Zeyad has posted Part Four of his impressive ethnic history of Iraq, bringing us up to the present day. Today's post also includes a detailed ethnic map of Iraq, drawn up by Zeyad himself.
A Small Victory has a few words about Vladimir Putin's disclosure that he warned the US about possible terrorist attacks from Saddam Hussein (yes, him) in the days after September 11. The Left, of course, say he's lying. Michele is in no mood for this nonsense.
The Belmont Club has a very good article on the strategic value of oil.
Jane is participating in Operation Shoe Fly with Sergeant Hook, to collect shoes for Afghanistan. Stop in at Armies of Liberation and find out more.
2004-06-18
Morning Report: June 18, 2004
MORNING REPORT - June 18, 2004
Tomorrow is Juneteenth. Commemorating the liberation of enslaved Americans on June 19, 1865, the folk holiday of Juneteenth
is steadily growing in popularity among African Americans and others. An excellent source of first-hand knowledge about the life of slaves is the I Was A Slave series edited by Donna Wyant Howell.
If we are to truly fulfill our mission in Iraq, it is essential that Americans - all Americans - remember, study, and learn from the cruelties that happened in our own land.
Hate crimes bill passes. (LCR) Legislation introduced by Oregon's Republican Senator Gordon Smith, expanding the definition of "hate crimes" to include gender, perceived sexual orientation, and disability of the victim, was passed by the US Senate. According to the Log Cabin Republicans press release, Sen. Smith proposed the legislation as and amendment to the Defense Department Authorization Bill. Smith is quoted as saying: "Hate crimes tear at the very fabric of our Nation. They seek to intimidate entire groups of Americans and as such divide our Nation."
IAEA condemns Iran regime. (CNN) The International Atomic Energy Agency has adopted a resolution condemning the Iran regime for its lack of cooperation with the agency's nuclear inspections, according to the CNN report. The resolution does not, however, call for a report to the UN Security Council.
Sudan conflict spreads death, terror. (BBC) International humanitarian agencies charge the UN with being slow to react in the Sudan crisis, in which Arab militias or Janjaweed - aided, critics say, by the Sudanese government - are committing atrocities against ethnic Africans in the western region of Darfur. Mass rape is a common tactic. The government of neighboring Chad is worried that the Janjaweed are crossing the border into its own territory. Humanitarian organizations are doing what they can; they could use your help.
Tomorrow is Juneteenth. Commemorating the liberation of enslaved Americans on June 19, 1865, the folk holiday of Juneteenth
is steadily growing in popularity among African Americans and others. An excellent source of first-hand knowledge about the life of slaves is the I Was A Slave series edited by Donna Wyant Howell.
If we are to truly fulfill our mission in Iraq, it is essential that Americans - all Americans - remember, study, and learn from the cruelties that happened in our own land.
Hate crimes bill passes. (LCR) Legislation introduced by Oregon's Republican Senator Gordon Smith, expanding the definition of "hate crimes" to include gender, perceived sexual orientation, and disability of the victim, was passed by the US Senate. According to the Log Cabin Republicans press release, Sen. Smith proposed the legislation as and amendment to the Defense Department Authorization Bill. Smith is quoted as saying: "Hate crimes tear at the very fabric of our Nation. They seek to intimidate entire groups of Americans and as such divide our Nation."
IAEA condemns Iran regime. (CNN) The International Atomic Energy Agency has adopted a resolution condemning the Iran regime for its lack of cooperation with the agency's nuclear inspections, according to the CNN report. The resolution does not, however, call for a report to the UN Security Council.
Sudan conflict spreads death, terror. (BBC) International humanitarian agencies charge the UN with being slow to react in the Sudan crisis, in which Arab militias or Janjaweed - aided, critics say, by the Sudanese government - are committing atrocities against ethnic Africans in the western region of Darfur. Mass rape is a common tactic. The government of neighboring Chad is worried that the Janjaweed are crossing the border into its own territory. Humanitarian organizations are doing what they can; they could use your help.
2004-06-17
The Iraqi Holocaust: No One Asked Them
Little Green Footballs posts this message from a US Marine Corps Reserve officer in Iraq:
... Along with the violence, I saw many things that lifted my heart. I saw thousands of Iraqis in cities like Qurnah and Medinah - men, women, children, grandparents carrying babies - running into the streets at the sight of us, the first Western army to arrive. I saw them screaming, crying, waving, cheering. They ran from their homes at the sound of our Humvee tires roaring in from the south, bringing bread and tea and cigarettes and photos of their children. They chattered at us in Arabic, and we spoke to them in English, and neither understood the other. The entire time I was in Iraq, I had one impression from the civilians I met: Thank God, finally someone has arrived with bigger men and bigger guns to be, at last, on our side.
Let there be no mistake, those of you who don’t believe in this war: the Ba’ath regime were the Nazis of the second half of the 20th century. I saw what the murderous, brutal regime of Saddam Hussein wrought on that country through his party and their Fedayeen henchmen. They raped, murdered, tortured, extorted and terrorized those in that country for 35 years. There are mass graves throughout Iraq only now being discovered. 1st Battalion, 5th Marines, out of Camp Pendleton, liberated a prison in Iraq populated entirely by children. ...
... Along with the violence, I saw many things that lifted my heart. I saw thousands of Iraqis in cities like Qurnah and Medinah - men, women, children, grandparents carrying babies - running into the streets at the sight of us, the first Western army to arrive. I saw them screaming, crying, waving, cheering. They ran from their homes at the sound of our Humvee tires roaring in from the south, bringing bread and tea and cigarettes and photos of their children. They chattered at us in Arabic, and we spoke to them in English, and neither understood the other. The entire time I was in Iraq, I had one impression from the civilians I met: Thank God, finally someone has arrived with bigger men and bigger guns to be, at last, on our side.
Let there be no mistake, those of you who don’t believe in this war: the Ba’ath regime were the Nazis of the second half of the 20th century. I saw what the murderous, brutal regime of Saddam Hussein wrought on that country through his party and their Fedayeen henchmen. They raped, murdered, tortured, extorted and terrorized those in that country for 35 years. There are mass graves throughout Iraq only now being discovered. 1st Battalion, 5th Marines, out of Camp Pendleton, liberated a prison in Iraq populated entirely by children. ...
America's Dark Legacy
Jane posts a link to a recent NYT story about the discovery of two meticulously detailed diaries from the slave era. The Turnage and Washington narratives offer a wealth of historical detail and personal insights into the cruelties suffered daily by enslaved Americans.
The "I Was A Slave" series being published by American Legacy Books offers first-hand reports of slave life from hundreds of freed slaves. During the New Deal, President Roosevelt commissioned a massive oral history project in which survivors of the slave era were interviewed about their experiences. Donna Wyant Howell has been laboriously compiling excerpts from the transcripts of thousands of interviews. Currently six books are available of a projected series of 24. These may be purchased at a very affordable price from American Legacy Books. (I bought the first four as soon as they became available, and I've just ordered the latest two.)
American Legacy also accepts donations. Please take a moment to visit their website, and consider purchasing the books - or even making a donation - if you possibly can. As Americans, we have a duty to understand the horror of enslavement, and to value our freedom.
The "I Was A Slave" series being published by American Legacy Books offers first-hand reports of slave life from hundreds of freed slaves. During the New Deal, President Roosevelt commissioned a massive oral history project in which survivors of the slave era were interviewed about their experiences. Donna Wyant Howell has been laboriously compiling excerpts from the transcripts of thousands of interviews. Currently six books are available of a projected series of 24. These may be purchased at a very affordable price from American Legacy Books. (I bought the first four as soon as they became available, and I've just ordered the latest two.)
American Legacy also accepts donations. Please take a moment to visit their website, and consider purchasing the books - or even making a donation - if you possibly can. As Americans, we have a duty to understand the horror of enslavement, and to value our freedom.
OutRage article
Here's the original article referenced by Portland's Just Out, quoted in my post "Leftist Homophobia."
Bush, Iraq, and Gay Marriage
Okay, now that I've got your attention ...
This is something I've been meaning to address for a while, and I think it's time now. Regular readers of Dreams Into Lightning (yes, all three of you) have probably figured out where I stand anyway, but it's a good idea for me to spell it out here.
First of all, let me be really clear here: I disagree strongly with President Bush about a number of things, and gay marriage is one of them. Probably the biggest one. Bush has gone on record as endorsing a constitutional amendment to, as its supporters claim, "preserve the sanctity of marriage by defining marriage as between a man and a woman". That is, a constitutional amendment that would enshrine straight folks' "right" to protect themselves from understanding the truth: that relationships are to gay people what they are to straight people.
"But if we let gays get married, what next? What's to stop a brother and sister from marrying each other?" Well, if you define marriage as "between a man and a woman", nothing. Of course, out here in the real world, people recognize that gay marriage has everything to do with commitment, growth, and responsibility - just like straight marriage - and nothing whatever to do with incest. (That's why many domestic-partner laws stipulate that the parties not be related to one another.)
The New York Times' conservative columnist David Brooks has written eloquently in favor of gay marriage. Even National Review seems to be coming around: there's an excellent essay in the June 14 print issue, "Perversion" by Roger Scruton, which seeks to "rehabilitate the concept of perversion". Taking the case of pedophilia as a starting point, Scruton argues that the question of "consent" is merely a diversion: the true evil of pedophilia lies in the nature of the act, and in its consequences for the victim. His words on homosexuality worth quoting verbatim:
"Conservatives ... might be troubled by a concept of perversion that lets homosexuality so easily off the hook. Of course, there is the rampant bath-house promiscuity that some might reasonably liken to pornography, in its fetishistic and phallic focus. But we can legitimately regard this as a perversion while refusing to accept that the perversion stems from the homosexuality. And I think that this is part of what underlies the pressure towards gay marriage - namely, the wish to distinguish the normal from the perverted, without assuming that homosexuality is in itself the cause of either. A normal homosexual desire seeks union with another person just as does the normal desire of man for woman or woman for man. It becomes perverted in the same way, by being deflected from this interpersonal relation towards an act that demeans, objectifies, and desecrates its object. And the normal desire seeks to vindicate itself in a moral commitment, in homosexual just as in heterosexual relationships."
I can add nothing to this. However, Scruton goes on in his concluding paragraph to condemn gay marriage on the grounds that the real purpose of marriage is to have children! This is surely one of the weakest arguments against gay marriage, and I can't help feeling he tacked that single paragraph on at the end simply because he couldn't bear to face the conclusion that his own essay demands. Marriage, he proclaims, "marks an existential transition, a move away from the concerns of one generation towards a concern for the next." Presumably referring to falling European birthrates, he observes that "without marriage, as we are beginning to see, societies do not reproduce themselves." (How, then, does this explain teen pregnancy in social groups where marriage is rare?)
Picking apart this dazzling display of sloppy reasoning would really demand a full post, but I'll just touch on a few of the obvious points here. Is the true purpose of marriage, then, to have and raise children? That's what Scruton seems to be saying, but he doesn't spell it out in so many words because he can't. If marriage is only worthwhile for the purpose of procreation, then infertile persons should not marry fertile persons, because that would waste valuable reproductive resources. Infact, infertile people should not get married at all, because a marriage that cannot produce children is a "desecration"! Conversely, what about lesbian couples who conceive through donor insemination? What about adoption, for heaven's sake? What about birth control? Scruton is not really giving us anything new here: it's simply the "marriage for procreation only" argument, worded opaquely enough to discourage any of the difficult questions that such an argument invites.
Now back to Bush.
The President has no official role - NONE - in the constitutional amendment process; he's just a citizen like any other in that regard. And the likelihood of such an amendment passing is, I think, very close to zero. But as a member of the gay community, I cannot feel anything but disgust at President Bush's position.
But here's the thing. Gay marriage is an important issue, but it is not the only issue in the world. It is not even the most important issue. Gay marriage - whose outcome depends scarcely or not at all on the person of the President - pales into insignificance against the campaign against fascism in the Middle East and elsewhere, which depends on the President in great measure. The battle for freedom in the Mideast outweighs gay marriage by so many orders of magnitude that I can't even conceive of setting one against the other.
In Iran, homosexuals do not even have the right to live, much less marry. In Palestine, gay people are subject to arbitrary arrest, imprisonment, torture, and execution. These things are symptoms of the totalitarianism that still holds most of the Mideast in its grip. And that same fascism threatens all of us - gay and straight - in America.
Unlike the fine writers at National Review, I don't have to worry about losing my conservative credentials because I don't have any. I've been a liberal all my life and my basic values haven't changed. But the world has changed. The Democrats have sold out their ideals to the mafias of the Mideast, and it is the Republican Party - slowly but surely coming round to enlightenment on social issues - that we must look to for the defense of the freedom, dignity, and responsibility that we all hold so dear.
So that's where I stand: queer, liberal, Republican, and proud.
This is something I've been meaning to address for a while, and I think it's time now. Regular readers of Dreams Into Lightning (yes, all three of you) have probably figured out where I stand anyway, but it's a good idea for me to spell it out here.
First of all, let me be really clear here: I disagree strongly with President Bush about a number of things, and gay marriage is one of them. Probably the biggest one. Bush has gone on record as endorsing a constitutional amendment to, as its supporters claim, "preserve the sanctity of marriage by defining marriage as between a man and a woman". That is, a constitutional amendment that would enshrine straight folks' "right" to protect themselves from understanding the truth: that relationships are to gay people what they are to straight people.
"But if we let gays get married, what next? What's to stop a brother and sister from marrying each other?" Well, if you define marriage as "between a man and a woman", nothing. Of course, out here in the real world, people recognize that gay marriage has everything to do with commitment, growth, and responsibility - just like straight marriage - and nothing whatever to do with incest. (That's why many domestic-partner laws stipulate that the parties not be related to one another.)
The New York Times' conservative columnist David Brooks has written eloquently in favor of gay marriage. Even National Review seems to be coming around: there's an excellent essay in the June 14 print issue, "Perversion" by Roger Scruton, which seeks to "rehabilitate the concept of perversion". Taking the case of pedophilia as a starting point, Scruton argues that the question of "consent" is merely a diversion: the true evil of pedophilia lies in the nature of the act, and in its consequences for the victim. His words on homosexuality worth quoting verbatim:
"Conservatives ... might be troubled by a concept of perversion that lets homosexuality so easily off the hook. Of course, there is the rampant bath-house promiscuity that some might reasonably liken to pornography, in its fetishistic and phallic focus. But we can legitimately regard this as a perversion while refusing to accept that the perversion stems from the homosexuality. And I think that this is part of what underlies the pressure towards gay marriage - namely, the wish to distinguish the normal from the perverted, without assuming that homosexuality is in itself the cause of either. A normal homosexual desire seeks union with another person just as does the normal desire of man for woman or woman for man. It becomes perverted in the same way, by being deflected from this interpersonal relation towards an act that demeans, objectifies, and desecrates its object. And the normal desire seeks to vindicate itself in a moral commitment, in homosexual just as in heterosexual relationships."
I can add nothing to this. However, Scruton goes on in his concluding paragraph to condemn gay marriage on the grounds that the real purpose of marriage is to have children! This is surely one of the weakest arguments against gay marriage, and I can't help feeling he tacked that single paragraph on at the end simply because he couldn't bear to face the conclusion that his own essay demands. Marriage, he proclaims, "marks an existential transition, a move away from the concerns of one generation towards a concern for the next." Presumably referring to falling European birthrates, he observes that "without marriage, as we are beginning to see, societies do not reproduce themselves." (How, then, does this explain teen pregnancy in social groups where marriage is rare?)
Picking apart this dazzling display of sloppy reasoning would really demand a full post, but I'll just touch on a few of the obvious points here. Is the true purpose of marriage, then, to have and raise children? That's what Scruton seems to be saying, but he doesn't spell it out in so many words because he can't. If marriage is only worthwhile for the purpose of procreation, then infertile persons should not marry fertile persons, because that would waste valuable reproductive resources. Infact, infertile people should not get married at all, because a marriage that cannot produce children is a "desecration"! Conversely, what about lesbian couples who conceive through donor insemination? What about adoption, for heaven's sake? What about birth control? Scruton is not really giving us anything new here: it's simply the "marriage for procreation only" argument, worded opaquely enough to discourage any of the difficult questions that such an argument invites.
Now back to Bush.
The President has no official role - NONE - in the constitutional amendment process; he's just a citizen like any other in that regard. And the likelihood of such an amendment passing is, I think, very close to zero. But as a member of the gay community, I cannot feel anything but disgust at President Bush's position.
But here's the thing. Gay marriage is an important issue, but it is not the only issue in the world. It is not even the most important issue. Gay marriage - whose outcome depends scarcely or not at all on the person of the President - pales into insignificance against the campaign against fascism in the Middle East and elsewhere, which depends on the President in great measure. The battle for freedom in the Mideast outweighs gay marriage by so many orders of magnitude that I can't even conceive of setting one against the other.
In Iran, homosexuals do not even have the right to live, much less marry. In Palestine, gay people are subject to arbitrary arrest, imprisonment, torture, and execution. These things are symptoms of the totalitarianism that still holds most of the Mideast in its grip. And that same fascism threatens all of us - gay and straight - in America.
Unlike the fine writers at National Review, I don't have to worry about losing my conservative credentials because I don't have any. I've been a liberal all my life and my basic values haven't changed. But the world has changed. The Democrats have sold out their ideals to the mafias of the Mideast, and it is the Republican Party - slowly but surely coming round to enlightenment on social issues - that we must look to for the defense of the freedom, dignity, and responsibility that we all hold so dear.
So that's where I stand: queer, liberal, Republican, and proud.
Let's Blogroll!
Ginmar is in rare form, with a thought-provoking rant on women who collaborate with male sexism. The book "Woman's Inhumanity to Woman" by the feminist Phyllis Chesler examines some of the dynamics between the phenomenon Ginmar is talking about.
A Small Victory has some thoughts about Iraq and 9/11 that are worth reading.
In one of several related posts, Andrew Sullivan responds to questions (raised by Jonah Goldberg at The Corner, among others) regarding his position on President Bush. (And the view here at DiL? Glad you asked. If it's possible to be the opposite of two opposites, that would explain why I'm supporting Bush. I'll explain better soon - watch this space.)
A Small Victory has some thoughts about Iraq and 9/11 that are worth reading.
In one of several related posts, Andrew Sullivan responds to questions (raised by Jonah Goldberg at The Corner, among others) regarding his position on President Bush. (And the view here at DiL? Glad you asked. If it's possible to be the opposite of two opposites, that would explain why I'm supporting Bush. I'll explain better soon - watch this space.)
The robots are coming!
Okay, I am REALLY excited about the new movie "I, Robot" (starring Will Smith) based on the short story collection by Isaac Asimov. Asimov is one of my favorite writers, and he had a special gift for exploring the ambiguous relationship between humans and technology. I'm also glad to see a sign that thoughtful science-fiction cinema is not dead. There is so much more to science fiction than "Star Wars". Great SF films like "Soylent Green", "2001", and "Blade Runner" are visually and mentally stimulating, and also good "people stories". I'll try to write more about this later.
Morning Report: June 17, 2004
MORNING REPORT - June 17, 2004
Questions about 9/11 Commssion. (various) The September 11 Commission has contradicted President Bush's claims about the alleged ties between al-Qaeda and Saddam's Ba'athist regime in Iraq. But is this an indictment of Bush, or of the Commission? Debka examines omissions and discrepancies in the Commission's report.
Andrew McCarthy's article in NRO raises some questions as well. And
CNN reports that Tony Blair's office is standing by its position, asserting that Saddam "created a permissive environment for terrorism and we know that the people affiliated to al Qaeda operated in Iraq during the regime".
Questions about 9/11 Commssion. (various) The September 11 Commission has contradicted President Bush's claims about the alleged ties between al-Qaeda and Saddam's Ba'athist regime in Iraq. But is this an indictment of Bush, or of the Commission? Debka examines omissions and discrepancies in the Commission's report.
Andrew McCarthy's article in NRO raises some questions as well. And
CNN reports that Tony Blair's office is standing by its position, asserting that Saddam "created a permissive environment for terrorism and we know that the people affiliated to al Qaeda operated in Iraq during the regime".
2004-06-15
Leftist Homophobia
"Members of the gay group OutRage! and the Queer Youth Alliance took part in a London demonstration May 15 urging greater respect for human rights in Palestine. they also carried signs urging the Palestinian Authority to stop arresting and torturing homosexuals, which led to friction with other demonstrators.
"When they arrived in Trafalgar Square to join the protest, the gay activists were surrounded by Islamic fundamentalists, Anglican priests and members of the Socialist Workers Party, the Stop the War Coalition and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign who called them 'racists', 'Zionists', and 'CIA and MI5 agents', according to Peter Tatchell of OutRage!. He said the gay activists were told to move to the rear of the demonstration and, when they refused, the protest organizers blocked their placards and shouted down their interviews with reporters. ..."
- Just Out (Portland, Oregon), June 4, 2004
"When they arrived in Trafalgar Square to join the protest, the gay activists were surrounded by Islamic fundamentalists, Anglican priests and members of the Socialist Workers Party, the Stop the War Coalition and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign who called them 'racists', 'Zionists', and 'CIA and MI5 agents', according to Peter Tatchell of OutRage!. He said the gay activists were told to move to the rear of the demonstration and, when they refused, the protest organizers blocked their placards and shouted down their interviews with reporters. ..."
- Just Out (Portland, Oregon), June 4, 2004
The L Word: Fascism and the Left
THE L WORD: LIBERALISM IN CRISIS
Fascism and the Left
Notice how all the leftists' arguments hinge on the idea of a devious leader (GWB) manipulating an ignorant and unthinking populace - the "sheeple", as the DU are fond of calling Americans. Think of the worldview that this attitude implies: a fundamental contempt for humanity and for democracy, and faith only in the power of a "supreme leader". This is the essence of fascism on the Left.
These people despise Bush precisely because he is NOT like Saddam Hussein; and had they the power, they themselves would strive to be like Saddam.
Fascism and the Left
Notice how all the leftists' arguments hinge on the idea of a devious leader (GWB) manipulating an ignorant and unthinking populace - the "sheeple", as the DU are fond of calling Americans. Think of the worldview that this attitude implies: a fundamental contempt for humanity and for democracy, and faith only in the power of a "supreme leader". This is the essence of fascism on the Left.
These people despise Bush precisely because he is NOT like Saddam Hussein; and had they the power, they themselves would strive to be like Saddam.
2004-06-14
Dreams Into Lightning has an Official Position on Item # 3
... and it may be found in the text of the Iran regime change petition.
You haven't signed the petition yet?
Well, what are you waiting for?
You haven't signed the petition yet?
Well, what are you waiting for?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)