Monday, July 16, 2007

Sketch

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.

Saturday, July 14, 2007

Quatorze Juillet

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)

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

The Crime of Jihad

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

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.

Sunday, July 8, 2007

The War for Muslim Minds by Gilles Kepel


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


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



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.