2005-09-12

Iranian Solidarity Rally - New York, September 14

Freedom-loving Iranians and their allies will hold a rally at the United Nations on September 14, according to this item at Free Iran:
Wednesday September the 14th
In Front of the United Nations Offices
From 9 AM to 5 PM (local time)
At the Dag Hammarskjold Plaza (by the UN Building)
Located at 1st Ave and 47th East (Entry to the park and the "Iran UN Protest 2005" section must be made from 2nd Ave and 47th East.)
Contact information: 214-906-8181

A Plea for Rally Support & Demonstration Attendance from all Freedom-Loving people of the world against Terror and Torture Masters and Fanaticism who are coming to NEW YORK For 60th ANNIVERSARY Of UNITED NATIONS!

This is an invitation to join a call by all Iranian-American opposition groups, Former U.S. Hostages in Iran and freedom loving people of the world for New York and worldwide demonstrations against the Mafia Mullahs, Terrorists, Islamofascists, and Fanatics who intend to stop and kill the spread of FREEDOM, SECULARISM & DEMOCRACY around the World!

...If you are against GENOCIDE,
If you are against TERRORISM,
If you are against FANATICS,
If you are against the MAFIA MULLAHS,
If you are against ISLAMOFASCISTS,
If you are against ALL HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS,
If you are against UNITED NATIONS poor performance on human rights and Free Societies.
If you are against UNITED NATIONS accepting many of 191 governments as official members of UN that are not respecting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which they have signed as member of UN.

If you are against current UN leadership which is hosting a Former hostage taker and terrorists

If your family has been victimized by any act of terrorism (Sept 11th Terror Attacks, Terrorism in Europe, Middle East, Asia and throughout the world), please bring a picture of your loved one/s to the demonstration.

If your family has been victimized by the Islamist Mafia Regime in Iran or is a family member of one of the over 120,000 freedom-loving political prisoners, torture victims, or Iranians who have been executed in the past 26 years, please bring a picture of your loved one/s to the demonstration.

If you oppose all terrorism and acts of violence against those who wish to live in freedom, then your support and unity with the Iranian people should not be based on whether you are a democrat, republican, libertarian, conservative, independent, green, left, right, or center, but should be based only on your belief that the destiny of the human race is freedom and the unending pursuit of our wishes and our dreams.

Read the full post at the link.

Corrupt of the Earth

Miriam, the lesbian, had been branded "corrupt of the earth" by religious police in her homeland. I ran video footage smuggled from Iran to prove what would have happened to her if she'd stayed and been arrested. The tape showed two women, bundled alive in white sheets, being lowered into freshly dug pits. A mob of men and boys gathered around them and began to hurl fist-sized stones at their heads. Most hit the mark and bounced off to reveal crimson spurting from the material. Miriam explained that, by law, every rock-hurler was supposed to tuck a Koran under his arm to restrain the force fo the blow. That decree didn't always stick. Still fearing for her life, Miriam told her story in silhoutette. - The Trouble with Islam Today

2005-09-11

"I told them not to talk about their dreams."

He told me a year ago: "I saw in a dream, we were playing a soccer game against the Americans. When our team showed up in the field, they were all pilots!" ...

We were at a camp of one of the brother's guards in Qandahar. This brother belonged to the majority of the group. He came close and told me that he saw, in a dream, a tall building in America, and in the same dream he saw Mukhtar teaching them how to play karate. At that point, I was worried that maybe the secret would be revealed if everyone starts seeing it in their dream. So I closed the subject. I told him if he sees another dream, not to tell anybody ...

- Osama bin Laden


When someone tells you not to talk about your dreams, do not listen.

Each of us bears inside a spark of the Divinity. We each carry a small piece of our Creator's vision for us. When we listen to this inner voice and find the courage to share it with others, and when we find the courage to listen to other people's visions without prejudice, we begin to weave the great web of humanity's collective dream. Those who would shut down this process are the ones who would kill our right to dream. They are the enemies of humanity.

On one occasion, only days before the Shah left Iran, Khomeini's minions made the shocking statement that Khomeini's image was on the moon. We all gathered on the roof. I was a child, uninfluenced by the hysteria of politics, and kept asking, Where is the image? Adults from all walks of life gazed at the moon's pockmarked face and everyone started saying, "Yes, there he is. He is on the moon, can you see him?" pointing at the same pimples on the moon's face that have been there for over four billion years. Some even shed tears of joy and bowed and prayed, declaring that God himself sent Khomeini and that is why his image appeared on the moon. - "Living in Hell" by Ghazal Omid

Here is what happens when people allow themselves to be brainwashed by political elites or by the mass media. In extreme cases they can be persuaded to commit atrocities against others, believing that they will gain Paradise as a reward. As Ghazal Omid says in the Introduction, "These brainwashed individuals have been promised Utopia, not recognizing that it was the face of Satan who appeared to them, not promises from the Angel Gabriel."

In the summer of 1963, an American pro-democracy leader named Martin Luther King addressed a quarter of a million freedom activists in the nation's capital. A hundred years earlier, America's bloodiest war had broken the back of the slave regime, but equality under the law still eluded African Americans. He called on activists to demand payment on an old promissory note, and to reject "the tranquilizing drug of gradualism." He warned against bitterness, hatred, and despair. In his famous peroration, he declared: "I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream." Creatively interweaving the language of the Biblical prophets with his own message, he spelled out a vision of a world where the dream of freedom and justice would be fulfilled. No one can say that Dr. King's dream has yet been fully realized in America. But to deny the great strides that have been made since then would be to deny the achievements of brave activists like Dr. King and his followers.

You, too, have a dream. It is uniquely yours, buried within the depths of your soul. And while your dream is unique, you have the chance to share it with other people and to learn of their dreams. This is the kind of dreaming that leads to a world where people speak and listen to one another with respect and without fear.

When I was in my mid-teens, my mother gave me some books on Jewish spirituality and mysticism - called the Kabbalah in Hebrew - which would become an important step in my own spiritual journey. Here, Rabbi Lawrence Kushner draws a parallel between understanding sacred Scripture and understanding a dream:

1. Begin with that most difficult and subtle question of all ... what is the underlying emotional dynamic of the story?
2. Recall our own recent, immediate experiences. Since dreams are often initiated by something that happened only recently, we must ask about yesterday's residue.
3. Isolate and identify the primary elements of the dream text before us. What are the dream's components?
4. Pay especially close attention to the seemingly trivial details and the little discrepancies.
5. We must not allow embarrassment to distract attention from elements that make us uncomfortable.
6. If this Scripture dream is actually ours, then our associations are also relevant. Often, they will be of only personal validity, but at other times they will open new dimensions of understanding as compelling as those of commentators of old.
7. Assume full responsibility for the dream. For "through the dream the man makes the matter his own; it is in his will, and he is responsible for it." [Johannes Pedersen, Israel.] ... We are responsible for the evil impulses of our dreams.
8. The dream can condense opposites into one truth.
9. The many selves, who together comprise the one self, are separate. ... We must therefore be all the parts of our dream.
10. Through the dream/Scripture we slip back to our origins. Through that infinity of meanings we return to the undifferentiated ness of all existence. ... This is the great dream of which each individual dream is a personal manifestation.
- excerpted from "The River of Light" by Lawrence Kushner

What I like about this approach is that it calls on us to take our visions seriously - and responsibly. It asks us to be true to our individual visions, but also to seek common ground with the visions of others. It recognizes that absolute truth belongs to the Creator alone, but that the search for truth belongs to all of us together. Muslim activist Irshad Manji draws the following lessons from her Islamic studies:

After so much exploring, my personal interpretation of the Koran leads me to three recurring messages. First, only God knows fully the truth of anything. Second, God alone can punish unbelievers, which makes sense given that only God knows what true unbelief is. (And considering the Koran's mountain range of moods, it really would take the Almighty to know how it all hangs together.) Human beings must warn against corrupt practices, but that's all we can do to encourage piety. Third, our resulting humility sets us free to ponder God's will - without any obligation to toe a dictated line. "Let there be no compulsion in religion," states a voice in Chapter 2 of the Koran. "Unto you your religion, unto me my religion," echoes another voice in Chapter 109. In between, there's this: "If God had pleased, He would have made you all one people. But He has done otherwise..." Ain't that the truth.
- "The Trouble with Islam Today" by Irshad Manji

The war that was declared on America on September 11, 2001, was a war against dreams. It was a war of brainwashing against inquiry, tyranny against democracy, enslavement against freedom. We won't win this war by force of arms alone. Our most important weapons are the weapons of the spirit - the "soul force" that Dr. King spoke of. Physical tools like the internet are of great value, especially when we use them to reclaim control of our minds and engage in open discussion with one another - here we are wresting our right to dream back away from the propaganda masters who would kill it. But most importatnt, we must reach out to one another in real life. We will win the war against fascism by speaking our dreams to one another face-to-face, and by finding common ground with the dreams of our neighbors. We must find the courage and the humility to go onward, remembering that we ourselves are but the dream of God.

2005-09-07

Gender and Friendships

Oh, the horror. What is a parent to do when a boy's friends are girls?
Q: Our high school son’s friends seem to be overwhelmingly female.

We think he's still too young to be spending so much time with the young ladies. In his young teen years we would prefer him to be playing ball with guys his age.

Is there anything unusual about this?

Notice the easy segue from what "we would prefer" to the question of what is "unusual".

MSNBC Today's parenting guru, Dr. Ruth Peters, hedges.
A: The response depends upon how your child fits in with other kids his age, especially at school.

Many teenage boys that I’ve worked with maintain “special friendships” with girls, mainly because they feel that females tend to be better listeners than guys. Your son may be more comfortable talking on the phone with girls as well as engaging in social activities, rather than playing ball or hanging out with guys his age.

There's nothing wrong with this, especially if the young ladies are appropriate, good and loyal friends. The question, though, is one of balance.

Ah, so it's "balance" that matters. Should we set a goal, then? If "balance" is what we're after, perhaps a 50/50 gender ratio would be optimal. So, Dr. Ruth Peters, are you now ready to tell every mother in America that fifty percent of her son's buddies should be girls? Didn't think so. It's only when the boy's friends are the "wrong" gender that balance is an issue, isn't it?
If your child focuses his friendships totally upon females because he feels that he cannot make and keep friendships with guys, there may be a problem.

So now we're going to start looking for all the reasons having female friends might be a problem.
Perhaps he is not athletic and feels self-conscious hanging around with boys. Or, an embarrassing event earlier in life may have shaken his self-confidence and he fears that he will be rejected if he tries to socialize with them.

Did the writer mention any of these things? I missed it. But that doesn't stop Ruth Peters from trying to pathologize the boy's friendships with girls, just as the reactionary "experts" of a generation ago came up with all kinds of theories about the "cause" of homosexuality (domineering mother, absent father, blah blah blah). Some of them are still at it.
In my experience, I find that most teens realize that a mix of both male and female friends works best and they tend to move within mixed groups of boys and girls.

Here's the one statement in Peters' column that I can unequivocally agree with. Everyone should, I think, strive to maintain an inclusive circle of friends. It's especially important to learn to deal socially with people of both genders, and this is an essential skill in a gender-integrated society such as ours. Anyone growing up in the Western world will likely have both female and male co-workers, male and female social acquaintances, female and male mentors, and so on. More broadly, it's good to get to know people from a wide range of gender, social, geographical, ethnic, political, religious, and economic backgrounds. Human beings are diverse, and when we enrich our social circle we enrich ourselves. And young adulthood isn't a bad place to begin - I said begin - this process.

But that isn't really the issue for Ruth Peters and the concerned mom.
Try talking with your son in order to understand his motivation as to why his friends all seem to be girls. If he is lacking in self-confidence when dealing with guys, help him to understand the basis of this problem and to put it in proper perspective. If he was teased years ago for lack of athletic ability, that may not be as important now as a teenager. In addition, he may have developed a new interest or skill that would now enhance his importance in a group of guys but he hasn't yet realized that he can use this new skill to develop male friendships.

Pathologizing again. How about this novel concept: "Try talking to you son ... and then JUST LISTEN." That's right, just listen without projecting your own phobias on the kid.
Another type of situation in which I see boys maintaining most friendships with girls is, of course, that they are very attracted to the opposite sex. Although having a girlfriend as a teenager can be exciting and a ticket to popularity, your son needs to learn how to set limits upon this behavior. Not only am I suggesting setting sexual limits, but also acknowledging that having a girlfriend tends to be a distracting, time-consuming affair which can take precedence over completing chores and studying.

Balance, again, is key — he needs to learn that other things in life are of equal importance as having a bunch of girls to hang around with.

Let's read that last sentence again (and we'll try to ignore the atrocious grammar):
... he needs to learn that other things in life are of equal importance as having a bunch of girls to hang around with.

Here, Dr. Peters has finally answered the question: Yes, there IS a problem, because the boy's friendships are a sign that there is something "he needs to learn". Once again, she is zealous in finding all the things that might be "wrong" with this poor boy's life.
In addition, he may find that guys cease to be friends with him if he focuses most of his time on the ladies. When his relationships break up, your son’s guy friends may not be there to buoy his spirits or to help him recover from his lost love. It may be a good idea to bring these issues to his attention now so he can begin to regain some balance in his life.

... "Balance" that, in the estimable Dr. Peters' judgment, he clearly lacks. But wait! There's one more possibility.
A third reason why some teenage boys tend to surround themselves with girls as friends is that they are questioning their sexual identity. Be cautious about jumping to this conclusion, as your child may be comfortable with a heterosexual lifestyle. However, some teen boys find that they are much more comfortable with girls their age — they may be able to relate better conversationally, and they are not distracted or threatened by sexual feelings if their friends were boys. If this is the case, I hope that your son can begin to discuss his sexual identity conflicts with you, and I do hope that you are supportive of his feelings. He may be convinced that he is gay, or perhaps confused due to feelings of attraction that he’s had toward members of the same sex. If he desires, counseling may help him to clarify his feelings, to see that he is accepted by his family regardless of sexual orientation and to be able to keep this aspect of his personality in balance with responsibilities found at home and at school.

If there's an award among advice columnists for "breaking the bad news slowly", Dr. Peters ought to get it for this paragraph. Credit where due, she senses that her correspondent might just be, well, a teeensy bit uptight about the boy's sexual identity. So to avoid scaring the poor woman, she bends over backwards to avoid saying, "Y'know, hon, your son might be gay." But she does ask the mother, ever so gently, to be "supportive of his feelings." Good.

The fourth possibility, which Dr. Peters overlooks, is that the young person may be transgendered or differently gendered. He may identify with girls more than with boys; he may enjoy female friendships because he feels he has more in common with girls than with boys, or because their companionship, friendship, and respect are the things he values. In short, he may be physically male but psychologically female. That is, transgender or transsexual. But that's an eventuality that even the ever-so-broad-minded Ruth Peters is unwilling to confront.

Whether or not this is the case, he will not be helped by adults' contemptuous attitudes toward "having a bunch of girls to hang around with." Whether these two women recognize it or not, the boy's ability to form platonic friendships with girls is a wonderful thing. He will be less likely to engage in sexist or predatory behavior against women, because he will think of women as friends rather than sex objects. But if he's condemned for "hanging out with a bunch of girls", he will scarcely be learning respect for women.

Why is it still so easy for people in our culture - even educated, intelligent women like Dr. Peters - to devalue the role of females and female friendships? Are girls simply worth less than boys? Or is it a fear of transgressing socially assigned gender constraints? Sadly, sexist attitudes may be internalized by women, just as (for example) gays may internalize homophobia, or Jews anti-Semitism. And it's also true that much of the older generation is still carrying, subconsciously, centuries-long prejudices against people who do not conform to their socially assigned gender.

Social conservatives are not wrong when they recognize that, for most of the population, traditional gender roles are reasonably comfortable and meaningful. No one should expect women to stop being women or men to stop being men. In fact, the early feminist movement bears the blame for denying the existence of innate gender identity altogether, and thus muddying the debate for a whole generation. Nor do I dispute for a moment that there also exists such a thing as "misandry", or reverse sexism, among both men and women who have been overdosed on a certain kind of feminist dogma. The existence of one kind of prejudice does not negate or cancel the other. It is certainly true that "women and men are different"; it is also true that people are different, each one of us a unique individual.

Self-acceptance is the first step toward personal responsibility. When I can say, "I am not you, I am different from you", then I can acknowledge that you and I do not have to be identical to be worthy of one another's respect. I often hear today's "liberals" say things like, "I know you're Jewish/gay/black/evangelical/whatever, but it doesn't matter to me." This is the most illiberal thing we can possibly say - it's saying "I have to overlook an essential part of your identity for you to be OK". It's denying that we can embrace diversity as a positive thing.

When we acknowledge all of who we are, we acknowledge all of our potential for good and evil. If we are gay, we reject the idea that our love is a "disease" and embrace the responsibility of a committed relationship with another person. If we are differently gendered, we welcome the gift of seeing across the void between "Venus" and "Mars", and we reject sexism in all its forms.

I've been quoting Dr. Peters' column in full because I want you to know that I am not "cherry-picking" her words to support a particular viewpoint. You should also know that I don't mean to single out one columnist; I have no doubt that Dr. Peters is a fine, compassionate person and highly competent in her field. The attitudes I've criticized are widely shared and socially respectable among educated, "liberal" people. It is part of the broader problem of a liberal establishment so self-satisfied that it is blind to its own prejudices. (And conversely, some of the most open-minded people I've known have been housewives, combat soldiers, conservative bloggers, recovering addicts, and Orthodox rabbis.)

Here is
Dr. Peters’ Bottom Line: If your son is like many teens, he may meet your concerns with eye-rolling, a heavy sigh and an attitude that suggests that you're just not in tune with today’s kids. By asking him questions, getting to know his friends and staying open to all possibilities, perhaps he’ll feel more comfortable in expressing his concerns or helping you to understand what it’s like walking in his shoes. Be patient, supportive and available so that he’ll begin to open up to you and perhaps heed some of your advice.

And here's my bottom line: The kid's OK. Period. If his biggest problem is having mostly female friends, you should consider yourself the envy of a great many mothers of teenagers. He may have special challenges: If girls in his age group relate to him as a friend or "girl friend", then they may not see him as "dating material". Many straight women are not romantically attracted to men who are feminine, effeminate, or otherwise strongly female-identified - and we shouldn't expect them to be. But people are not all alike. (Of course, if he is gay, then none of this is a problem!) And then again, he may just be a regular straight guy who gets along well with girls, end of story. If your son can learn to interact socially with people of all genders, if he can respect himself and behave responsibly and compassionately toward others, if he can earn his place in the world and form a committed intimate relationship with another person - you should not ask for more than that. G-d created humankind, male and female, in the Divine image.

2005-09-06

Two of the best conservative bloggers on the internet ...

... are in rare form. Sherri Reese has a cool new spot called Bring Your Brain. (Update your browser!) She has a terrific post on individual responsibility. And don't miss LaShawn Barber. You'll have to wait for her post on Katrina, but you can catch her piece on non-citizens and the law now. Go check it out.

Moussa Arafat Killed

Moussa Arafat, nephew of the late Palestinian strongman Yasser Arafat, was killed today by Palestinian gunmen. Arafat was a chief rival of Palestinian Authority leader Abu Mazen. Debka reports:
Before dawn Wednesday, Sept 7, dozens of armed Palestinians burst into the home of the former chief of Palestinian military intelligence, nephew of the late Yasser Arafat and one of Abu Mazen’s main opponents. They killed him after a gun battle with his bodyguards.

According to some reports the gang abducted his son. The assassination of one of Gaza’s strongmen marks the onset of the Gaza Strip's armed contest for power between the Palestinian Authority, Hamas and the Popular Committees, which were part of Arafat’s power base. Reprisals are expected.

Stay tuned here for more as this develops.

"I had never even heard of him until a couple of days ago ...

...and I don’t ever want to hear about him again." So says Michael Totten of FEMA's head idiot in charge, Michael Brown; and so should you. Michael Brown needs to be fired. Just in case there's any doubt in your mind, go read MJT's post.

UPDATE: Mythusmage opines that "termination doesn't go far enough" - FEMA should be abolished. And that's just the beginning. Read the post.

Yahoo! Collaborates with Chinese Communist Fascism

Yahoo turned a Chinese dissident in to the Beijing regime's thugs, according to an RSF item posted at Roger L. Simon and Instapundit.

Roger quotes Reporters Without Borders:
The text of the verdict in the case of journalist Shi Tao - sentenced in April to 10 years in prison for "divulging state secrets abroad" - shows that Yahoo ! Holdings (Hong Kong) Ltd. provided China's state security authorities with details that helped to identify and convict him, Reporters Without Borders said today.

"We already knew that Yahoo ! collaborates enthusiastically with the Chinese regime in questions of censorship, and now we know it is a Chinese police informant as well," the press freedom organisation said.

"Yahoo ! obviously complied with requests from the Chinese authorities to furnish information regarding an IP address that linked Shi Tao to materials posted online, and the company will yet again simply state that they just conform to the laws of the countries in which they operate," the organisation said. "But does the fact that this corporation operates under Chinese law free it from all ethical considerations ? How far will it go to please Beijing ?"

Reporters Without Borders added : "Information supplied by Yahoo ! led to the conviction of a good journalist who has paid dearly for trying to get the news out. It is one thing to turn a blind eye to the Chinese government's abuses and it is quite another thing to collaborate." ...

Read the whole thing at the link. Bloggers, remember: Do not expect the corporate interests to protect you from the oppressors.

Oh, and just for a morbid laugh, here is Yahoo!'s "core value" on Customer Focus:
Customer Fixation:
We respect our customers above all else and never forget that they come to us by choice. We share a personal responsibility to maintain our customers' loyalty and trust. We listen and respond to our customers and seek to exceed their expectations.

Yeah.

Iran Report

Russia rejects reporting Iran to Security Council. Financial Times reports:
Russia on Monday ruled out an early decision to report the Iran nuclear controversy to the United Nations Security Council, undermining US and European efforts to build international consensus for a diplomatic reprimand this month.

A senior Kremlin official said Iran had not violated the rules of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Its nuclear programme, he said, should continue to be dealt with at the governing board of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN’s nuclear watchdog, without involving the Security Council.

Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, adopted a more cautious approach in a meeting with foreign journalists and academics. He did not exclude a future referral to New York, though not at this point, and said it would have be done “in a very precise form”. ...


Man hanged in connection with killing of security forces. Quoting Iran Focus, Free Iran reports:
Tehran, Iran, Sep. 04 – An Iranian man was hanged in the town of Iranshahr, in Iran’s south-eastern Baluchistan Province, a semi-official daily reported on Sunday.

The man, identified as Houshang Bameri, was hanged at 9 am Saturday morning, the hard-line Jomhouri Islami wrote. He was accused of killing two para-military security agents.

Baluchistan Province, home to Iran’s minority Baluchis, has witnessed a string of clashes between government troops and insurgents in recent months. Baluchis, unlike Iran’s Shiite clerical rulers, adhere to the Sunni branch of Islam.


The regime's strategy. Mohammed at Iraq the Model offers this analysis of the Iranian regime's game plan:
Why is Iran choosing to defy the world with all the present dangers of a military reaction if Iran kept pushing things to the edge?

Does Iran want to develop nuclear power for peaceful utilization?

If that was the case then the European offer is very reasonable and I find it generous and it cannot be claimed (without raising suspicions) that this offer doesn't meet the needs for a peaceful program. Not only that, it even guarantees better support than if Iran depended on its own capabilities as Europe will be contributing with her nuclear expertise…but Iran refused the offer.

Does Iran want to get nuclear weapons?
Why not? The nuclear military power's been the ultimate dream the leaders of the region who want to protect their regimes from any possible plans of change and to have the ability to attack their enemies.

But Iran realizes the idea that there are many countries out there that are going to stop her from possessing nukes and once some countries feel that Iran is too close to getting the weapons, they will no doubt take the move and destroy the infrastructure of the nuclear program and Israel is a strong candidate for conducting the mission here. It's fundamental that a strike with conventional, high precision weapons that are available for many countries is enough to destroy the Iranian dream without the least defensive response from Iran who lacks the practical ability of defending the nuclear facilities.

So both of the above theories put Iran before an irrational choice as the current escalation doesn't indicate peaceful Iranian intentions and at the same time in contradicts Iran's defensive abilities…so why escalate?

I think that Iran is seeking a limited confrontation and Iran is calculating the possible gains and losses well in this confrontation and the results expected by the regime there are:

1-Having the Iranian nuclear facilities destroyed.
2-Preparing the country for a take over by the extremists; in the way despotic regimes make their calculations, the resultant is positive.

Iran thinks that this is not the appropriate time for the super powers to invade and change the regime in Tehran since the situation in Iraq doesn't encourage making such a move.

And if Iran waited until the situation resolves in Iraq before taking critical steps like resuming the nuclear program then that escalation will impose greater threats on the regime itself not only the nuclear facilities while an escalation at the moment will result in limited reaction from the world limited to as much as destroying the facilities only while giving the regime the chance to halt any remaining sign of the struggling weak democracy in Iran; the nuclear facilities will serve just like the 'Mill' in Orwell's "Animal Farm".

This scenario is not far from what we’ve seen in Iraq; Saddam challenged the world after facing growing internal crises which made him export his problems to Kuwait.
He was seeking a confrontation with the whole world in an incomprehensible way that looked literally like suicide but Saddam like any other tyrant knew the results; losing Kuwait but gaining the "legitimate" right to silent any voice of internal opposition since the country is under external threats making any opposition look like treason. And that stage will be the worst timing for starting an opposition movement while the government is calling for "national unity" to face the foreign threats.

Iran will push for a confrontation and whatever is proposed will not be viewed as convincing to Iran which will put [before the world two] ways to choose from, either a limited confrontation that prolongs the lifetime of the regime and grants it more power on the inside OR success in possessing the nuclear weapons before the world makes the practical measures to stop Iran and Tehran is not willing to take a third option.

Doctor Zin at Regime Change Iran agrees: 'An important analysis. It is consisent with my theory that the Bush administration is pursuing a third way, convincing the international community to support read democracy in Iran, i.e. internal regime change.'

BUY THE BOOK "LIVING IN HELL" BY GHAZAL OMID - the story of an Iranian woman's struggle against oppression.

From Around the Blogosphere

Alison Bechdel is a talented cartoonist and blogger. Go check out her current posts for her views on Katrina and the aftermath. (And Alison, please accept my humble apologies for my meltdown in your comments the other day. My rhetoric was way over the line.)

Already mentioned, MJ at Friday Fishwrap is doing her part as a volunteer. Grace Davis posts on her friend Badgerbag who is also volunteering.

Beth Mauldin is volunteering too.

Judith at Kesher Talk has a post on Federal, State, and Local Spheres ... and a donor who somehow got overlooked.

Michelle Malkin quotes more Republican attacks on FEMA stupidity.

One Fine Jay has a list of RINO sightings, including Dean's list of a few politicians who should be held accountable.

2005-09-05

Portland Coffee House, Trinity

I'm liveblogging from Portland Coffee House on Trinity Place. It's independently owned and easily the best coffee shop in the neighborhood. It used to be part of the Portland Coffee House chain of about four or five locations, but the owner decided he was getting out of the business and spun off the various outlets. PCH Trinity was bought by a very nice young couple who are expecting their second child any day now.

The owners and baristas (yes, the place really merits that highfaluten term) are dedicated and knowledgeable. The shop always has a crowd of fun young people (and a few old farts like me). And the coffee is absolutely first-rate!

PCH Trinity is currently open from 6:30am to 2:30am (yes, you read that right) every day. They're planning to go 24/7 soon, which is a very big deal in Portland because there aren't many 24-hour shops in town. The decor is uber-cool and there's always good music playing in the background. And don't miss the local art on display.

So if you live here, or if you're visiting town and you want to experience a bit of Northwestern decadence, check out PCH Trinity. It's located at 1951 West Burnside, at the corner of Trinity Place. (That's the street that runs between NW 19th and NW 20th Avenues. I call it Avenue Nineteen and a Half.) It's across from Panda Express and next door to Tony's Tavern. (There's a gay bar just up the block, too, if you're so inclined.) * The phone number is 503-248-2133. *

And yes, PCH Trinity has wi-fi. Stop by for a cup of coffee or a bite to eat. Say hi to Brian, the manager, and all the nice folks there. Mention Dreams Into Lightning if you want. Oh, and if you see a mysterious figure in a ponytail and a black beret, it might just be me.

CORRECTION: Please disregard the phone number which previously appeared in this post. It is incorrect and belongs to a private residence. THE CORRECT NUMBER IS 503-248-2133.

Tears

Dr. Laua's Worst Nightmare defends politicians' right to be emotional every now and then. I absolutely agree. Our leaders are as human as we are, and whatever their strengths or weaknesses may be, for heaven's sake let's not deny them this most basic gifr of humanity. I have said this before in connection with President Bush and I'll say it again here - and I'll add that this proves that (contrary to what I suggested before) insensitivity isn't confined to one part of the political spectrum. Judge leaders by their actions - not their feelings.