Sic Semper Tyrannis 2008

John Hagee, McCain and Catholic voters

You have to wonder what John McCain thinks he is "playing at."  He accepted a public endorsement from a man who wrote that the Catholic Church Is an "apostate church," this, evidently on the basis of the learning acquired at various bible "cow colleges." Since the endorsement McCain has done nothing real in the way of repudiating this man.

There are still a lot of Papists in this country and even those who no longer are observant are likely to resent this calumny and McCain's willing association with it.

Now, there are not many Catholics as openly critical as I of the hierarchy for their self obsession and tolerance of child molesters but enough is too much in this case.

I have seen simple priests walk impassively through beaten zones in the Holy Land where tank guns, TOW missiles and small arms expressed the fury of nationalist madness.  They were there to do their duty to deliver monetary aid to Christians and Muslims alike and they feared not.  People had been literally "shot out" of their homes and Christian charity demanded a response.  The response was given.

Has John Hagee ever done anything to express his "ministry" other than to solicit money on television?  pl

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hagee

Turkey, Hadith and the Gate of Ijtihad

"According to Fadi Hakura, an expert on Turkey from Chatham House in London, Turkey is doing nothing less than recreating Islam - changing it from a religion whose rules must be obeyed, to one designed to serve the needs of people in a modern secular democracy. He says that to achieve it, the state is fashioning a new Islam. "This is kind of akin to the Christian Reformation," he says. "Not exactly the same, but if you think, it's changing the theological foundations of [the] religion. " Fadi Hakura believes that until now secularist Turkey has been intent on creating a new politics for Islam. Now, he says, "they are trying to fashion a new Islam." Significantly, the "Ankara School" of theologians working on the new Hadith have been using Western critical techniques and philosophy. They have also taken an even bolder step - rejecting a long-established rule of Muslim scholars that later (and often more conservative) texts override earlier ones. "You have to see them as a whole," says Fadi Hakura. "You can't say, for example, that the verses of violence override the verses of peace. This is used a lot in the Middle East, this kind of ideology. "I cannot impress enough how fundamental [this change] is." "  BBC News

-----------------------------------------------------------

Our German friend, Bernhard ,brought this to my attention.  I had not heard of this development before. This is of the greatest importance to the future of the Muslims.

The Islamicate civilization has long suffered from a rigidity that defies logical evolution in the sacred law.

This reformist activity can be seen as a restoration of the essence of a great religion, just as the Protestant Reformation and Catholic Counter-Reformation can be seen as restorations.

For the Turkish government itself to be doing this, at a time when that government is strongly influenced by religious political party strength is, in itself, a kind of miracle.

If I were a Muslim I would take that as a sign of God's will.  pl

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7264903.stm

"Muqtada and the Mahdi" Part Two by Amatzia Baram

Download muqtadah_and_the_mahdi.doc

Agitprop not done here.

Just a reminder, there will be no "Ad Hominem" attacks published here whether they are against me or someone else.  Civility rules.  If I break the rule, remind me.

Lately we have had a wave of such attacks delivered by a new group of the Harpies of the left, (seemingly a "task group" made up for Obamian defense of the "future").  These, apparently were attracted by my criticism of their "friend."  Since the Harpies of the right also dislke me, I am feeling pretty good about myself.

I particularly relished (frissons everywhere) the little catlike remarks about my; age, fossilization (interestingly I have always thought of myself as a paleoconservative libertarian so that is acceptable), "background" (code maybe)?

If I missed one of these remarks and published it let me know and I will add you to the list.  pl

Kristol on Obama

"But that clearly isn’t what she was talking about. For as she had argued in the Wisconsin speech, America’s illness goes far beyond a flawed political process: “Barack knows that at some level there’s a hole in our souls.” This was a variation of language she had used earlier on the campaign trail: “Barack Obama is the only person in this race who understands that, that before we can work on the problems, we have to fix our souls. Our souls are broken in this nation.”

But they can be repaired. Indeed, she had said a couple of weeks before, in Los Angeles: “Barack Obama ... is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed.”

So we don’t have to work to improve our souls. Our broken souls can be fixed — by our voting for Barack Obama. We don’t have to fight or sacrifice to help our country. Our uninvolved and uninformed lives can be changed — by our choosing Barack Obama. America can become a nation to be proud of — by letting ourselves be led by Barack Obama."  William Kristol in the NY Times

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here you see the essence of this Fall's Republican campaign against Obama (if he is nominated).  The argument will be made that Obama is a threat to traditional American political life.

This will be easy to do given the present rhetoric from the Obamians.  Mrs. Obama describes her husband as a "cure" rather than a candidate.  In her view, he is going to change us, permanently.  I did not know that this was a function of political leadership in this country.  Actually, I have labored under the burden of the notion that the presidency of the United States was a rather limited job, carefully limited in fact to that which the constitution allows.  Perhaps that is no longer true.  Perhaps the president is now "king for a while."  Presidents are praised or blamed for everything that happens "on their watch."  That tendency in the media and public seems indicative of an inability to deal with the notion of limited government.  That is too bad.  It may indicate that the days of real republicanism in this country are passing.

I, for one, do not wish to be "changed" by any politician.  I do not want to have the "hole in my soul" repaired.  I do not wish to be forbidden  to go on with my own petty little life in my own petty little way.

It is odd that Bill Kristol, Brooks and I are on the same side in this.  Odd, but refreshing.  I wonder how many of their opponents on the left would feel so strongly for Obama if he were on the right with these two men?

Incidentally. I don't intimidate easily, so those people who write nasty notes about this (as opposed to reasoned objection) should simply "vote with their feet."  pl

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/opinion/25kristol.html?ref=opinion

But, was the Mahdi consulted?

"On Friday, Iraqi and U.S. officials viewed the extension of the cease-fire as emblematic of Sadr's political evolution. With the passage of a law last week that calls for provincial elections, they said, Sadr believes his movement could win against Iraq's current Shiite rulers, widely viewed by Iraqis as corrupt and inefficient. Last year, Sadr's loyalists withdrew from the government to distance themselves from it.

"They can compete either through the ballot box or through militias," said a senior U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity. "The Sadrists think they could make significant advances at the ballot box as part of a backlash at the perceived failures of the government. . . . They think they made a mistake in boycotting elections in 2005."

Even some Sunni politicians, who were suspicious of Sadr's motives, appear to be embracing his efforts to steer his movement away from violence. Alaa Maaki, a Sunni legislator with the Iraqi Islamic Party, said the Sadrists are engaging more politically and now meet regularly with representatives of his party."  Washpost

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interesting fellow Sadr.  He is widely thought to be devoid of the kind of scholarly talent that would allow him to become a real Shia Alim, but his "street smarts" are hard to dispute.  He is a kind of Juan Peron or Emiliano Zapata figure to the Shia poor of Iraq.  They think of themselves as an oppressed underclass, the descamisados in the conceit I just made of Latin Robinhoodery.  He fits that nicely for them.  His father was a well thought of Ayatollah, and Muqtada is riding that reputation.  His father got on well with Sunnis.  He gave Sunni (and Shia) tribal sheikhs a lot of credit for wisdom in their administration of tribal law ('urf, 'aada and taqlid).  They remember.

Muqtada has some interesting quirks.  He consults often with the Mahdi himself.  No.  I am not joking.  That would be disrespectful.  His "army" (movement) is the Mahdi's Army.  The Shia Mahdi waits in the wings for an appropriate time to come forth and accept the command of that army.  The Shia Mahdi is the 12th Shia Imam who has been "hidden" (by his own choice) for a long, long time.  At some point he is going (according to 12er belief) to appear with Jesus to lead the struggle against vice, sin and unbelief.  When that fight is won, then the last days will be upon us and Judgment Day will arrive for all including those who have been suffering the torments of the grave. 

There is a body of correspondence between and among units of the Mahdi Army and Muqtada al-Sadr's office concerning Muqtada's consultations with the Mahdi on matters of policy.  There are frequent references to decisions taken by Muqtada on the basis of guidance given him by "the boss."  One might think that what is meant is "inspiration" by the spirit of the Mahdi, but that does not seem to be the case.  the language implies real meetings in the flesh at some secret location.

A good example involved Hashish.  Some Mahdist commanders asked if it were permissible for their men to use Hashish when fatigued, depressed, etc, from the strains of duty.  Muqtada's office replied that after consultation with the Mahdi... 

Interesting fellow,  pl

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/22/AR2008022200495_2.html?sid=ST2008022200780

"The Collective Memory of a People" Serbia This Time

"In Serb-dominated northern Kosovo, demonstrators waved Serbian flags and chanted "Kosovo is ours!" Police tried to keep protesters off the Kosovska Mitrovica bridge over the Ibar River. The bridge, which divides Kosovo Serbs from ethnic Albanians, has long been a flashpoint of tensions in Kosovo's restive north

Kosovo's ethnic Albanian leaders declared independence from Serbia on Sunday. The province, which is 90 percent ethnic Albanian, has not been under Serbia's control since 1999, when NATO launched airstrikes to halt a Serbian crackdown on ethnic Albanian separatists. A U.N. mission has governed Kosovo since.

*************************************************************************

Serbian police said one person died and more than 150 people were injured in unrest Thursday, which erupted after a state-sponsored rally. Nearly 200 people were arrested and 90 shops ransacked, police said in a statement.

On Thursday, nearly 200,000 demonstrated in downtown Belgrade against Kosovo independence. Rioters stormed the U.S. Embassy and set fire to offices and police guardhouses on the sidewalk in front of the building. The nearby Croatian embassy was also attacked, and a residential building next door was damaged by fire.

Associated Press

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr Christine Helms (oft quoted here)was right in observing that the collective memory of a people is like a storehouse of power, a tool shed in which are kept the instruments of struggle, the weaponry stored up for use in expressing group will. 

In the collective memory and mind of the Serbian people they are a besieged Christian Orthodox people beset with enemies; Muslim Bozniaks, Catholic Croats,  Albanians of all kinds.  In their minds Serbia is eternal and Kosovo IS Serbia.  Kosovo is where Serbia began.  It is the heart of their national mythos.  The issue of the numerical preponderance of the Albanian "trespasser" means nothing to the Serbs.  In much the same way, the city of San Antonio IS Texas for most Texans because the Alamo is there. 

David Habakkuk wrote here recently that the continuing failure of the "Borgian Collective" that is the Bush Administration lies in its inability to accept the limits of American power.  I agree but would add that an often wilful refusal to understand or accept the "tribal" nature of the self image of many peoples is a reinforcing failure of the "Borg."  This is clearly among the major factors in this ineptly managed and unnecesary new crisis in the Balkans.  We caused this by ignoring and deprecating what the Serbs hold most dear in their souls.  Now people will die for our arrogant meddling.

It is an open qustion whether or not the neocon jacobin Borg is uniquely unqualified to deal with questions of tribal identity and dreams or if we Americans are generally so afflicted.  Texans are, I think, better at this than most of us, but at the same time display the indifference to other tribes that is a penalty paid in compensation for the gift.  One might suggest other "minorities" in America that still understand tribal identity and values. 

In the main, most Americans have been de-racinated to such an extent that the "obscure" loyalties of far away peoples are simply incomprehensible.  As a corollary, those among us in government who do understand such things are often regarded with distrust, and are thought to be "unsound."

This is a problem .  pl

article/ALeqM5ie7MkLvjbbKQiGvfank1pUVZvYywD8UVE0UO0

Obama is for Children

David Brooks is not my favorite columnists but I think he is right "on it" with this peroration.

Obamamania is just that, "mania."  It is the historical equivalent of the economic hysteria that lead to such phenomena as the Dutch Tulip disaster or mass investment in Florida swamp land.  Huey Long promised change as well. Obama promises change.  What change?  Tell us what change and how he will accomplish it within the boundaries of law and the constitution.  His wife, a Harvard graduate, told us that for the first time in her adult life she is proud of the United States.  She says she is proud because now real change is possible.  Once again, what change?  Single payer national health care?  Mass transfer of wealth from one group to another maybe?  How?  Confiscatory taxation maybe?  Widespread award of large federal set-aside contracts maybe?  Further restriction of free speech to avoid emotional pain inflicted by "insensitive" statements or writing? 

WHAT CHANGE????

Evidently a few people are beginning to sober up long enough to think of this man's presidency as something other than a global public relations stunt.  Good for them.

Senator Barack Obama may well be the stuff of an historic president, someday.  Right now he is running as a demagogue appealing to the childishness that lurks just below the surface in American popular "culture."

He could no more run the executive branch successfully and enact a legislative program than any other slick talking novice politician.

"The Sitting Shiva Campaign."  Very good, David.  I would prefer "The Drunken Irish Wake Campaign" but I share your sentiment.  I surely do.  pl

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/19/opinion/19brooks.html?em&ex=1203742800&en=a5b44851f61bf3bc&ei=5087%0A

Reuel Gerecht, man of many faces?

"Critics of any discussions might respond that the Iranians might say yes, but to only low-level talks in Switzerland, not in Washington and Tehran. In so doing, the mullahs could bind the United States to meaningless, stalling discussions while the regime perfected uranium enrichment, increased the range and accuracy of its ballistic missiles and advanced its nuclear warhead designs.

But so what? Minus the direct talks, this is more or less what is happening now. Would a President John McCain tolerate pointless discussions? Probably not. Would Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton? Perhaps. Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton may well prefer to see the clerical regime go nuclear than strike it preventively. But if that is where they would go, their opponents can do little about it. The only thing that could conceivably change their minds would be direct talks on the big issues separating the two countries. The mullahs have a way of driving their foreign interlocutors nuts. Just ask the European negotiators who’ve had to deal with them. Meeting Iranian leaders is perhaps the best way to turn doves into hawks.

For far too long, the United States has failed to wage a war of ideas with the Iranian regime over the proposal that scares them the most: the reopening of the American Embassy. "  Reuel Gerecht

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Careful, Reuel.  The truly demented among you will begin to suspect you of MODERATION.  Those who daily await the news that Ahmedinajad has launched his legions into Iraq in a re-enactment of the Anschluss tolerate no deviationist revisionism.  This instinct for party discipline is part of their heritage.  Michael Rubin, the movement's "Igor" figure is rising again in the pages of the party press.  He will be watching you.  Rubin has revived his old tale of my feckless statement to some magazine to the effect that national level intelligence analysts do not like GWB's thinking and do not wish him and the likes of Rubin well.  Surprise! Or maybe Mufaja'a!

Seriously (more or less), Gerecht argues here for diplomatic engagmeent with the Iranians to see what the possibilities might be for a negotiated end to the "veiling" in their nuclear effort.  That makes sense to me.

As he says, a real negotiation will, at the very least, expose the mullahs's as merely tactical in their statements concerning their willingness to discuss serious issues seriously.

If the neocon Jacobins want to fight Iran, such a negotiation would be a politically necessary preliminary step.

Careful, Reuel.  They will be watching you now.

Yes.  I know.  You are not in the picture.  Maybe next time.  pl

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/20/opinion/20gerecht.html?th&emc=th

A "Devine" case of Special Pleading

"Admittedly, the CIA has suffered greatly in recent years primarily because of policy shortfalls and leadership issues. But no one should underestimate the quality of its staff, its foreign ties and its unique capabilities, which are the cornerstone of the intelligence community. These strengths remain the base for building a robust intelligence agency.

Because Congress was instrumental in setting up the DNI, there may be an inclination there to avoid the issue and the embarrassment that its poor performance could cause to those who supported its creation and who still mistakenly point to it as the reason there has not been another terrorist attack in the United States. But our ability to tackle the national security challenges of this decade is central to our survival and should trump any hesitation to confront this issue head-on, even if it means scrapping the ill-conceived notion of the DNI and its super-bureaucracy.

If Congress is reluctant to initiate the review, a broad-based private-sector initiative should be undertaken to jump-start public debate about the state of U.S. intelligence -- a debate that never took place in 2004. The key issues that unfold from this debate should be high on the new president's agenda for change."  Jack Devine

------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't believe I have ever met Devine.  My CIA friends all know him, and think well of him.  They should.  In this oped he is making a brave attempt to resuscitate a dead past, to return the CIA to its previous status as the overlord of the intelligence community.

The reforms he is unhappy with reduced the CIA to the status of primary responsibility for overseas espionage (HUMINT) on behalf of the US government.

Before the reforms, the CIA had that reponsibility and also controlled the actions and in large part the budgets of most of the other agencies of the intelligence community.

They had that control because the head of the CIA then also "wore" another "hat" as head of the community.  Unfortunately, THAT CIA used the community head role of its director to ruthlessly obstruct and hamstring the function and development of the other agencies whenever it could or wished.  THAT CIA also had primacy in the peacetime covert actions for which they were well known.  THAT CIA also controlled the National Intelligence Council where National Estimates are written.  If you don't think that was important, think of the Iraq NIE of October, 2002.

The CIA has lost all those functions to the Director of National Intelligence or to the armed forces.  So sad.  I like it this way and think the country is better served.

How do I know all this?  I will post a photo of my scars.  When Devine says "intelligence professionals" he means CIA people.  pl

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/17/AR2008021701733.html