Dreams Into Lightning Celebrates Two Years

April 21, 2006 marks my second anniversary of blogging here at Dreams Into Lightning.

Gretchen doesn't want a cell phone.

Via the magic that is ORblogs, Gretchen speaks out:

"Please help me understand. You are a 36 year old woman and you do not want a cell phone?" Clearly he was straying from the Sprint approved script. "That's right" I said, "I have never had a cell phone and I don't really want one."

Heh. Go read the rest at the link.

You know, for about two or three years (circa 1999-2001) when EVERYBODY WAS GETTING INTERNET, I closed my AOL account and went netless. Just as a lifestyle choice, for the same reason I don't watch TV. I'd get the strangest, most incredulous looks and questions. "You mean you don't have internet yet?" "Anymore," I corrected.

Nowadays, as you can see, I have internet access and spend quite a bit of time online. I had good reasons for choosing not to have internet service then, and I have good reasons for choosing to have it now. But I'll always admire people who have the nerve to make their own choices about technology.

And who knows? The day may yet come when I might give up internet again.

What Tammy said!

Tammy Bruce has a great new post linking to the Carnival of the Feminists at Daily Troll and making some important points:

While we tend to stick with blogs or news sites that we feel reflect out POV, consider the fact that you probably have disagreed with a number of my posts, but perhaps find the variety and the debate fun and informative. Take a look at Daily Troll, after all, they included my post knowing that they would be sending their readers to a conservative feminist site. Usually when liberals or lefties link to Tammy Blog it's in an attack post. Their linking here is an indication that they, too, have an open mind, and promote material they agree with even when it's from someone with whom they probably disagree with a whole lot of the time.

Oh, and don't miss her post on Sharon Stone. It's worth a visit for the pictures anyway, but read what Tammy has to say about the sexist double standard around older women vs. older men.



feminism

Germantown, Maryland Woman Escapes Iranian Prison

Unbelievable story from the Maryland Gazette via Marze Por Gohar:

When Jaleh Jahandideh left the United States in January to visit her 92-year-old father in Iran for the first time in 12 years, she took four huge suitcases full of clothing and gifts for her extended family.

A satchel the size of a large fanny-pack slung over her shoulder was the only bag the Germantown woman had when she returned Saturday, after 21 days in an Iranian prison and a harrowing escape by horseback over the steep Zagros mountains into Iraq.

The petite Jahandideh emerged, arms raised in a ‘‘V”, from U.S. Customs at Virginia’s Dulles International Airport with a look of joy and relief matched only by the expressions of her husband, stepson and daughter and son-in-law. The family spent a tense two-and-a-half months working to get Jahandideh out of Iran after authorities detained her when her ex-husband, a former military intelligence official and her daughter’s father, learned she was back in Iran.

Memo: If your ex-husband is a former military intelligence official for the Iranian regime, you probably want to be careful what you say to him.

Jahandideh’s trip to Orumiyeh to visit her family began peacefully. Then, her ex-husband –– with whom she attended state dinners in the 1980s during the reign of the Ayatollah Khomeini –– visited her. He grew increasingly angry as she spoke about her life in America, Jahandideh said during an interview Monday, adding that he recorded the conversation.

Well, you can probably guess what happened after that, but you'll never guess how she got away. Go to the link to read the whole thing, it's amazing. And a big cheer for the Kurds!

Iran

Tragedy Strikes ITM

Omar and Mohammed's brother-in-law was murdered last week.

He was not affiliated with any political party or movement and spent all his time working at the hospital or studying at home and he was dreaming of building a medical center for his specialty to serve the poor who cannot afford going to expensive private clinics.

We didn't know or anticipate that cruel times were waiting for a chance to assassinate the dream and kill the future.

It was the day he was celebrating the opening of a foundation that was going to offer essential services to the poor but the criminals were waiting for him to end his life with their evil bullets and to stab our family deep in the heart.

Grief and pain is killing me everyday as I hold my dear nephews, my sister is shocked beyond words while my parents are dead worried about the rest of us.

We are trying hard to close the wound, summon our patience and protect those still alive while we look forward to the future that we hope can bring peace for us.

The terrorists and criminals are targeting all elements of life and they target anyone who wants to do something good for this country…They think by assassinating one of us they could deter us from going forward but will never succeed, they can delay us for years but we will never go back and abandon our dream.

Go read the rest at Iraq the Model.

Lasting Sacrifices, Enduring Courage

Army Specialist Craig Ivory was the adopted son of Patrick Ivory and was raised by his father and his stepmother, Terri Ivory, this item at Families United informs us:

He graduated from State College High School in Pennsylvania in 1996 where he excelled in a unique blend of extracurricular activities; while he was an accomplished athlete in football and track, he also was a talented musician with the concert and symphonic bands.

Craig’s military career was even more dynamic. He first enlisted in the Army in January 1997. He served in many different roles during his career: he served in the U.S., Korea and Iraq; he reenlisted twice and trained or served as a mechanic, paratrooper, support personnel for an MP unit, a candidate for the Special Forces, and finally, as a medic.

On March 26th, 2003, he was among 1,000 paratroopers from the 173rd dropped into Northern Iraq. He spent five months supporting the field units as a medic. His father recalls Craig’s exchange with an English-speaking Iraqi woman who pleaded with him: “Please don’t go home. We need you to protect us.” Craig consoled her and explained that while they have their own homes and one day would have to leave, “we’re here for you now.”

In the extreme battlefield conditions, including 135 degree heat, Craig suffered a stroke and was transported to Germany, where his father made the difficult decision to remove his life support. Craig had been planning to follow in his father’s footsteps as a physician’s assistant after his military career.

Craig’s father said Craig had a movie quote that he favored as a sort of motto: “What we do in life echoes through eternity.” For Craig, that has especially rung true beginning with his family donating a memorial to his high school and establishing a $1,000 annual scholarship fund in Craig’s memory for members of the military medics wanting to pursue a career as a physician’s assistant. ...

Patrick Ivory explains that he felt compelled to join Families United after an incident with a reporter. He claims the reported totally spun his words and characterized his sentiments inaccurately to serve their agenda. “The media only reports the negative and the sensational. The positive information is never shared with America.”

“What we do in life echoes through eternity.” I like that. Take a moment to reflect on Craig's commitment and idealism, and think about what his words. As you already know, I am a combat vet and I lost several friends in the Desert Storm Iraq/Kuwait campaign in 1991. I hope more Americans will take the trouble to learn about our experiences, and why we do what we do.

Brave women are making sacrifices at the frontlines too, Donna St. George at the Washington Post reminds us.

Her body had been maimed by war. Dawn Halfaker lay unconscious at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, her parents at her bedside and her future suddenly unsure. A rocket-propelled grenade had exploded in her Humvee, ravaging her arm and shoulder.

She is one of 11 women combat amputees.

They have discovered, at various points of their recovery, that gender has made a difference -- "not better or worse," as Halfaker put it, "just different."

For Halfaker, an athlete with a strong sense of her physical self, the world was transformed June 19, 2004, on a night patrol through Baqubah, Iraq. Out of nowhere had come the rocket-propelled grenade, exploding behind her head.

The article continues,

The Iraq war is the first in which so many women have had so much exposure to combat -- working in a wide array of jobs, with long deployments, in a place where hostile fire has no bounds. In all, more than 370 women have been wounded in action and 34 have been killed by hostile fire. ...

n the hospital, female combat amputees face all the challenges men do -- with a few possible differences. Women, for example, seem to care more about appearance and be more expressive about their experiences, hospital staff members said. Among the women, there also was "a unique understanding or bond," said Capt. Katie Yancosek, an occupational therapist at Walter Reed.

The advent of female combat amputees has left an enduring impression on many hospital staff members. "We have learned not to underestimate or be overly skeptical about how these women will do," said Amanda Magee, a physician's assistant in the amputee care program. "Sometimes they arrive in really bad shape, and people are really worried. . . . But we've learned they can move on from a devastating injury as well as any man."

Go to the link to read about Juanita Wilson, and how she balances soldierhood and motherhood. And don't miss this:

On that winter morning, Wilson had already tied her combat boots, her right hand doing most of the work and her prosthetic holding the loop before it is tied. "I want it to be known that just because you're a female injured in combat, you don't have to give up your career and you don't have to look at yourself as disabled," she said.

She added: "I haven't met any female soldier yet who feels she shouldn't have been there."

Iraq

Purdue Student Busted After Death Threats

President George W. Bush, Laura Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld were apparently on the hit list of Purdue University student Vikram Buddhi, who's now in jail. Post-Trib:

A Purdue University graduate student was arrested and charged with threatening to kill President George W. Bush, Laura Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

Vikram Buddhi allegedly posted the detailed and threatening messages on an online message board.

Buddhi has been studying industrial engineering at the university, having moved temporarily from India to his new home in West Lafayette 10 years ago on a student visa. He was originally hired as a teaching assistant in the math department but was removed from that position and is now a teaching assistant in the industrial engineering department. ...

In the various messages posted, Buddhi urged the Web site’s readers to bomb the United States and for them to rape American and British women and mutilate them, according to court documents. Other messages called for the killing of all Republicans.

What a lovely fellow.

Hat tip: Plus Ultra. Rico wonders, "do women at Purdue feel threatened by a graduate student who openly calls for rape and mutilation of women? Or, does the fact that he also hates George Bush make him less threatening?"

Troops In Support of the War

Washington Post, via Families United:

By Wade Zirkle

Earlier this year there was a town hall meeting on the Iraq war, sponsored by Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), with the participation of such antiwar organizations as CodePink and MoveOn.org. The event also featured Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), a former Marine who had become an outspoken critic of the war. To this Iraq war veteran, it was a good example of something that's become all too common: People from politics, the media and elsewhere purporting to represent "our" views. With all due respect, most often they don't.

The tenor of the town meeting was mostly what one might expect, but during the question-and-answer period, a veteran injured in Afghanistan stood up to offer his view. "If I didn't have a herniated disc, I would volunteer to go to Iraq in a second with my troops," said Mark Seavey, a former Army sergeant who had recently returned from Afghanistan. "I know you keep saying how you have talked to the troops and the troops are demoralized, and I really resent that characterization. The morale of the troops I talk to is phenomenal, which is why my troops are volunteering to go back despite the hardships. . . ."

"And, Congressman Moran, 200 of your constituents just arrived back from Afghanistan -- we never got a letter, we never got a visit from you, you didn't come to our homecoming. The only thing we got was a letter from the governor of this state thanking us for our service in Iraq, when we were in Afghanistan. That's reprehensible. I don't know who you two are talking to, but the morale of the troops is very high."

What was the response? Murtha said nothing, while Moran attempted to move on, no pun intended, stating: "That wasn't in the form of a question, it was a statement."

It was indeed a statement; a statement from both a constituent and a veteran that should have elicited something more than silence or a dismissive comment highlighting a supposed breach of protocol. This exchange, captured on video (it was on C-SPAN), has since been forwarded from base to base in military circles. It has not been well received there, and it only raises the already high level of frustration among military personnel that their opinions are not being heard.

In view of his distinguished military career, John Murtha has been the subject of much attention from the media and is a sought-after spokesman for opponents of the Iraq war. He has earned the right to speak. But his comments supposedly expressing the negative views of those who have and are now serving in the Middle East run counter to what I and others know and hear from our own colleagues -- from junior officers to the enlisted backbone of our fighting force.

Murtha undoubtedly knows full well that the greatest single thing that drags on morale in war is the loss of a buddy. But second to that is politicians questioning, in amplified tones, the validity of that loss to our families, colleagues, the nation and the world.

While we don't question his motives, we do question his assumptions. When he called for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, there was a sense of respectful disagreement among most military personnel. But when he subsequently stated that he would not join today's military, he made clear to the majority of us that he is out of touch with the troops. Quite frankly, it was received as a slap in the face.

Like so many others past and present, I proudly volunteered to serve in the military. I served one tour in Iraq and then volunteered to go back. Veterans continue to make clear that they are determined to succeed in Iraq. They are making this clear the best way they can: by volunteering to go back for third and sometimes fourth deployments. This fact is backed up by official Pentagon recruitment reports released as recently as Monday.

The morale of the trigger-pulling class of today's fighting force is strong. Unfortunately, we have not had a microphone or media audience willing to report our comments. Despite this frustration, our military continues to proudly dedicate itself to the mission at hand: a free, democratic and stable Iraq and a more secure America. All citizens have a right to express their views on this important national challenge, and all should be heard. Veterans ask no more, and they deserve no less.

The writer is executive director of Vets for Freedom. He served two tours in Iraq with the Marines before being wounded in action.

Vets for Freedom
I can add my voice to these gentlemen's. The arrogance and condescension of the pampered civilians who think they can speak for me is beyond words. I am proud to have taken part in the war that liberated Kuwait in 1991; my only regret is that we did not finish the job then by liberating Iraq and getting rid of Saddam Hussein. But I am proud and grateful that today's men and women in uniform have done exactly that, and they are providing the necessary security as Iraq rebuilds itself into a free and prosperous nation.

The so-called "liberals" who defended Saddam and his torture chambers have contributed nothing - less than nothing - to this noble effort. The final defeat of fascism in the Middle East will owe much to President George W. Bush and nothing whatever to the "peace" activists, whose increasingly ignorant and incoherent ravings testify to their own disordered mental state.

When 3,000 Americans were murdered in cold blood on September 11, 2001, our Armed Forces were ready to respond and respond they did. Whether you know it or not, whether you want to believe it or not, Americans and freedom-loving people around the world sleep more safely at night because of these people.

Iraq

Iran: What Bush Must Do

While Western leftists "liberals" continue to dither and stall and make excuses for the fascists in Tehran, freedom activists urge the Bush Administration to do what needs to be done.

"Big bark, small dog" - and that dog is on its last legs. Ruzbeh Hosseini, Marze por Gohar:

There is no doubt that the latest show of force by the Islamic Regime is nothing more than an attempt to show its legitimacy. Indeed, any regime, whether democratic or totalitarian, is at its most vulnerable when it is seriously questioned by its citizens and the world. But such displays of grandeur are little consolation to those within Iran who live in a country where there is no proverbial “bottom” to hit when it comes to the Islamic regime’s complete incompetence to administer.

Within the last few months Iran's economy has all but stalled. It is estimated that over the last year, almost two-hundred billion investment dollars has left . Throughout the country development projects that were once scheduled to go ahead have either been scrapped or put on hold . A great indication of this is the seemingly un-ending real-estate boom of Tehran that has sputtered and stalled . The impetus behind this economic catastrophe is the Islamic Regime’s bold stance towards the West and its determination to go all-or-nothing on a wide range of social and political issues that are not limited to its controversial nuclear program. With propaganda campaigns and political posturing that is reminiscent of the heydays of the Islamic revolution the regime has ventured to turn government programs that would ordinarily be seen as a waste of government resources in more democratic countries into symbols of national pride. It hasn’t worked. ...

Hosseini concludes: 'Contrary to what the media may believe, such a confrontation will not be with the United States or Israel. Rather, the regime’s incompetence at home will pit it against an increasingly impatient population who longingly looks to the successes of the “East Asian Tigers” that have surpassed Iran in economic strength and reminisces of the days when Iran not only was a regional power, but the world’s sole super-power 2,500 years ago.' Read the whole article at the link.

National Review: "The problem is the regime." The Editors, National Review:

The problem with Iran is precisely not its nuclear program. The problem is the regime. We have every reason to think this regime would use its arsenal to threaten the U.S. and its allies, and to extract concessions inimical to our interests. Nor can we exclude the possibility that the mullahs would actually launch their nukes. Consider Hashemi Rafsanjani, that celebrated "moderate," exulting that the Muslim world will "vomit [Israel] out from its midst," since "a single atomic bomb has the power to completely destroy [it]." Nuclear deterrence operates on the assumption that your foe is rational. Things start to break down when a significant part of its ruling establishment fancies itself on divine mission to evaporate the Zionist Entity in a mushroom cloud, roll back the Great Satan, and usher in a paradisiacal rule by sharia. That's not a regime to bargain with. The goal must be to remove it from power.

This does not mean invasion and occupation. But it does mean getting serious about supporting the Iranian democracy movement. The contradiction of Iran is that its people, the most educated, moderate, and pro-Western of the Muslim Middle East, are ruled by the most aggressive Islamists in the world. It wouldn't take a large expenditure to catalyze that tension. ...

We can expect more of the usual incoherent drivel from the Left. What we need from President Bush is action.

Iran

Iran: The Military Option

"A military option against Iran's nuclear facilities is feasible," writes Thomas McInerny in The Weekly Standard.

A diplomatic solution to the nuclear crisis is preferable, but without a credible military option and the will to implement it, diplomacy will not succeed. The announcement of uranium enrichment last week by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad shows Iran will not bow easily to diplomatic pressure. The existence of a military option may be the only means of persuading Iran--the world's leading sponsor of terrorism--to back down from producing nuclear weapons.

A military option would be all the more credible if backed by a new coalition of the willing and if coupled with intense diplomacy during a specific time frame. The coalition could include Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, Turkey, Britain, France, and Germany. Solidarity is important and would surely contribute to potential diplomatic success. But should others decline the invitation, the United States must be prepared to act.

What would an effective military response look like? It would consist of a powerful air campaign led by 60 stealth aircraft (B-2s, F-117s, F-22s) and more than 400 nonstealth strike aircraft, including B-52s, B-1s, F-15s, F-16s, Tornados, and F-18s. Roughly 150 refueling tankers and other support aircraft would be deployed, along with 100 unmanned aerial vehicles for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, and 500 cruise missiles. In other words, overwhelming force would be used.

The objective would be, first and foremost, to destroy or severely damage Iran's nuclear development and production facilities and put them out of commission for at least five years. ...

Via Free Iran News Forum. The article adds that Iran - which the author states is only 51% Persian - is rife with ethnic and civil unrest. "Azerbaijanis and Kurds comprise nearly 35 percent of the population. Seventy percent are under 30, and the jobless rate hovers near 20 percent." A massive covert operation, timed to coincide with the air campaign and patterned after the Afghan campaign of 2001, could bring down the weakened Islamic Republic regime.

Meanwhile, JINSA lists America's national security priorities.

At least one analyst suggests that Iran could only generate enough for a one-shot demonstration to halt the current round of talks at the UN by presenting the Security Council with a fait accompli. An Israeli official said Iran had proved a "rudimentary research and development capability" needed to create nuclear weapons, but it did not mean that the Iranians had "mastered the nuclear fuel cycle." Israel's Chief of Military Intelligence, Amos Yadlin, called the announcement "a bargaining chip... meant to move the debate to the next point - the extent of enrichment."

However, even a demonstration project means that Iran has acquired the knowledge to enrich uranium after which, like biting the apple, you cannot "un-know." If the Iranian program is not stopped, some analysts believe Iran could master the fuel cycle by the end of the year. This is what Israel considers the "point of no return."

The Iranians themselves say they are looking to increase the centrifuge string from the current 164 (enough to test the technology) to 3,000 (enough for industrial purposes, or to make one bomb per year) and then to 50,000 (do the math yourself). The ringer here, of course, is that we don't know what we don't know. There are suggestions of a parallel, clandestine program; that the 3,000 centrifuges already exist, that the knowledge base is stronger than we think. ...

As previously noted here, some sources believe that the regime is hiding a top-secret facility in Neyshabour. This is

a top-secret plant under construction that is designed to run 155,000 centrifuges, enough to enrich uranium for 3-5 nuclear bombs a year.

This is Project B, or the hidden face of the enrichment plant open to inspection at Natanz.

This plant, due for completion next October, is scheduled to go on line at the end of 2007. According to our intelligence sources, running-in has begun at some sections of the Neyshabour installation, which is located 600 km northeast of Tehran. DEBKAfile’s sources reveal too that the Neyshabour plant has been built 150 m deep under farmland covered with mixed vegetable crops and dubbed Shahid Moradian, in the name of a war martyr as obscure as its existence.

Spook86 at In from the Cold cites an e-mail exchange with a former weapons inspector:

The former inspector believes that Iran will have to operate a small-scale cascade for at least 6-12 months before ramping up production. Obviously, the availabilty of P-2 centrifuges would help, but there is no evidence that Iran has the larger models in quantity (yet).

This former inspector also opined that Iran may have only a limited supply of the parts required for building centrifuges, estimating that Tehran might be able to assemble another 1-2,000 over the next year. Even if those are the larger P-2 models (and that's a stretch), it's still a long way from the 50,000 needed for fast-track, weapons-scale enrichment efforts (with the P-1), or the 12-13,000 needed, if the P-2 models are used. Beyond that, Iran still has the issues of output and quality to contend with.

A cautionary note: I am not trying to underestimate the menace posed by Iran's nuclear program. But Tehran still has significant technical and logistical barriers to overcome to reach the production levels needed to build a bomb. When will they overcome those hurdles? That's the $64,000 question, but given current levels of activity, Iran's progression along the enrichment track would probably produce a weapon in the 2009-2010 timeframe, and not in 2006 or 2007.

Having said that, we must emphasize (again) that there are significant gaps regarding what we actually know about Iran's nuclear program. The lack of P-2 centrifuges at Natanz may suggest that those models are being used (or will be used) in a parallel program at a covert facility. If the secret effort is more advanced/producing enriched uranium on a larger scale, Iran could have the material for a bomb before 2009 or 2010. As we've noted on numerous occasions, the possibility of a "dual track" nuclear program in Iran cannot be dismissed.

Late last week, a senior Israeli official stated that the west had missed the opportunity to head off Iran's nuclear program.

Spook86 doesn't cite the Debka report, but Debka may be working from the same sources as the "senior Israeli official". I've left a comment at IFTC, so we'll wait to see what Spook makes of Debka's claims about Neyshabour.

UPDATE: Spook86 responds with this illuminating post in comments:

Follow the main rail line heading east out of Tehran. Beyond the city, there isn't much, but the Iranians spent billions on that line that appears to go nowhere; certainly the number of passengers from Mashhad couldn't justify that level of investment; neither could potential trade with Afghanistan. A number of analysts in the intel community have long believed that this region is home to at least one major nuclear site, and possibly others as well. The location is remote; facilities could be more easily concealed, and it creates more targeting problems for potential adversaries, namely Israel.

On the other hand, any sites in eastern Iran are just a short hop from our bases in Afghanistan--something the Iranians never really counted on.

Iran

Vision and Memory

The second day of Passover is my mother's yahrzeit, and I observed it by lighting a candle in her memory and taking a few moments to think about her role in my life. I thought about her again today as I was rummaging through old books, many of which I inherited from my parents. And I want to say a few words about how my parents' legacy had shaped my views on the world today.

Mom was born on the eve of the stock market crash in small-town Maine. She was raised by a domineering and very conservative mother, who - she believed - favored her older brother (a grudge my mother would bear against my uncle until very late in her life). She must have seen the horrific newsreels from World War II, with their scenes of the German death camps, just as she was entering adulthood, and I believe it influenced her deeply. Looking back on those years, she would wonder bitterly why somebody didn't "do something".

My mother was a staunch liberal, but no friend of communism. She objected strenuously to what she saw as attempts to impose Christian practices in the schoolroom, but she didn't care for Madalyn Murray O'Hair, whom she considered an intolerant extremist. Mom wasn't against religion - she placed a high value on the individual's right to his or her own belifs. I think she would have appreciated Wafa Sultan's words: "You can believe in stones, just don't throw them at me." And she loved the Russian writers - Tolstoy, Chekhov, Dostoevsky, Pushkin - but never confused Russian culture with the brutal Soviet regime. One of her greatest heroes, and a name I heard often in our home, was a Soviet dissident who then went by his Russian name - Anatoly Shcharansky.

Mom was an idealist, but enough of a cynic to know how easily, and how badly, good intentions can go wrong. (My father, on the other hand, was mild-mannered and a bit more utopian in his outlook. He had a congenital allergy to anything that smacked of elitism, recognizable even in his days as a young soldier: even at the remove of many years, he resented his eviction from the officers' recreation area. That's my Dad. I don't believe he was ever pro-Communist, but I think he had a sneaking admiration for socialism - or at least, for socialists like Bernie Sanders.)

I remember my mother well, and you might think that I had a good relationship with my parents and a happy childhood. No. Mom drank heavily and suffered from mental illness; she could be incredibly cruel to those closest to her. Even in the best of times she was usually imperious and aloof. One of the things we must do in life, as we grow older, is to sort out the things we have inherited and try to pick out the good from the bad. I believe that the clarity we are able to bring to this task largely determines the clarity with which we are able to find our way into the uncertain future.

We have to do this, not only with our families of origin but with the ideas we have inherited - religion, political ideology, and so on. Unlike many neoconservatives - David Horowitz, for example - I never went through the "road to Damascus" experience or the wholesale repudiation of an old belief system. (Well, I never went through the Communist thing either, so that probably helped.) I believe it was my mother's uncompromising commitment to her own ideals, and her healthy mistrust of any kind of missionary extremism - that has shaped my experience and my beliefs as they are now.

Thanks to Judith at Kesher Talk for prompting this post. I plan to write more about my experiences with liberalism - and with Judaism - in the near future. So stay tuned.

liberalism

The Euston Manifesto

Liberals who haven't forgotten what liberalism is all about should go read The Euston Manifesto, which boasts the likes of Norm Geras, Harry Hatchet, Shalom Lappin, Jane Ashworth, and Eve Garrard among its signatories. From the Preamble:

We are democrats and progressives. We propose here a fresh political alignment. Many of us belong to the Left, but the principles that we set out are not exclusive. We reach out, rather, beyond the socialist Left towards egalitarian liberals and others of unambiguous democratic commitment. Indeed, the reconfiguration of progressive opinion that we aim for involves drawing a line between the forces of the Left that remain true to its authentic values, and currents that have lately shown themselves rather too flexible about these values. It involves making common cause with genuine democrats, whether socialist or not.

The present initiative has its roots in and has found a constituency through the Internet, especially the "blogosphere". It is our perception, however, that this constituency is under-represented elsewhere — in much of the media and the other forums of contemporary political life.

Go read the rest at The Euston Manifesto. For those pressed for time, Soldier's Dad makes it short and sweet.

The left and right should be arguing about the size of shape of social safety nets, which services are best provided by government or private industry, formulas for taxation etc.

We shouldn't being arguing over the benefits of genocidal dictators. We can argue about the best way to get rid of genocidal dictators.

liberalism
Euston Manifesto