countries that invest in Kurdistan creates more interests in keeping the region stablized. Even if the Kurds don't establish their own sovereign nation, the work being done in the region should help create a blueprint for the rest of Iraq if the sectarian violence ever stops.

OM...

2007-06-27T14:34:00.000-05:00

On the 12th of July the prayer which will open the US Senate's day will start and end with the mystical "OM". Rajan Zed will be the guest "chaplain" uttering the Hindu prayer. It may be a first in the Senate's two hundred year history.

Zed may be lucky that he is not blessing the House. After January's row over whether or not Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison should be able to use the Qur'an during his swearing in process - a process that doesn't even use a holy text; the 'hand on the Bible' event is just a photo-op and is after the congressional oath - Capitol Hill may again buzz with "we are a Christian nation" rhetoric and fanfare in the weeks leading up to Zed's prayer. Perhaps Virginia Rep. Virgil Goode will issue another bigoted letter focused on the establishment of a homogeneous religious faith in the United States (read: Christianity).

Legal secularists may not want to condone the public expression of faith, especially in a government institution, however they should at least acknowledge the positive aspects of having an opportunity to expose our political leaders to religious pluralism. If the Supreme Court is going to allow the government to promote religion, so long as it isn't promoting a particular sect, it would behoove our society and its leaders to be exposed to the broad range of religious faiths of its members more often. "Value Evangelicals" - to borrow the term used by Noah Feldman - like Goode, will most likely decry the event as an example of the further degradation of our culture, morals, and tradition.

Hopefully the event occurs without much ado and Mr. Zed is allowed to conduct his prayer with the same respect the regular chaplain is given.

Delicate (Radical) Muslim Sensibilities

2007-06-26T18:27:00.000-05:00

Last weekend, Salman Rushdie was honored by the Queen of England for outstanding literary achievement; the Queen had over 900 people on her Birthday Honours list which received an honorific title. Only Mr. -now Sir - Rushdie's knighthood has lead to international protests.

On the following Monday (June 18th), Pakistan's national parliament passed a resolution condemning the award. Pakistani Religious Affairs Minister Ejaz-ul-Haq went so far as to intimate that Rushdie's knighthood was justification for suicide bombings; he argued that actions like Rushdie's knighting are the root cause of terrorism. He also advocated for all Muslim countries should cut off open dialogue with Great Britain if they didn't rescind the honor. Ul-Haq later took the floor and told the parliament that his statement was not promoting or justifying suicide attacks. The British envoy in Islamabad was told that the knighting of Rushdie was contrary to attempts by Pakistan and Britain to build "mutual understanding" and it showed an "utter lack of sensitivity" by the British government.

Iran has called the knighthood "a provocative act" on the part of the Queen and the UK, and claimed the honor was evidence of "Islamophobia" within the British government.The Iranian Foreign Ministry Director for Europe, Ibrahim Rahimpour, stated that the title given to Rushdie was an "obvious example of fighting against Islam. It has seriously wounded the beliefs of 1.5 billion Muslims and followers of other religions." First Deputy Speaker Mohammad Reza Bahonar called Rushdie a "hated corpse" on the floor of the Iranian parliament. His statements were reportedly met with a loud applause. A spokesman for the Iranian Foreign Ministry called the knighthood "a blatant example of the anti-Islamism of senior British officials" and that it showed "the process of insulting Islamic sanctities was not accidental but was being supported by some Western countries."

Britain denies any anti-Islamic sentiment behind the honorific title bestowed upon Rushdie. Salman Rushdie has published over 10 different works since 1975, most of which are fiction. His second novel Midnight's Children earned him literary acclaim. His rise in the literary world occurred seven years before he published The Satanic Verses. He has published seven pieces since 1988. Rushdie isn't a one-trick pony - more on point, he isn't an Islamophobic one-hit wonder who rode his anti-Islamic message all the way to gates of Buckingham Palace.

For those readers that aren't aware of the cause of this international row, many within the Islamic world believe Rushdie to have insulted the Prophet Muhammad and his wives through dream narratives of the protagonist in The Satanic Verses. So incensed were some clerics, that Ayatollah Khomenei actually issued a fatwa condemning Rushdie to death and offering a bounty for his head - Khomenei claimed the offense was in Rushdie's depiction of Muhammad and his wives, but perhaps it was the dream narrative that was very similar to his Parisian exile. Iran refused to remove the fatwa even as recently as 2006. [A fatwa is a legal opinion, it is, therefore, not legally binging in court. It's similar to dictum in American law. It has legal significance, but is nothing more than an opinion of a judge on a certain subject. That doesn't mean of course that some wouldn't use a fatwa for justification after committing a crime. A similar decree was issued against Naguib Mahfouz which lead to a fanatical Muslim man stabbing him in the neck.] Rushdie was forced into hiding for many years. Translators and publishers linked to the text were also threatened or even killed.

I shall leave it to my readers to research the Rushdie's reference on their own if they so choose. However, the Hornbook/Cliff's Notes answer is this: it refers to a highly contested interpolation - a passage added to a text by someone other than the author - within the Qur'an. Rushdie's novel isn't even about the contested Qur'anic passages. For those that want a brief synopsis of the book: here.

Reading the novel I was expecting a depiction of the Prophet and his wives that was teetering on the far edges of bawdy. Now I am not an easily offended person, so perhaps my reaction is invalid. Nor was I raised a Muslim. However, while I am not easily offended I do have a good internal barometer of what is offensive to the general public. I didn't find the allusions to be offensive, and most certainly not to the point of a death sentence. At least with the Dutch cartoons there were images that were easily identifiable as offensive (Muhammad with a bomb in his turban) to those of the Islamic faith. Christians wouldn't like it if Jesus was portrayed flirting with alter boys in a commentary on the Catholic Church. Free speech aside, I can at least understand why the cartoons would be offensive to Muslims. (For an interesting angle on why some Muslims may be offended read Reza Aslan's article)

Regardless of the degree of offense, words and images do not justify violence. Muslims concerned with the West's depiction of their faith as one of radicals and violent young bearded men shouldn't feed the fire with violent protests of cartoons, knighthoods, or novels. Time and time again (from bin Laden to last week's diplomatic dialogue) Muslim's delicate sensibilities are invoked. Most commonly, "Muslim humiliation" is referenced. Instead of mindless protests and violence, read the text, commentary, etc. and then respond in kind with scathing rebukes or reviews of the Western or author's depiction of your faith and culture. Respect is not earned through mob mentality delinquency or by cutting off diplomatic ties with a country because they hurt your feelings. Iran, Pakistan, and other radical clerics may not speak for the Islamic faith, but they do have the loudest voices and receive the most media coverage. It's time to drown them out. The root cause of terrorism is not the knighthood of an author, but a failure to provide economically, socially, and politically for the disaffected Muslim youth. Economic progress is hard without multinational investment; which in turn is hard to secure when national policy is decided by emotion and reprisals against past "humiliations."

Midaq Alley by Naguib Mahfouz

2007-06-26T14:30:00.000-05:00

Naguib Mahfouz was a Nobel Peace Prize winner and is heralded as one of the Arab world's best writers. He was born, died, and buried - last August at the age of 94 - in Cairo, Egypt. I found this book while I was studying at AUC. It is supposed to be one of his best; the story did not disappoint.

Midaq Alley was written in 1947 and takes place during the later portion of World War II in an alley of Cairo. The basic idea behind the story is modernization - specifically the breaking of Arab tradition for Western tradition. The story follows the everyday lives of the people that live in the alley. Everything from the mundane to the taboo and unrequited love to war is experienced by the small group of Egyptians in the alley. The characters are extreme representations: the match-maker, the professional crippler/beggar, the rich land-lady, the hashish store owner, the coming of age male, and the young beautiful female that longs for a new life of her own as she has to fight off suitors.

The story is a touching blend of the character's lives, feelings, and desires. I often found myself trying to imagine the characters walking in the alleys, smoking hookah at the shops, and going about their daily lives in Cairo. It helped to have a firsthand experience as a reference point, but it's not required to become engaged by Mahfouz's writing.

My only regret is that I didn't pick up more of his works while I was at AUC. The AUC Press is holds the rights to his works and I can't buy the same artwork for the covers outside the Middle East. If you want to pick up a copy, don't fret, Amazon has copies too.

Wag of the Finger

2007-06-26T14:03:00.000-05:00

While male rebellion and even some illicit behavior is often socially constructed as a part of or measurement of our "manhood," I have never considered speeding as one of the crimes included. In Australia, not only does the toilet water spin the other direction, but speeding is a matter of machismo. Violent images of car crashes failed to decrease the amount of speeding in Australia, so what is the government left to do? Ah yes, a national campaign to attack penis size of offenders.

From time to time you'll hear a car or motorcycle rev its engine and/or squeal its tires for no real reason other than to draw attention to the driver. And to be fair, you think "oooo big tough guy" or "he's over compensating", right? While the attention grabbing actions seem to be fair game, general speeding seems a bit ridiculous. I don't think as I am driving down I-80 that the people passing me have a small penis; instead I usually think "Geez! Someone's in a hurry!"

What about female speeders? Are they just off the hook from national - now international - embarrassment? Perhaps Australia should go with an equally as funny and potentially offensive campaign to curb female speeders by playing up the stereotype that women can't drive?

Quick Reviews

2007-06-24T09:03:00.000-05:00

Here are some books I have read recently:

Holy Superheroes! by Greg Garrett

This nonfiction books examines the impact of faith and spirituality in comic books. The book is less than 200 pages so the examination is cursory but informative. I enjoyed the book mainly because I enjoy both the intersection of the two different elements, as well as each element individually. Some of the sections were thought provoking, while the post-9/11 chapter is very touching. The book is rife with quotes from founding fathers and great social reformers which make the book worthwhile in itself. If you have a little time to kill and enjoy thinking about spirituality or what role comic books have in our society as side from providing scantly clad women illustrations for the teenager male population, pick up Garrett's book.

July, July by Tim O'Brien

Tim O'Brien is a wonderful storyteller. He's also a graduate of Macalester College in St. Paul. A fun fact for me when I was talking to Prof. Dick Lesicko about the book in March. O'Brien was a member of Lesicko's debate team. Anyways, I have been impressed with O'Brien ever since I read The Things They Carried (the collection of narratives not just the short story of the same title). This book is about a class reunion (at Mac but in the book it's Darton Hall) of former hippies and Vietnam Vets. It's an interesting examination of what happens in life after college, when you have to put form to your dreams and theories. It's a quick read and a good summertime book.

Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman

As I wrote in my review of Fragile Things I like Gaiman's writing style and fantasy worlds. He always has an excellent amalgam of wit, history, religion, philosophy, and the spectacular. The premise of this novel is that there is a world beneath London, literally an Underground London, were people go when they fall through the cracks or are forgotten. This alternative London is full of knights, lords, monsters, and bounty hunters. The novel is about a man that stumbles into this world after trying to help a young woman and desparately tries to get his old life back. Another great summertime or travel book.

How Soccer Explains the World by Franklin Foer

Foer aims to explain globalization and the geopolitics of certain regions through their passion and treatment of football (soccer). It's an interesting book, and surprisingly on point with some regions international politics. I learned a lot about the history of certain European clubs like Milan, Barcelona, and the nasty sectarian history and fighting between Reading and Celtic. Rarely in the United States do we hear any news about the football clubs around the world. Every four years soccer is a blip on our radars for the World Cup and then back to exile, making it hard to understand the world's passion for the sport. While Foer doesn't actually believe that soccer/football explains the positives and negatives of globalization he does provide a clear argument for the extension of certain world ailments (i.e. sectarian strife, crime syndicates, ethnics divides, and the Jewish Question) onto and into football clubs around the world.

In the end, I would reccommend all of these books for summer reading. None of them are too heavy for a nice summer day.

The Ultimate Betrayal

2007-06-21T15:43:00.001-05:00

When everything you know and understand has gone to pot, you always have your personal perception of your life. Your emotions, thoughts, and recollections are intrinsically unique. They are yours and only made public if you so wish to share them. No one should ever be able to take away your freedom of conscience or your ability to trust in your own feelings and perceptions. People. time, and tragic events may be able to take way your the ability to function in everyday life. Aside from the natural decline in memory and agility, we can generally trust our own instincts, emotions, and perceptions.

Not being able to trust our own body and the information it is communicating to us is a terrible event. Long-term medical diseases like Lou Gehrig's disease or Alzhemier's are horribly painful for the victim and those around them. Enemies don't even wish such fate's on each other.

Losing control isn't limited to neurological or physical ailments. Sometimes the unknown is just as debilitating. Modern medicine is supposed to have the answers. Even a terminal diagnosis brings with it a plan of action; a possible remedy to pursue is discussed and treatment is commenced.

For almost a year now by body has waged war on itself. No one is quite certain what the cause or even the ailment is. Doctor's are fairly certain it's not malignant or terminal, but that does little to stymie the fears of getting through the day when pain or a lack of control take over. It had gotten to the point that I didn't remember what it felt like to feel normal. Luckily, the current treatment seems to be working, with only minor spells of panic, pain, or discomfort.

My thoughts and sympathies go out to those that are suffering a much more severe form of sickness and disabilities than me, and to the families that have to cope with the difficulties associated with slowly or even quickly watching a person's body turn against them.

Divided by God by Noah Feldman

2007-06-16T17:38:00.000-05:00

Noah Feldman is a constitutional law scholar and professor. He's on his way to Harvard Law this fall after previously teaching at NYU.

Divided by God seeks to provide the reader with a historical account of and propose an answer to the separation of church and state problem. Feldman does a good job of walking the reader through the history of the First Amendment Freedom of Religion jurisprudence and history.

Most of the book is spent covering the history of the religious freedom jurisprudence. Your basics are covered -like the difference between the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause - as well as a brief philosophical discourse on freedom of conscience in the 18th century. Feldman also spends a lot of time on the history of two groups, the legal secularists and the value evangelicals.

The propose of this book is three-fold:

1) To provide the reader with a history of the issues surrounding the separation of church and state;
2) Show why both the legal secularists and the value evangelicals have incorrect interpretations of the First Amendment and its history;
3) To propose a solution to the current cultural, political, and social problems surrounding the separation of church and state dilemma.

The book was fairly easy to read. Even those without a legal education should find Feldman's arguments, discussions, and historical regurgitation clear and concise as he uses very little "legalese."

In the end, Feldman decides to propose his own solution to the church/state problem. He believes the Lemon test and O'Connor's endorsement test should be replaced with what he calls a more historically accurate test of "no coercion and no money". While I agree that his "coercion and money" prohibition is a better bright line test for the courts, I don't know that I personally want more religion in the public sphere. Nor do I want more politicians deciding and writing legislation based on their personal faith.

Regardless of my personal views, Divided by God is an insightful book and one that more people should read. The more the general population knows about the law and why certain freedoms are in place the better.

Starman: Sins of the Father (TPB)

2007-06-16T16:34:00.000-05:00

At the behest of a friend I read the trade paperback (TPB) Starman: Sins of the Father.

Premise: The Starman mantle is passed down a generation after family tragedy. However, the next in line is not only hesitant about taking up the herioc post, but is antipathetic about it.

I'm not much of a DC Comics guy. I've mostly read Marvel comics - particularly the X-Universe - and thus have less knowledge about the DC Universe. I was able to read the series without much trouble even though I don't know much about the original Starman, Opal City's history, or the Starman villian du jour.

This series is mostly a coming of age/father-son personal struggle story arc. The series was written in the mid-nineties and thus has the artistic flavor of that time period. Personally, I didn't much care for the art work. It's not bad, just not aesthetically pleasing to me, if you will. The writing used a lot of broken sentences and incomplete thoughts to move the storyline; as far as literary style goes, it's some what hard to read in the comic book format. However, the emotional intensity and personal struggle in the arc required a disjointed thought process. I would be interested to see if the writing style changes as the series progresses; that being said, I don't know yet that I will seek out the story of Starman.

I don't know if it's a failing on my part to understand the DC Universe, the Starman history, or the appeal of Starman, but I didn't get extremely attached to any of the characters in the storyline. I'm sure as Starman comes to term with his new life as the champion of good in Opal City and more villians seek to wipe him off the face of the earth the intrigue will build.

There is a character in the storyline called The Mist. Apparently, the Mist and Starman (1940s style) were quintessentional adversaries to the point that the animosity has passed down through the generations. Yet I didn't quite understand the author's last depiction of the Mist. Perhaps I am missing something because I lack the history of the series and characters, but the almost decreped and absent-minded image of the Mist at the end of the series is so contradictory to his persona in the rest of the series that it left me in a state of disbelief.

All in all, the series was entertaining. It was a nice read on a hot day. The storyline seemed in tune with natural human emotions. Yet i just couldn't get myself to care about what happened next in the saga once the arc was finished. Perhaps it will grow on me if I pick up another TPB of Starman. I shall reserve judgment, until that day.

Enemies and Friends

2007-06-15T09:04:00.000-05:00

Wednesday's repeat attack on the Shi'a al-Askari Shrine in Samarra, and the Shi'a reprisal attacks on at least six Sunni mosques that followed, further evinces that the sectarian bloodbshed between the Sunni and Shi'a is still a constant threat to civilian lives and miltary personnel. While PM Nouri al-Maliki's party blamed al-Qaeda for the attack, the sectarian warfare isn't limited to insurgent groups or terrorist cells. This is a civil war that destroys relgious shrines and places of public worship, and targets non-combatants. Even if an Iraqi cell of al-Qaeda destroyed the minarets of al-Askari shrine, they didn't then bomb, burn, or attack six Sunni mosques overnight.

While the American troops should try to promote peace and the rule of law in Iraq; we do not wanted to be connected with groups that are willing to kill civilians indiscriminately based on whether or not they believe the banu-Hashim should control the caliphate and that the mahdi will usher in the end of days. However, I fear that our current military strategy is going to link us to such sectarian murder.

By funding and arming local Sunni factions we are not only giving them the means by which to fight al-Qaeda, we are also giving them the means to continue the sectarian violence which undermines a unified state and government. If we start arming the Sunnis, how long until the Iranians arm the Shi'a factions for purposes of "self-defense" after claims of United States prejudice and the arming of sectarian factions determined to kill Shi'a civlians? The United States already claims that Iranians are giving arms to the Shi'a factions and the Taleban in Afghanistan. Is our response to arm the Sunni factions? Are we going to ask the Sunni insurgents to wage the war the Bush Adminstration so desparately wants with Iran?

Even if the United States were to arm both sects - of course then we will need to make sure the Kurds are well armed too - and avoid the Iranian arms quagmire, once we pull out of Iraq we will leave trained and armed sectarian factions. These factions aren't afraid to kill each other when we occupy the country, what will they do when we leave? Will the new Iraqi government and police force be able to defend themselves from multiple armed factions trying to gain control of the country? Obviously not. The whole reason we're arming the local factions is because the Iraqi government and police can't control the violence within it's borders as is.

If a civil war is going to happen, we should do our best provide a stable government infrastructre and rule of law, train and arm the government to deal with insurgent groups. and offer whatever aid is necessary to protect the civilans from sectarian violence. We should not, however, start picking sides. How will the next generation of Iraqis respond to the United States for not only occupying their country and failing to provide the government and safety from death and tryanny it promised, but also for giving local factions the means by which to continue the reign of tryanny and sectarian bloodshed. We must becareful proceeding with a foreign policy that espouses: "The enemey of my enemy is my friend." It's not very hard to play this roulette style game before our new allies are Iran and al-Qaeda.

Sagging: Freedom of Expression or Obscenity?

2007-06-14T14:34:00.000-05:00

The city council of Delcambre, Louisiana unanimously passed an ordinance making it a criminal act to show your underwear in public. The ordinance comes complete with a maximum $500 fine, or up to 6 months in jail. The ordinance is due to become law when the mayor signs the ordinance, which is expected sometime this month.

Critics of the law believe the law will be used selectively against the "hip-hop" community. Council members claim the law will be enforced against everyone, regardless of race or gender. However, the law will almost certainly disproportionately affect the African-American community. Is it intended to do so? The Mayor's retort is that "white people wear bagging pants too."

The Louisiana indecency laws ban the exposure of private parts; the Delcambre's new proposed law clearly extends the scope of the indecency law. While the banning of "private parts" in public surely applies to public health concerns, the ban of underwear in public is too broad. While the sight of a thong or boxer shorts band may not be appealing to all, it certainly isn't obscene, nor is it furthering any public health interest. I would much rather see some young adult's tighty-whities than the half to full moon exposed during "plumber's butt." That is obscene, and perhaps I could understand the prohibition of low-rise jeans and no underwear in that same vein. However I fail to see the obscenity in seeing the top of someone's skivvies. The logical extension of this law is to also make criminal the exposure of bra straps as well. If you're going to prohibit the exposure of undergarments then you shouldn't stop with the lower half. Moreover, I hope Victoria's Secret or Hanes don't intend to have window shops, their mannequins maybe in for a rough night in the Delcambre jail.

The fashion choice of sagging your pants is a personal decision that shouldn't be governed by state authorities. Unless the city council truly believes that the exposure of undergarments has no redeeming social value and appeals to people's prurient interests then it seems like they have overextended their reach - of course if they think it appeals to people's prurient interests then perhaps the city council just has a underwear fetish? This quote from the Mayor intimates that perhaps he views the display of underwear as analogous to exposing yourself: "If you expose your private parts, you'll get a fine". He went on to say, "They're better off taking the pants off and just wearing a dress." Sounds like a trap, next week the Delcambre council will pass a law against cross-dressing too.

G-Men Take On Zombie Hordes

2007-06-14T14:26:00.000-05:00

The BBC News site has an article with a hilarious title "FBI tries to fight zombie hordes".

The FBI has found networks of zombie[s]... being used to ...steal...and attack
The agency said the zombies... were "a growing threat to national security".
The FBI has been trying to tackle networks of zombies for some time as part of an initiative it has dubbed Operation Bot Roast.

Unfortunately, it's not nearly as exciting as the X-Filesesque title and my creative editting suggests. It has to deal with cyber-crime. I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to mention the clever title.

United No Longer: Palestinian Government in Shambles

2007-06-14T14:20:00.000-05:00

Hamas fighters in Gaza City increased their attack on Fatah controlled areas and buildings. They overran the headquarters of Fatah's Preventive Security forces in Gaza City today, declaring the "liberation" of Gaza. The BBC reports that the attack led to President Abbas dismissing PM Haniya from his post and declaring a state of emergency.

The dismissal effectively gives the Gaza Strip to Hamas. The West Bank will be controlled by Fatah, at least for the time being. With Gaza City in the hands of Hamas - and soon the Gaza Strip - the response by Israel could be quick and fierce. PM Olmert has already warned of 'regional consequences' if Hamas has complete control of Gaza. Israeli security forces are reporting that Hamas in becoming more sophisticated like Hezbollan in Lebanon and are smuggling weapons into Gaza through Egypt. All of these Israeli comments were during the power struggle over the last few days. Their response to the dismissal of Haniya and the effective hand-over of Gaza to Hamas will be interesting and I fear bloody.

President Abbas will hold elections as soon as the fighting abates. However, if elections in 2006 are any indication of the view of the populace, Abbas may find himself with more Hamas members elected. The power struggle, according to Danny Rubinstein in a NYTimes Article, is the fault of Abbas and Fatah not sharing power with the generally elected Hamas members. If a new election occurs and more Hamas members are elected, Fatah will either have to ignore the voice of the people or they will be no better off than they are now. Time will tell...

The Price of Fluency

2007-06-13T17:51:00.000-05:00

As I mentioned in my previous post, I'm going back to France. As such, I want to make sure that I can stubble my way through a conversation with retailers and other salespeople well enough so that they don't get pissed at me. In the end, if they have pity and speak English, at least it won't be b/c they hate me for refusing to try.

With five years of formal French classes (8th to 12th grade) in secondary education, 2 semesters + one 8-week year review course at Iowa, plus a semester of oral French skills at Iowa I should be able to pick it up rather quickly, right? That's the hope anyway. I was thinking of getting one of those "Learn French in 3 days" magic CD sets to force me to dive head first into la langue de francaise. I also looked at Rocket French and Rosetta Stone. Rocket French is much cheaper, so a bonus point to Rocket French. I tried the Rosetta Stone demo and it wasn't too bad. I jumped right into French 201, just so I wasn't learning the words for boy and girl. (Not that I remember much French vocabulary) At the end of my 30 min lesson I learned the verbs for tying, lock, unlock, zip, unzip, freefalling, and leave through picture and sound association. I don't know how the full versions teach grammar and conjugation, but the picture association works well. It helps to know the pronouns for he and she to be certain.

I also tried the Arabic demo. I am seriously considering shelling out the $340 for Arabic vol 1 and 2. I need to learn it over the next year and private tutoring wasn't working - by no fault of my tutor, she was great. It wasn't creating an environment or schedule that was conducive to diligent studying on my part. My only fear with Rosetta Stone based on the demo, is that it won't teach me grammar or the conjugation forms/stems of the words. I need to read Arabic more than I need to speak it at this point in my "academic" career. I'm torn on what to do. C'est la vie, n'est pas?

Parisian Rendez-vous

2007-06-13T15:38:00.000-05:00

Well the tickets are purchased (thanks to Mastercard; insert "Priceless" tagline here) and the studio down payment has been sent. Paris will be at our disposal for 8 nights in October.

The place we rented can be found here. We decided to pay the same or less than a 3-star Parisian hotel and rent a studio apartment for our time in the city. We'll be by my favorite Parisian site, Sacre Coeur. With the Metro stop near by it should be easy enough to get to other sites in the city as need be. We're excited to buy food at the local markets and bakeries.

We plan on making a trip outside the city limits at some point. A 15 hour excursion or so to Fountainebleu and Versailles, Normandy, or the Loire Valley. We'll still have to set that up. The majority of our time will be spent in the city at a nice even and relaxed pace. We bought a book that has walking tours throughout the city, complete with historical facts and maps.

The plane tickets weren't terrible at $870/person out of Des Moines. We figured we would pay the little bit extra not to have to drive and park in Chicago or elsewhere. We can get a ride to the "International" Des Moines airport and then stay the night in Ankeny upon our return if the jet lag is too much.

Slightly funny is that we will get back on a Thursday, we probably won't go back to IC until Friday, and our mock trial team's first tournament is that weekend. Nothing like re-acclimating yourself to American society by listening to future litigators.

Of course, what this really means is that I don't have much time to re-learn some basic French. Sacre Bleu!

A Short Guide to Iraq: 1940's Style

2007-06-13T14:51:00.000-05:00

A friend passed on to me a link to this pamphlet produced by the US War and Navy Departments during World War II. It's somewhat entertaining and occasionally bigoted in its views/lessons on life.

I couldn't help but hear a voice like Sam Elliot, John Wayne, or George C. Scott when I was reading it. The Arabic in the back is accurate as far as I can tell. As the pamphlet says, it's an Iraqi dialect so I don't know some of it as I was exposed to an (urban) Egyptian dialect.

Some of the foregin policy/cultural interaction guidelines would be helpful to our troops in the Middle East even today.

Russian Ninjas

2007-06-12T22:03:00.000-05:00

It seems the Russians are launching a ninja attack on northern Italian farmers. (BBC article)

I was reminded of Kill Bill Vol.1 when reading about the old man that warded off the powerful Russian ninja. The difference being two-fold: 1) This ninja isn't Uma Thurman, and 2) The old man didn't land his shot square in the chest of his would-be assailant. Minor details really.

I was reminded of a funny cartoon I saw online about 5 years ago that detailed how to survive a ninja attack. Unfortunately for everyone I can't find the cartoon, and thus cannot enlighten everyone on how to survive a deadly ninja attack. However I did find these amusing videos and sites:

1. How to Survive a Ninja Attack
2. Howto: survive a ninja attack
3. Ask a Ninja Question 16 "How to Kill a Ninja"

Hopefully you can find a nugget in there to help you sleep easier tonight, knowing that if the Russian ninjas come you'll be better prepared.

Afghan Fighters Version 2.0?

2007-06-11T15:50:00.000-05:00

In a previous post I mentioned Reagan's support of the Afghan "freedom fighters" against Cold War nemisis the USSR. It seems my facetious comment about supporting the next version of the Afghan mujahideen may not have been as assinine as I orginally thought.

According to this BBC Article ("US pits Iraqi Sunnis against al-Qaeda") the new "exit" strategy in Iraq is to arm and train local warlords. The article uses the euphemism "Sunni tribal sheikhs" instead of warlords but any time the military trains and arms "local tribes and factions" it is only a matter of time before we - or they - start referring to them as "warlords." Warlord and factional disputes have left Afghanistan an almost completely lawless - in the sense of a formal central government controlling the rule of law - state, with Kubal as the only city the United States has any firm control over.

It is incredibily ironic that we are training local factions and militant groups to fight off a "freedom fighter" faction we helped arm and train 20 years earlier. The Islamist dogma that the Afghan mujahideen propogated didn't seem to bother us 20 years ago when it was focused on fighting and killing Soviets. In 20 years, will these Iraqi factions be the next al-Qaeda?

The U.S. Military is training these factions under the auspices of the Iraqi police force. However, each faction is to "secure their own areas." How long until these factions start a civil war - assuming the Bush Administration's current view that there is no civil war in Iraq - or start killing civilians in a territorial battle when U.S. troops finally leave? General Lynch's words offer little solace. He is quoted as saying:"There are tribal sheikhs out there who say: 'Hey, just allow me to be the local security force. I don't care what you call me. You can call me whatever you want. Just give me the right training and equipment and I'll secure my area.' And that's the direction we're moving out there."

"US commanders on the ground have been authorised and encouraged to enter into truces and agreements with local Sunni factions wherever possible, even if they are suspected of using arms against US forces in the past." (emphasis added)

The article and US military strategists point to the al-Anbar province as the archetype of success and future stability with this policy. The article points out that al-Qaeda had attacked police recruitment posts, which helped generate more antipathy towards al-Qaeda in the province. Perhaps it is the cynic in me, but I find it hard to believe that the al-Anbar province success will apply to the entirety of the country and recent success doesn't guarantee long-term safety for Iraqi civilians or US troops.

The reason this appears to be a failure to learn from history is that this is exactly what we had with the Afghan fighters 20 years ago: a common enemy that everyone could rally around as unwelcome and a threat to local interests. The problem wasn't getting the Afghan mujahideen to fight the Soviets. The problems was what to do with the armed fighters once the Soviets were defeated and withdrew. (For a fascinating book on the evolution of the jihadi ideology and firsthand accounts of influential members of the movement read The Journey of the Jihadist) We can't untrain these fighters once we give them the means to kill. In the short-term, this new local armenment policy may help suppress al-Qaeda's influence and military operations. I just hope it doesn't come back to haunt our children and grandchildren.

Damn Yankees

2007-06-10T19:59:00.000-05:00

So the Yankees are finally within one game of .500, and it only took until the second week of June. The Yanks used a three interleague game sweep of the bottom feeder Pirates (26-37) to extend their winning streak to six games.

I was certain going into this interleague home stand that the Yanks would find a way to lose to the NL Central punching bag. They came close in game one, winning 5-4 after a walk-off single by Jeter in the 10th inning. A decent start by 44 year old Clemens (6 innings, 5 hits, 3 runs, 2 walks and 7 strikeouts) yesterday, still required the Bronx Bombers to put up 1, 2, 2, 1 runs in the fifth through eighth innings respectively to win 9-3. The Yanks were leading 5-2 going into the top of the fourth today. By the time the homeside was up to bat the score was 6-5 Pirates. The Yankees responded to win 13-6 and sweep the Bucs.

While it's good to see the Yanks swinging the bat better and the bullpen not losing close games for a change, the Yankees still gave up 13 runs in three games - at home - to the bloody Pirates! A-Rod had two homeruns today accounting for 4 RBIs, bringing his series total to 6 RBIs. If A-Rod wasn't playing out of his mind this year, the Yankees would be battling the Nationals for East Coast inferiority.

I don't even like A-Rod. In fact, most people who talk basebeall with me have heard me refer to him as "Nimrod." He's overpaid, has made too many errors in big games for a player of his caliber, and has a case of fall-impotency. I don't expect the Yanks to win the World Series every year. I do however expect players of A-Rod's caliber to produce when he's expected to produce... the postseason.

Many have called for the head of Joe Torre; I say we should instead call for the head of the Boss. Ol'George is the reason that the majority of this team qualifies annually for senior citizen discounts at the Country Kitchen Buffet. Our bullpen is getting too old (Mussina, Pettite, and Clemens in the starting rotation?) and so is our outfield. George seems to think that if you take an established player and pay him more than most countries' GNPs, that they will bring home World Series Championships. The problem is that most established players that bring home eight figure paychecks are in one or both of these categories:

1) Fat cats
Give a player $20million and his reason to impress wanes quickly. Why sacrifice your body for team when you're earning tens of millions of dollars. You don't have to impress GMs to get the big bucks anymore. Just sit back and reap the benefits of making the Boss think you're worth the obscene paycheck you're getting.

2) Performance Decline
To earn the millions upon millions these players earn, typically they must produce for the better part of a decade or more. By the time they land in the Big Apple, they are too old to produce the numbers that gave the Boss drool marks on his pillow. Even if they can still produce, it's rarely to their previous level over the course of the season. See Randy Johnson and Bobby Abreu. Moreover, the older you get the easier you get injured or have chronic injury problems. See Gary Sheffield, Kevin Brown, Carl Pavano, and Jason Giambi.

The numbers most players produce when the arrive in the Bronx either proves my points or proves that New York is its own little universe for baseball stats. While New York fans may expect more from their players, they don't make them swing at bad pitches, don't make them throw horrible pitches, and don't injure them. On that point, neither does Joe Torre. So place blame where it belongs: in the front office.

Here's to the Yanks making a run at the Red Sox and bringing to August and September baseball what they do best: drama and excitement.

Fragile Things by Neil Gaiman

2007-06-10T19:17:00.000-05:00

As I finish books on my "Current Reading List" I intend to review them, for whatever that's worth. I'm not a literary critic by any means, but I'll give it a whirl.

Fragile Things by Neil Gaiman

Preface:

This book was given to me by my friend Brad after I recommended American Gods - also by Gaiman - to him. I haven't read a lot of Gaiman; my first exposure to him was as the writer of Sandman. Now I haven't actually read Sandman but I have read American Gods, Good Omens, Neverwhere, and 1602, a one shot series for Marvel. Needless to say, I like Gaiman's style and fantasy aimed stories.

Fragile Things is a collection of short stories and poems by Gaiman.

Review:

I am not a poetry fan, and thus I tended to read but rarely enjoyed the poetry. There is nothing wrong with poetry per se, I just prefer prose. The poetry wasn't overly artsy - difficult to follow or read - nor was it cliched; poetry fans will probably find nothing wrong with the poems contained in Fragile Things.

I enjoyed most of the stories. The collection served it's purpose of passing the time in a limitless, non-stressful, and imaginary world. The American Gods novella at the end of the collection was a nice addition. A couple of the shorts have been made into graphic novels since Gaiman originally wrote them, like Harlequin Valentine. Overall, I enjoyed the collection and would recommend it to anyone that enjoys stories filled with imagination, dark imagery, and dark humour.

Favorites: The Monarch of the Glen, Sunbird, Other People, and A Study in Emerald

Baseball, hot dogs, and apple pie

2007-06-10T18:58:00.000-05:00

Recently Melissa and I went to a Cedar Rapids Kernels game. The Kernels are a Single-A affiliate for the Los Angelos Angels of Anaheim of California of the Western Coast of the United States of America, unipole of the world. The Friday night adversary of the Kernels were the Quad City Swing - a Davenport Single-A affiliate for the St. Louis Cardinals. It was a good time. We paid $9/each for tickets about two rows behind the third base line. We purchased our ballpark food and watched a relaxing and exciting game. The Kernels won late after the Swing broke the scoreless game with two doubles - their only hits of the game at that point - in the 8th. A walk-off single in the bottom of the ninth sealed the game for the Kernels. The team mobbed the player responsible for the game winning home run like they had just won the pennant. It was great.

It's nice to go to a game without any attachments. Kernels v. Swing... I couldn't care less who wins. Unlike going to see the New York Yankees or St. Louis Cardinals (Melissa's team, and my adopted NL team), the loss of the "our" teams won't leave us feeling let down. For the record, I have never seen the team I want to win, win live. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a horrible hex. I have seen the Mets, White Sox, and Royals win at their home stadiums; but my point is that while I wanted them to win because I was at their home stadium, I didn't want them to win.

This was the second Kernels game I have been to this season and ever. Last time I went because the Cubs affiliate - the Peoria Chiefs - were in town. My friend wanted to go see the game because Ryne Sandburg is manager of the Chiefs. I was happy to obligue. Of course I rooted for the Kernels, despite sitting on the vistors side because I really dispise the Cubs. I have the Chicago-land students at the University of Iowa to thank for that. I don't even pay that much attention to the NL outside of how the Cards did, but man do those Cubs fans vex me - I am terribly vexed. My newfound annoyance with the Cubs creates a problem when going back to my "hometown" team of the Iowa Cubs. Solution: go when they are playing Memphis, the Cardinals Triple-A affiliate.

Man United?

2007-06-10T18:49:00.000-05:00

It seems Sony is stirring the pot over in Manchester. ("Cathedral to demand Sony apology")

Sony claims that they have permission to use the interior of Manchester Cathedral in their upcoming game Resistance: Fall of Man. Of course the cathedral spokesperson says "not so fast Sony."

My favorite part of the whole shinanigans is the 4 part demand on the part of Manchester Cathedral. They want Sony to help fund social groups in Manchester to help fight gun crimes. I thought England didn't have a right to bear arms? This seems like something the police need to focus on more than an entertainment corporation. Of course, this suggests that violent video games lead to real life violence. It's possible, I'm not an expert in psychology or sociology, but I have a hard time following the argument that violent video games lead Manchester to have a higher gun crime rate. My guess is the problem is a deeper socio-economic conflict. Mental note: don't piss of a ManU fan, he might be piss drunk and pull a Desert Eagle on you a la Snatch.

Egyptian Court Rules on Niqab Ban

2007-06-09T21:55:00.000-05:00

Today a committee in the High Administrative Court of Egypt upheld a 2001 court ruling to prohibit the American University of Cairo (AUC) from enforcing a complete ban of the niqab on campus. The niqab is a veil worn by a woman that only shows the woman's eyes; as opposed to the hijab which only covers a woman's hair but leaves her face completely visible. Both are garments designed to promote modesty in Islamic women while they are in public. Female Muslims generally begin wearing veils after they reach puberty; although there are varying opinions in the umma - Muslim community - as to the type of veil to be worn by a female Muslim, and even if veils are required by the Shari'a at all.

I first came across the article on the BBC News website entitled "Cairo campus veil ban struck down." After reading it I googled the subject to see if there were any other articles on the subject. The way in which the media outlet portrayed the ruling differed from site to site. Al-Jazeera (English edition) titled their article "Egyptian Court Permits Face-Veil Use"; whereas CBSNews went with the verbose title of "Egyptian Court: University Can't Ban Veils, American University Of Cairo Says Ban Protects 'Personal Safety And Security'". The American source goes immediately for the safety and security concerns AUC used as justification for the ban in an effort, I can only presume, to keep American fears of Muslims and the Middle East alive. Al-Jazeera went with the simple and postive title, choosing to focus on the right to wear the veil. The BBC went with the more negative title, focusing on the court's decision to strike down the ban.

The differences in the articles didn't end with the portrayal of the court's decision. The BBC and Al-Jazeera articles name the claimant as Iman al-Zainy, a former doctoral student at the Islamic Al-Azhar University. CBSNews names the plaintiff as Heba el-Zeini.

Regardless of the differences the articles all discuss that AUC banned the niqab in an effort to promote personal saftey on campus. As the Al-Jazeera article - the only article to mention the campus' current security measures - states students are currently required to pass through a metal detector and show IDs before entering the campus. This is true. We were required to pass through a metal detector, show IDs and they searched our bags every time we entered one of the entrances to the campus; it was the same on the Greek campus as it was on the main campus. Despite the modern security measures, the guards - all male for the entire 7 weeks I was there - paid much less attention to the female's bag and ID as they did the female student. Perhaps it was because I was with American/Western females, but even when female students walked in who where of Middle Eastern ethnicity, the guards smiled more than they searched.

While on the campuses I didn't see any students in the niqab, obviously because this case was still being argued. I did see female students wearing hijabs. I would say the split was about 50/50 on covered and non-covered female students. They same percentage could be said for the young Egyptian women that frequented the restaurants and clubs we visited during our stay. The use of the niqab was even less frequent and was - in my experience - only worn by older women. You may wonder why I think they were older if I could only see their eyes, fair question. I could see wrinkles; moreover, body posture and sometimes hands were indicators as well.

A commentary on the case from December (found here) pointed out that AUC also wanted to ban the niqab to ensure student integrity during exams. A point I hadn't considered but a fair point. Given the pace the guards move students through the gates - it's not wise to keep American, Western, or liberal educated youths lined up near extremely busy and dangerous (traffic laws don't apply unless a guard with a gun is present) streets, especially if you are concerned of attacks from hardline Islamist groups - I doubt the niqab is dispostive on tricking the guards. Just like a bar in the United States, a favorable look-a-like will get the job done.

The Islam Online commentary also mentions the fact that universities rarely enforce the ban. It's probably not coincidence that this case started in 2001. AUC security was quite responsive to world events while we were there, and I don't imagine that year was any different.

Chapter 1, Art 2 of the Egyptian Constitution states "Islam is the Religion of the State. Arabic is its official language, and the principal source of legislation is Islamic Jurisprudence (Sharia)." Notice that the provision states "the principal source..." not "a principal source"; the Constitution was actually changed to the former to reflect a more pro-Islamic stance. This change means that Shari'a has a greater influence in Egyptian law, leaving the ban on veils to be a peculiar ban. Yet Art. 3 states, "Sovereignty is for the people alone who will practise and protect this sovereignty and safeguard national unity in the manner specified by the Constitution". Unlike their Muslim brothers and sisters in Iran, Egyptians place their sovereignty in the people, not the ulema - Islamic law scholars/imams. Of course the power is really lies with the Hoss, but at least on paper it's a socialist democratic state.

Article 40: "All citizens are equal before the law. They have equal public rights and duties without discrimination due to sex, ethnic origin, language, religion or creed."

Article 41: "Individual freedom is a natural right not subject to violation except in cases of flagrante delicto. No person may be arrested, inspected, detained or have his freedom restricted in any way or be prevented from free movement except by an order necessitated by investigations and the preservation of public security."

Article 42: "Any citizen arrested, detained or whose freedom is restricted shall be treated in a manner concomitant with the preservation of his dignity. No physical or moral harm is to be inflicted upon him. He may not be detained or imprisoned except in places defined by laws organizing prisons..."(emphasis added)

The reason I mention articles 40 and 41 is that they are the justification offered by the plaintiff for filing her complaint. 42 was mentioned purely because of the choice of pronoun.

The Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR)quotes the committee as saying

The report recommends that the ban on the niqab be revoked on constitutional grounds. Specifically, Article 41 of the Constitution, according to the report, "prohibits discrimination against citizens on a number of grounds including religion or belief; a Muslim woman's niqab is linked to her religious beliefs." The report likewise invoked Article 41 of the Constitution "which holds personal freedom as a natural, sacrosanct and inviolable right; a woman's dress, which protects and covers her body, is a pillar of personal freedom, as dress is intimately linked to a person's body… and falls under the rubric of bodily freedom."

Actually, Article 41 states exactly when individual freedom can be violated, including public safety. Which is why AUC framed their argument in terms of public safety, even though my experiences tell me that AUC security is only a moderate concern to the actual guards.

In the end, I think wearing of the niqab is a personal choice. So long as AUC staff - female staff if requested - makes sure that jihadi terrorists don't start hiding underneath the veil, the female students should have the right to wear whatever they want so long as it's not threatening the safety of those around them. If you are to believe some Islamic scholars the women who choose to adorn the niqab are protecting the public from the noxious and uncontrollable male libido; a charitable action that should be allowed to continue if the veil-wearer freely chooses to take part in the tradition.

Rendition Trials

2007-06-08T14:21:00.000-05:00

With all of the Paris-gate coverage, little has been made of the commencemt of the CIA rendition trials in Milan, Italy. Twenty-six Americans - most of whom are believed to be CIA agents - and six Italians are accused of kidnapping an Egyptian terror suspect and allegedly torturing him in Cairo. Look here for BBC coverage, or here for NY Times coverage.

The NY Times points out that if allowed to persue the claim, the trial may uncover teh "darker side" of our War on Terror - aside from the war and deaths of innocent civilians, of course. It will be interesting to see what happens in the Italian Constitutional court with respect to this case. Both the US and Italy fear international embarassment and the leaking of state secrets. There is no mention if the Hoss is worried about being connected to the secreting away of an imam and alledged torture in one of his Cairo prisons.

I would like to point out that the most important fact from these articles isn't the focus on torture, the War on Terror, or alledged illegal actions by CIA or Italian operatives. The most important fact is that this case might yet prove that it is not the NY Yankees that are the evil empire but the Boston Red Sox. Philip Morse, a minority owner of the Sox, will be a witness in the case. "It is alleged that his Gulfstream jet was used by the CIA to fly Abu Omar out of Italy."

Shawskank Redemption*

2007-06-08T12:10:00.000-05:00

The daily soap opera that is the "incarcerated" life of Paris Hilton has taken a new twist. Every person able to watch, listen to, or read a TV or news website, has surely been informed of the socialite's release from a California jail. It's received more press than the G8 Summit.

Sheriff Baca stated that she was released for "medical reasons;" yet the sheriff refused to expound upon his statement for "privacy reasons." The blogosphere and news outlets have been full of rampant speculation as to what the major "medical" problem is. I had heard everything from a rash to a refusal to eat prison food, and from sleep deprivation to claustrophobia.

Baca is further quoted as saying, "The problem here is that there is a medical issue and it isn't wise to keep a person in jail with her problem over an extended period of time and let the problem get worse." I'm a little confused, but shouldn't a modern prison facility have a medical ward? We're not talking about Devil's Island, Abu Ghraib, Chateau d'If, Old Tolbooth, or The Maze. It's a modern day Los Angelos prison, with a wing designed to keep celebrities, police officers, and politicians from mingling with the general prison population. (see BBC Article). I don't remember any other inmates getting out recently because they missed their caviar or 24 carat ring - which I saw on a news show once, it was obscene, even by legal standards.

Something I will rarely say, but I agree with Rev. Al Sharpton in this BBC article on the subject. This release by the sheriff smacks of favoritism. It seems Baca is sheriff by day and a fighter for social justice and inequity by night. He is quoted as saying, "My message to those who don't like celebrities is that punishing celebrities more than the average American is not justice." I agree that punishing celebrities more than the average Joe Schmoe is not equal justice and is a poor use of our justice and penal systems. However, I fail to see how the punishment that Ms. Hilton received was more severe than other probation violators. As my previous post described, her attorney claims the cell was too small and isolated, yet is designed to protect her. Baca's logic only works if: 1) Keeping celebrities with unnamed medical conditions is more severe in punishment than keeping non-celebrities with the same medical condition or 2) Ms. Hilton received a worse sentence merely because she has celebrity status. Violating probation can lead to imprisonment of the entire sentence for the original crime. In Iowa, a DUI usually leads to a 6-month deferred sentence. However, a violation of your probation gives the court the discretion to incarcerate you for the entire six months that it originally deferred. I may not be familiar with the laws of CA but I doubt it's much different.

Ms. Hilton -unless the judge rules otherwise- will get to spend 40 days in house arrest. Baca made a big deal to point out she won't be able to leave her home. Sorry, but 40 days in a four-story 1920's Hollywood mansion is not a deterrent. ET showed a delivery van bringing Ms. Hilton her favorite cupcakes and two friends coming to visit. It seems her "medical" concerns have abated quite quickly. Hopefully the air of the Hollywood hills and cupcakes will allow her to heal better than would have otherwise happened under state doctor supervision.

Of course, since writing this and before I could post it after work, Ms. Hilton was taken back to her cell, kicking and screaming the entire way. She now has to serve the full 45 day sentence in jail as opposed to the 23 day sentence she was originally required to serve after 'good behavior.' She screamed "[i]t's not right" at the judge while in tears after the sentence can down. She also screamed for her mommy... how more cliche can you get?

* The title is borrowed from the 7-Jun-2007 Daily Show with Jon Stewart, in which Jon stated they would not be covering the Hilton saga but if they did the story might be titled "The Shawskank Redemption."

Cpl. Grizzlyman

2007-06-07T16:30:00.000-05:00

Bear robots rescues wounded troops

It seems the US Military has developed the Battlefield Extraction Assist Robot or BEAR to aid and rescue wounded US troops. The robot actually has a teddy bear-like face to reassure the wounded solider and put them at ease.

It's like Care Bears meets Terminator. While the idea of a rescue robot has obvious benefits, it's the comical teddy bear face that takes the cake. Maybe the plan is to warm the hearts of the enemy? Don't shoot... I love you!

The Hoss Strikes Again

2007-06-06T13:37:00.000-05:00

Egyptian Brothers Arrested BBC Article

It seems the Egyptian government is gearing up again for another election. When I was studying in Cairo in the summer of 2005 Hosni Mubarak - the Hoss - had dealt with opposing candidate Ayman Nour in a similar manner just prior to my arrival (see 2005 story).

The National Democratic Party (NDP) prefers to arrest opposition rather than acknowledge public cries for reform or participate in the democratic process. NDP did approve March 2007 constitutional reforms for Egypt - although I am skeptical of any law/doctrine/referendum the heir apparent Gamal "Hoss Jr." Mubarak would promulgate and advocate as "strengthen[ing] political parties" and yet critics are calling a solidification of the Egyptian emergency state of law. If interested, here is the Egyptian Constitution.

The leader of the new party Democratic Front, Osama al-Ghazali Harb, - a former member of NDP's Policies Committee, which is head by none other than the Hoss Jr. - resigned after the referendum was passed; he believes the constitutional reforms will only keep the NDP's firm control on the Egyptian government in place.

When I was staying in Cairo, Condolezza Rice visted in order to talk with the Hoss about the upcoming elections. Near the American University of Cairo's (AUC) campus are areas of immense human and vehicle traffic. In one of these squares, there was a 15ft sign of the Hoss with what looked like Xmas tree lights strung around the edges, creating - what I can only assume was intended - a halo effect around the Hoss' head. There were slogans in Arabic around the cutout as well, although I don't know what they said. We were told it was placed there by a supporter. On the edge of the "Greek campus grounds" of AUC - across the street from the main campus - there was a huge billboard of the Hoss that I had to look at everyday (see picture supra). The reason I tell this anecdote, is because the day that Sec. Rice arrived the gynormous cardboard angelic Hoss magically and conveniently disappeared; just in time for the NDP to talk about fair elections with Sec. Rice. It seems only fair that they had to take down the angelic Hoss in order to talk about fair elections given that I didn't see a single advert for Mr. Nour or any other candidates during my seven week stay. Let alone a giant-sized angelic advert of another candiate erected in an area of substantial daily traffic.

The Hilton Prison Suite

2007-06-06T11:51:00.000-05:00

Ms. Hilton's lawyer is complaining that his client's prison stay is cruel and unusual punishment. Okay, he didn't use those words but he is saying that it's unfair. Evidently, Ms. Hilton is in a confinement/isolation cell. Her lawyer is complaining that 45 days in isolation (23 of 24 hours in her cell) isn't fair and a normal person would have been placed in a dormitory with other inmates, which would make the time go faster for Ms. Hilton. All she did, he says, is drive on a suspended license while on probation. Of course, he convienently left out the part that it was probation for a DUI.

I am pretty sure that reason Ms. Hilton is in the isolation cell is so that she doesn't have to interact with the "common folk" in the prison population; most likely a move for her safety rather than as extra punishment for being an hotel heiress. I doubt the court system or prison is really all that troubled that Ms. Hilton's time isn't passing very fast. It's the penal system, not summer camp. Although, if every person that went to prison for a DUI received isolation treatment, we might have less repeat offenders.

Just look at it this way, it'll give Ms. Hilton time to write her book on life in the klink.

Giulani's Post Debate Statement

2007-06-05T20:12:00.000-05:00

After the Republican debate, Republican presidential candiate Rudy Giulani said - to paraphrase - that all he heard at the Democratic debate was a push to go back to the 1990s and forget about the threat of the terrorists to the United States.

1) I'm sure that the Democratic candiates plan to completely ignore the war in Iraq and the threat to national security created by that war and jihadi Islamists and terrorist groups. I think I remember that answer in the Democratic debate... Wolf: "Please raise your hand if your administration's policy regarding the war in Iraq will be to just completely ignore it and act like it never happened." ::every hand goes up::

2) If the reason that Giulani believes that the Democrats want to roll back policy blindly to 1990s is because they mentioned the Democratic heydays of the '90s, then Mr. Giulani, it seems to me you are proposing sometime much worse. At every possible moment you invoke the memory and presidency of Reagan. According to your theory, that must mean that you want to roll back to the 1980's. Not only would that push the threat of terror from the Middle East and jihadi Islamists further from our mind, it would be a complete shift in policy. Instead of fighting the War on Terror by targeting Islamists we would fund and support their campaign against current world powers. Given that we are currently in a unipole situation, it seems that Giulani's invocation of Reagan only means that Giulani must want to the Islamists to defeat the United States. At least that is what it would mean if we were to follow his statement and reasoning to its logical end.

LATER ADDITION:

Ronald Reagan Proclamation 5034 - Afghanistan Day, 21 March, 1983

Excerpt:

The tragedy of Afghanistan continues as the valiant and courageous Afghan freedom fighters persevere in standing up against the brutal power of the Soviet invasion and occupation. The Afghan people are struggling to reclaim their freedom, which was taken from them when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in December of 1979.

In this three-year period the Soviet Union has been unable to subjugate Afghanistan. The Soviet forces are pitted against an extraordinary people who, in their determination to preserve the character of their ancient land, have organized an effective and still spreading country-wide resistance. The resistance of the Afghan freedom fighters is an example to all the world of the invincibility of the ideals we in this country hold most dear, the ideals of freedom and independence.(emphasis added)

If you read the proclamation it isn't very hard to just replace "Afghanistan" with "Iraq", "Soviet Union" with "America", and "Afghan freedom fighters" with "Iraqi insurgents". If we weren't the occupying force in Iraq, it's not unfathomable that President Bush would issues a statement in the spirit of Reagan's Proclamation 5034.

This proclamation only further evinces that Mr. Giulani's comment was nothing more than sophomoric politicking. But then the great Ronald Reagan knew all and was infallible, right? At least that is the myth the Republicans aim to push.

Barnett and Iran

2007-06-05T15:34:00.001-05:00

Below is a recent gmail conversation I had with my friend about a Thomas Barnett piece...

The Barnett Piece: KnoxNews Columnist

Julian's comments:
The most worrisome thing about this for me is that Barnett is no dove by any stretch of the imagination. And he has a lot of contacts inside the Pentagon...

My response:
It's not unfathomable. It seems to me a full scale strike on Tehran will only hurt Israel. Any support by Israel of an attack on Iran will lead to an increase in attacks by Hezbollah from Lebanon/Syria. Such attacks will push the destablized conditions in Beruit and Lebanon even further from reconstruction of a stable government and a potential Middle Eastern haven for grassroots reform.

Saudi may privately speak of removing their regional nemisis Persia from rising power, but publicly they will never be able to stand behind an American attack, especially if it becomes an American-Israeli attack. If there is a hated regional nemesis vilified more than Persia, it's the Israelis.

I don't think it's out of the question that Bush will do something as he leaves office to hand a steaming pile off to the next president in the event that it's a Democratic president-elect. Hopefully this time Congress will have the intelligence and testicular fortitude to tell the President "no."

Julian's comments:The fact that the Israelis and the Saudis would both like to see Tehran knocked down a few pegs, but can't get away with trying it themselves may mean, as I think Barnett was arguing, that even now they're both privately pushing the US towards doing it for them. How anyone on Earth could think anything the Israelis or Saudis come up with vis-a-vis Iran is likely to be a good idea is beyond me; however, I doubt it's beyond Cheney and Bush.

What really worries me is that all of the major Democratic presidential candidates are on record as saying that Iran MUST NOT be allowed to get atomic weapons. They probably need to say that in order to be politically viable in the general election, but it could also back them into a corner regarding our policy towards Iran during this next obscenely long year and a half.

My response:
All UN reports I have read state the Iranian program is years away from actualizing the threat of nuclear weapsons. Thus, by the time Bush leaves they - in theory - won't be armed. I understand that we can't wait until they are armed to respond, but do you really think that the Bush adminstration will use "they have the potential of creating weapons of mass destruction" as a justification for invasion? Given the fallout of the last war based on the lack of WMD, a doubt public support will be high for another invasion based on the same justification.

I don't think the view that Iran shouldn't have nuclear weapons necessiates invasion. Perhaps the answer does lie in Riyadh; more Arab pressure may be the answer. Western pressure (I include Israel in this) isn't going to solve anything. Western military pressure will only increase the public support for the jihadists in the area. While the Sunni and the Shia may have bad blood, Saudi pressure could lead to the Arab league pressuring Iran to curtail its weapons program.

I am of the opinion that Iran should be able to develop nuclear power for non-military purposes if they so choose. I understand the line is very thin between non-military programs and being able to nuke Tel Aviv; yet continuing to treat the Arab world as if they are children and can't police themselves isn't going to further relations or allow them the ability to regulate themselves. I seriously doubt that 70 milliion Iranians want nuclear war with Israel. I seriously doubt the Egyptians, Lebanese, Syrains, and Jordanians truly want nuclear fallout on their borders. Let Tehran have their nuclear power, if the Israelis have it why not let the Iranians have it. The Israelis are just as trigger/missle happy as the next guy; yet we trust them with the bomb. Let Iran prove that will do as they say. Closely monitor them, hell allow China and Russia to have a say in it which will allow them to maintain their energy interests and still maintain an open door policy.

If we want Iran to reform, invading is the worst possible option.

Julian's comments:You're preaching to the choir on all of those points. Actually, I'd go as far as to say that Iran and Israel could probably handle Mutually Assured Destruction as well as India and Pakistan have. Hopefully cool heads will prevail, but the nuclear issue is potentially quite inflammatory. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Your response??

Standardizing My Future

2007-06-05T11:40:00.000-05:00

As I start to prepare for the GRE, I am reminded of why I hate standardized tests. The Kaplan book clearly states that succeeding on the GRE is dependent upon mastering the GRE game. A clear admission that the GRE doesn't actually test your ability to earn a post-graduate degree. In three years of law school I wasn't once asked a test question of this nature: "You have a book shelf with five missing books. You want to re-shelf the books but notice instructions on the wall. It says that Torts cannot be placed next to Admin Law. Con Law cannot be in front of or behind Civil Procedure..." you get the picture.

The reading comprehension and analytical writing sections at least make sense when deciding whether or not the potential student is capable of forming an argument and analyzing dense material. The line of reasoning of logic games, antonyms, and synonyms as measuring tool for future success is lost on me. Perhaps that just means I am not fit for post-graduate studies, aye?

Government Fashion Critics?

2007-06-05T11:19:00.000-05:00

As I was reading the BBC World News site I stumbled across this article.

It seems a US military panel has decided to change the discharge status of an ex-Marine based on his decision to wear fatigues to an anti-war protest. The military justifies their punishment based on a rule that prohibits the 'unauthorized wearing of uniforms.' The panels decision has left a war veteran with "kind of honourable status" according to his lawyer after their "non-punitive decision."

If the decision isn't punitive - it doesn't affect any of the benefits he will receive - and the Cpl. removed his name tag and military emblems, why has the military decided to punish this veteran? Unless the military demanded that the Cpl. return his fatigues after service, then why do they care what he does once discharged, especially if he has removed any reference to the military or his service from the attire.

No reasonable person is going to believe that the government/military is sponsoring the anti-war protest just b/c an ex-Marine is wearing fatigue pants and a fishing hat. I suppose the Cpl should have waited a week or two so that his discharge was complete, perhaps then nothing would have happened. But again, no one watching the protest will be confused or lead to falsely believe the military is protesting President Bush's War on Terror/Democracy outreach to the Middle East program. It seems that the military is just sore that one of the young men that fought for his country and served his time decided that he didn't agree with the war.

Salutations

2007-06-05T11:16:00.000-05:00

Welcome to my blog, where I'll talk about whatever topics are on my mind. Midnight Sprint will be your source for my opinions on rubbish to revolution.

Why "Midnight Sprint", you ask? It's a reference to the Doomsday Clock and current world events. You know, sort of an attempt to be witty, dramatic, and/or ominous.