Gotcha Journalism

Katie Couric is obviously in the tank for Obama. :eye roll:

My beautiful election enters its dark phase.

Peggy Noonan is well on her way to becoming my favorite columnist. Today's piece just put it over the top for me. I mean:

Bambi is playing Chicago style.

There's a musicality to that line that has been resonating with me all morning.

Noonan also has voiced a thought I've been having for almost a year now:

A final point. Do you ever have the passing thought that the presidential election doesn't matter as much as we think? Whoever wins will govern within more of less the same limits, both domestically and internationally. A New York liberal leaning toward Mr. McCain told me this week he has no fear that Mr. McCain may be a more militant figure than Mr. Obama. We already have two wars, "we're out of army." Even if Mr. McCain wanted a war, he said, he couldn't start one.

The funny thing about this idea is how vehemently my friends, both liberal AND conservative react to this idea.

The Good War?

This article (hat tip:Andrew Sullivan) reinforces my concerns with our next president, whoever he may be.

While I recognize the national interest in nailing down areas of civil disorder in order to prevent anti-American terrorist from gaining toeholds and training grounds, I wonder whether we could do more good than harm by waging war to control the areas.

Obama has been much more forceful than McCain on sending more troops to Afghanistan. I worry that, bad as Iraq has been, its nothing compared to what a protracted conflict in the tribal areas between Afghanistan and Pakistan could be.

Are we going to end up looking at the Bush years with nostalgia? I shudder to think.

Amen to that

I've been feeling uncomfortable about this story ever since it came out, but was unable to enunciate why. This op-ed piece from the IHT manages to put my vague feelings into words. Money quote:

Public sex is certainly a public nuisance, but criminalizing consensual acts does not help. "The only harmful effects of these encounters, either direct or indirect, result from police activity," Humphreys wrote. "Blackmail, payoffs, the destruction of reputations and families, all result from police intervention in the tearoom scene." What community can afford to lose good citizens?

And for our part, let's stop being so surprised when we discover that our public figures have their own complex sex lives, and start being more suspicious when they self-righteously denounce the sex lives of others.

I get the sense that many Democrats are capitalizing on the story because it makes a Republican look bad. But using bigotry for partisan gain is just as ugly from both sides of the aisle.

Manifest Destiny

Saturday night I had a very vivid dream:

I was on a trip to the desert as a teacher on a bus. The students were a mix of AUCians and BSCers and we had faculty from both. We stopped in a village in the middle of nowhere and all the people on the bus went off to do their thing.

I found myself on the doorstep of what looked like an antique shop, cluttered with bric-a-brac. I really wanted to go in, but was afraid; it was clearly not open for business, and entering would have been trespassing. Two professors joined me on the doorstep, one, named Nate, was equally hesitant and interested. The other, Steve*, said he knew his way around in there. He said he could show us around.

We went in, but the room was too cluttered to walk freely. We had to belly crawl. Although Steve led us in, once inside, I was in the lead; I’m not sure why. The stuff in this room was amazing, I especially noticed the rugs, Dragon style Persian carpets of astounding beauty. Pieces from the Caucasian mountains, Persian pieces and also Bedouin pieces. The other furniture seemed mostly of the typical middle class Egyptian style, heavy gilt and crystal, not really my taste. I also remember some alabaster pieces and some beautiful classical portraits.

After we had all gotten our fill of looking, I led us back to the front door. Although we had left it open, it was shut and barred! I had to stand up to lift the bar, and as I stepped out of the room, there was an Arab sheik, clearly the owner of this building standing on the front porch, casually drinking his tea and holding court with the locals.

I had never felt like more of a trespasser in my life. I felt utter shame, that I would have breached what, in retrospect, was clearly a private space, not meant to share with the likes of us.

The owner, turned toward us as we exited. He was a tall thin man, with bright sharp eyes, leathery, mahogany colored skin and a huge mustache. He was wearing a brown galabeya and a blood red turban. As we shuffled out into the light, covered in dust and cobwebs, he beamed a huge smile and welcomed us with a twinkle in his eye.

He never looked at Steve, but he took Nate by the shoulders and said that his people needed Nate to stay and help them. Nate, shrinking at the prospect, stepped back and refused to help. At which point Sheriff (I knew his name without an introduction) turned to me and asked me if I would help.

As I said that I would stay (I decided to build a school in his village), Sheriff reached out to shake my hand. He hand a huge hand, but the handshake was still strange somehow, it didn’t feel right. When I looked down to see why, I realized that his hand was missing the index finger and pinkie. Each finger was twisted and charred at the second knuckle. But he shook my hand with no self consciousness at all. And as he continued, I realized that it was a warm, welcome handshake, and I felt relief.


All this is introduction to the news that, on Sunday morning, I was invited by Steve to give a teacher training workshop in Baghdad and Irkuk this Spring. Given my name, and the proximity to Mosul, it may come as no surprise that I’ve felt as though my destiny somehow lay in (or at least beyond) the Tigris. The dream had no small part in my feeling that this was a trip that I absolutely had to do. Of course, the fact that I’ll be traveling through a war zone, about five weeks before my second daughter is expected to enter the world, certainly gives me pause.

But I simply can’t escape the feeling that destiny is calling me. Its time to step onto the shore.

Wish me luck.

On the Other Hand...

A good counter argument to my position. I would argue, however, that, if Buckley is right, then this surge will only make our phased withdrawal more secure. In a gamed risk analysis, the surge makes sense to me.

Surge

The English version of Al Jazeera started broadcasting about a month ago, and I’m at a loss to figure out why its gotten such a bad rap in the western media. My experience has been, I think, the opposite of what most people unacquainted with the organization might expect:
As many of you know, I tend to be a bit of a political junky, especially when it comes to international issues, and most especially, involving this region. As might be expected, I’ve been following the war in Iraq rather closely. For the record, I was in favor of the 2003 invasion, probably for the worst of all possible reasons. I thought that anything was better than the sanctions regime, and all of its inherent corruption (this turned out to be more true than I could have imagined) and burden on innocent Iraqi citizens. I was also incredibly naïve in thinking that democracy, if it took root in Iraq, would have a good chance of positively affecting the other countries in the region. I felt that the administration had done a pretty good job in Afghanistan, and might reasonably be expected to handle Iraq well. I also believed Colin Powell when he said that the WMDs in Iraq posed a significant threat. I further thought that the income Iraq derived (or could derive) from oil coupled with such a strong anti-American regime were intolerable in a region of such importance. I also seriously doubted the liberal nostrum of developing a grand coalition, because I felt that the major European countries would never join.

Since then, incidents like Abu Ghraib, and the widespread arrests and detentions with a total disregard of habeus corpus, the revelation of a total lack of a WMD program, and the near pathological denial on the part of the administration that anything is wrong at all in Iraq have made me regret my position. I remain hopeful that something positive can still happen Iraq, duly noting that it is often just when everything is about to resolve itself that things can seem to be completely disastrous (of course, things also seem completely disastrous just before they get a whole lot worse).

So with all of this background, I was paying very close attention to the debate this weekend over President Bush’s proposal to send in an additional “surge” of troops. My regular daily read, Andrew Sullivan, claimed that it was a half measure, predetermined to fail and an implementation of the “cut and blame” strategy. My daily newspaper, the Herald Tribune, had about ten different stories each day about how everybody in the world thought it was a bad idea. Then, on Sunday night and Monday morning, I watched the pundits roll out on the three Sunday morning talk shows (This Week, Face the Nation, and Meet the Press). Of course, bowing to convention, they had advocates from both sides of the aisle, one of them actually had Republicans for and against the surge as well as Democrats for and against.

It was sad, really. While those opposing the surge had really nothing substantive to offer (the most common phrase was “strong diplomacy”, as if another suit making suggestions were all that it would take, those supporting the surge had nothing better to offer than. “the consequences of failure are catastrophic”. Well, duh! No mention if 20k more troops would actually help things.

And then, dear reader, I turned on Al Jazeera. I usually use it as background noise as I’m reading the paper and uploading my morning caffeine dose, just to see if there’s any late breaking news I should know about. There was an hour long show called, “Indepth Iraq (or something like that) featuring a number of US critics both domestic and abroad (Michael Isikoff was particularly loathsome, in my opinion). There was a “Military Expert” from Cairo, other pundits from around the region, Iraq, Lebanon and Syria, and, most remarkably, a plain speaking, level headed, experienced military strategist from Florida. He was a retired general who was still getting briefings from the pentagon and probably was still consulted on military strategy. He was getting challenges from all over the place. The host of the show started, but other pundits would cut in, challenge the general, and ask snide questions (particularly this Isikoff fellow). They brought up every possible concern or criticism of the new surge plan and this general, not bending words, not answering as a politician, just stating his own (well informed) opinion equanimous.

He convinced me. Here’s my current opinion:

1. 5 brigades and an extra regiment are enough to supplement the Iraqi units in the parts of Baghdad where sectarian violence is an issue.
2. Its also probably all we can muster right now and all that the Iraqi government would put up with.
3. Sadr city, as well as other militia operation centers will be dealt with later, once overall security is in place.
4. If this doesn’t work, it was still a good idea to beef up security for a phased withdrawal (could happen as soon as six months if progress isn’t made).
   
   And to think, I saw it on Al Jazeera!!

Freedom

I took the last song off, because I didn't want a picture of OBL on my blog. This one leans the same way, perhaps a bit stronger and has some over the top associations that I don't agree with. Nevertheless, I hope everyone who can votes tomorrow.

The Obvious Confirmed

 

Nuance

A perfect politician for a nuanced fence-straddler like me:

"It has not always been the pragmatist, the voice of reason, or the force of compromise, that has created the conditions for liberty," he writes about the antislavery movement of the 19th century. "Knowing this, I can't summarily dismiss those possessed of similar certainty today--the antiabortion activist ... the animal rights activist who raids a laboratory--no matter how deeply I disagree with their views. I am robbed even of the certainty of uncertainty--for sometimes absolute truths may well be absolute."

-Barrack Obama

Metrics in Iraq

Read this report.

Its not all bad: Oil revenues are slowly increasing, Schools are improving and Electricity outside of Baghdad is at target levels


But the majority of indicators are moving in the wrong direction:the Electricity levels in Baghdad, the Number of Attacks per day, the number of insurgents, the number of civilians killed, the number of US troops killed, These and many other "Metrics" are all trending in the wrong direction.

We need a new strategy.

Clinton the Badass?

I loved watching this interview (Parts 1, 2, and 3). Truth is, I'd tune in to Bubba just about anytime. The guy sure can talk. He seemed to prevaricate a little bit, especially when he back pedaled on whether the 9-11 report was the definitive source, or if it was Richard Clarke (isn't he the new year's eve guy). On the whole though, I thought he ripped Wallace a new one, and it was fun to watch. His basic point, I think, is totally spot on. Clinton was actively trying to catch this guy (when the oppostion was worried about who creamed on who's jeans) and then they got into office and didn't do squat. Yet the question is always "why didn't Clinton do more?" They never ask the other guys that, do they?

The Pope & Islam

There is an interesting interview of Kevin Madigan, SJ, president of the Institute for the Study of Religions and Cultures at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome that offers some insight into the latest furor. I'd recommend reading the original speech first, because, even though he get's a lot right, Madigan's take is off the mark in a few instances.

First, he says :

the Byzantine emperor’s position was relevant to the Holy Father’s larger theme: the rationality of God and the irrationality of violence. It is significant that the emperor was Greek because the pope wanted to underline the confluence of Greek philosophy and biblical faith.

But then he adds his own commentary:

It seems to me essential not to lock Muslims into one particular reading of their texts and traditions. It is nonsensical to say to someone who claims that Islam is a peaceful religion that he may not believe such a thing because the Qur’an says such-and-such. She should be encouraged to believe that Islam is peaceful and held to observe that.

I think the Pope wasn't trying to "Lock Muslims into one particular reading"; rather, he was commenting on the actions of people. I mean, there is violence and Islamic practice is forced upon people. If you don't think so, look at the Afghani who was almost sentenced to death from converting to Christianity.

By the end, Madegan has devolved into pure PC balderdash where the violence of the Islamic world is because of their poverty. That meme has been clearly refuted, IMHO, by the high numbers of terrorists which are actually fairly well educated, and come from staunchly middle class backgrounds. I mean, my students, certainly not poverty stricken by any sense of the imagination, often talk about violence as a means to justify religious differences. Madegan, however, does give throw the Pope this bone:

None of this is to say that it is all the fault of non-Muslims.

Well, gee, thanks. You mean this extremely out-of-proportion response to a legitimate critique is not my fault? Thanks for the support. Not.

A Political Victory?

A thorough (albeit depressing) review of the new law on interrogations:

"both sides appear to believe that the agreement permits the CIA to continue to use sleep deprivation, cold rooms, and other such techniques," even though such techniques do, in fact, constitue a breach of our Geneva obligations."

The NYT doesn't agree, but has other critiques:

It would impose new legal standards that it forbids the courts to enforce. It would guarantee terrorist masterminds charged with war crimes an array of procedural protections. But it would bar hundreds of minor figures and people who say they are innocent bystanders from access to the courts to challenge their potentially lifelong detentions.

I've read the proposed bill, and I'd agree with both source's evaluations. Sigh, a grim day for human rights.

Ding Dong, OSB is Dead?

Rather Anti-Climatic, if true, but still good news.

Bush Backs down?

Some resolution? (password required)

Common Article 3 guarantees humane treatment to combatants seized during wartime. The two sides agree that the article’s language prohibiting “outrages upon human dignity” is too vague and leaves military and C.I.A. personnel uncertain about what techniques they may use in interrogating detainees.

The White House has argued that without more “clarity,” it will have no choice but to shut down a C.I.A. program for interrogating top terrorism suspects. But Mr. Warner, Mr. McCain and Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina have argued against any changes in the language interpreting the article, saying such a change would invite other countries to reinterpret the Geneva Conventions as they saw fit, which in turn could endanger captured American troops.

The senators propose to provide clearer guidelines for interrogators by amending the War Crimes Act to enumerate several “grave breaches” that constitute violations of Common Article 3.

Several issues appeared to remain in flux, among them whether the two sides could agree on language protecting C.I.A. officers from legal action for past interrogations and for any conducted in the future. Beyond the issue of interrogations, the two sides have also been at odds over the rights that should be granted to terrorism suspects during trials, in particular whether they should be able to see all evidence, including classified material, that a jury might use to convict them.

I'm still a little fuzzy on the whole thing. But I think that specifying which techniques would be allowed and which prohibited (as the AFC wants to do) is a good idea (and addresses the lack of clarity issue). However, I think caution should be exercised in granting amnesty to earlier interrogations, it sounds more like a cya move by Bush and Rumsfield for allowing extreme coercive techniques. I'd say, give the field agents amnesty, but those who set the policy should take responsibility for their actions.

I'm glad to see that Bush backed down from this. Lets see how it turns out.

Edit> although the above quoted article seems to claim that Bush backed down, I just read elsewhere that Bush's original langugae was passed. I'll have to do some more research. :?

Pandering Pontif

Some Bullshit from the Coptic Pope:

In the first reaction from a top Christian leader, the head of Egypt's Coptic Orthodox Church said in remarks published Saturday that Pope Benedict XVI's comments on Islam were "against the teachings of Christ."
Coptic Pope Shenouda III told the pro-government Al-Ahram newspaper that he didn't hear the pope's exact words, but that "any remarks which offend Islam and Muslims are against the teachings of Christ."

Right, don't say anything that might piss off the Pharisees.
Also, did you notice how the paper took the actual words and summarized them incorrectly?
The Copt didn't say anything about Ratzinger, he was speaking hypothetically, admittedly, a cowards way out, but, in his position surrounded by 55 million muslims just waiting for an excuse to torch a church, I can't really blame him.

The Papal Furor

Here's a translated transcription of the Pope's speech. To be honest, I'm not sure i understood it in all its nuance (my mind strarted to wander near the end) but the section relevent to Islam is clear. He is making a critique, but I think one that may be justifiable (I don't know enough about Islam to say for sure).
It is clear that there are many places in the world where Islamic practices are forced upon people. Whether or not that is from the religion or the people who practice it, I don't know.

As for Il Papa, this is the first thing I've ever heard about him. Up until now I was instictually distrustful (I think it was because of those beady little rat eyes). Based on this speech, however, I have to say good job to the Cardinal College. He'll get my vote when he comes up for reelection. How long is his term again?

1984 watch

From ABC News

Hussein is one of an estimated 14,000 people detained by the U.S. military worldwide 13,000 of them in Iraq. They are held in limbo where few are ever charged with a specific crime or given a chance before any court or tribunal to argue for their freedom.

Well, they must all be terrorists, right?

Quick, lets waterboard them; let's set the dogs on them.