A Level Gaze |
|
"What effect must it have on a nation if it learns no foreign languages? Probably much the same as that which a total withdrawal from society has upon an individual." --G.C. Lichtenberg LinksNew Email Address! levelgaze@gmail.com Blogs NoWarBlog The Lefty Directory The Agonist aintnobaddude alicublog Alas, a Blog Altercation Ambivalent Imbroglio AmericaBlog American Street Amygdala Anger Management Angry Bear Armed Liberal Bad Attitudes Barney Gumble Bartcop Beyond Corporate Billmon Blah3 Body and Soul Booman Tribune Brad DeLong Busy Busy Busy Buzzflash By Neddie Jingo Calculated Risk CalPundit Chase me ladies Chris Nelson Contested Terrrain Cooped Up Conceptual Guerilla corrente Counterspin Crooked Timber Daily Howler Daily Kos Decembrist Demosthenes Driftglass D-Squared Digest Electrolite Eschaton Ethel Ezra Klein Fafblog! Fanatical Apathy Firedoglake First Draft Fistful of Euros get donkey! Globblog The Hamster Here's What's Left Horowitz Watch Housing Bubble Hullabaloo Intl News Istanblog James Wolcott Jesus' General Juan Cole Junius Lean Left Left Coast Breakdown Letter from Gotham Liberal Oasis MacDiva MadKane Mahablog Majikthise Making Light Marginal Revolution Mark Kleiman Matthew Yglesias MaxSpeak Media Whores Online Michael Finley Michael Froomkin MyDD My Left Wing Nathan Newman Off the Kuff Oliver Willis Orcinus Pandagon Pen-Elayne Pfaffenblog PLA The Poor Man R.B. Ham Raed in the Middle Ragout Raw Story ReachM High Cowboy Rittenhouse Review The Road to Surfdom Roger Ailes Rude Pundit Ruminate This Seeing the Forest Seize the Fish Self Made Pundit Sideshow Sirotablog Sisyphus Shrugged Skippy Slacktivist South Knox Bubba Steve Gilliard Talking Points Memo Talk Left The Talking Dog Tapped TBogg Ted Barlow Testify! Thinking It Through Through the Looking Glass TNR Online Tres Producers TRR Two Tears in a Bucket uggabugga Unknown News Vaara Wampum War Liberal Winning Argument Wonkette WTF Is It Now General Interest BBC News The Economist Metafilter RealPolitik Robot Wisdom Archives |
Tuesday, May 25, 2004
Just a stupid observation Is it typical, even among Arabs, for smugglers to hire musicians and bring their women (one in a western-styple wedding dress) and children to the middle of nowhere for a three-day party? Smugglers live their lives on the run. Their income and survival depend on their ability to evade detection. Smugglers have to be some of the most paranoid people on the planet. But we're to believe that a bunch of smugglers did not only all of the above, but fired their guns into the air in a war zone in which the enemy has uncontested air superiority and incredible satellite surveillance technology. It doesn't even pass the sepulchral-rattle test. Besides, the moral status of an Iraqi smuggler is, at worst, ambiguous. While Saddam was in power, the smuggler was transgressing against the law of an illegitimate, brutal tyrant. The Americans have yet to provide a functional government, to say nothing of a coherent set of laws, so smuggling is meaningless both morally and legally. In a country where the occupying authority funnels billions of dollars to Halliburton, and the country is hopelessly disrupted, smuggling might even be a positive good. A man can feed his family, and people are able to get the goods they want at prices they can afford. Sounds like an economist's wet dream. Thursday, May 20, 2004
Chalabi Raid a Fraud I'm going out on a limb and calling it now. They had him, but they didn't arrest him. Hmm...red flag, red flag...oh, here: A spokesman for the American occupation authorities said today that the Coalition Provisional Authority and its top official, L. Paul Bremer III, were not involved in the raids, and he referred all questions to the Iraqi police, which, the spokesman said, had planned and conducted the operations. There is absolutely no way the Iraqi "police" would move against Chalabi without explicit orders from the U.S. Supposedly, Chalabi has had the full run of Saddam's intelligence files. I'm sure he's covered his ass in triplicate. Any real examination of his doings would expose an awful lot of things that the Bush administration never wants to see the light of day. Never going to happen. This can only mean that they're going after Sadr sooner rather than later. His removal will create a huge power vaccuum among Iraqi Shi'ites. If enough Iraqis are convinced by this ruse, Chalabi will be in a position to emerge as a leader among the Shi'a, or so the thinking goes. I'll believe it when I see it. My guess is that Sistani nips this one definitively in the bud. Edit: Dumb title mistake fixed. Monday, May 17, 2004
The Charming Americans Just stop it. At the Camp War Horse detention centre in Baguba, north of Baghdad, it is a surreal scene: US soldiers handing out cash to freed prisoners along with a note saying "You have not been mistreated." Are the Iraqis this stupid? Are we this stupid to interpret this as remotely appropriate? One of the biggest industries in America is to punitively sue one's fellow citizens for real or perceived infliction of pain. Played just right, a twisted wrist could make a man a millionaire. For Iraqis who were tortured, on the other hand, a few bucks and an invitation to auto-hypnosis are enough to make them whole again. Let's get this straight: if there were a case where an American was subject to lurid, recorded, deliberate, malicious, gleeful sexual humiliation, it would be front-page news for weeks. Abner Louima. In all likelihood, there are hundreds of Iraqis (and ? knows how many Afghanis) who have suffered through this. Was the beating and real and simulated rape of all these Iraqis even effective? American soldiers are dying and being grievously wounded in their thousands. Did the (ugh) interrogations head off a significant number of additional attacks? How hard do we have to lean on this country to liberate it? via The Agonist Returnable Goods Avedon wonders why the RIAA would be crying foul over an almost-10% increase in sales, while enjoying increased efficiency in the form of fewer returns to boot. At the end of the day, they wind up with more money--a lot more money. The reason they're unhappy is that they are paid for shipped units. The 'float' of time before unsold goods are returned and credited is money in the publisher's pocket. A degree of inefficiency can make your company look larger on paper as well, because the 'shipped units' are counted as revenue. The move to more efficient sales will earn record companies more money, but the transition will be painful. Monday, May 10, 2004
Thursday, May 06, 2004
A Moment on the Road to Baghdad? In trying to get a handle on Bush's response to the revelations of US torture of Iraqi prisoners, I am reminded of an meeting reported shortly after he took office, in which Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar tried to convey the gravity of the situation facing Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied territories. On April 24th, the eve of the visit, Bandar received a private briefing from one of the President's senior officials: Bush, he was told, was unaware of what was happening in the streets of the West Bank or Gaza. "This guy doesn't watch TV - he just doesn't know this stuff," the official said, adding that Bush's aides, many of whom were staunchly pro-Israel, shielded him. Bandar was in a hotel in Houston preparing Abdullah for his meeting with Bush the next morning. Bandar wanted Bush to see what Arabs saw daily on Al Jazeera, hoping that it would open his eyes, and so his aides were trying to get photographs. Eventually, they were able to find some, mostly pictures of dead Palestinian children - a five-year-old with a bullet wound to his head, a child cut in half. He did not want to show the most gruesome; the purpose was not to make Bush sick. Although seeing the human costs of decisions he would be making didn't make a lasting impression on Bush, it did make one. There hadn't been a single note of contrition from the Bush administration regarding its actions before or during the Iraq war before yesterday. Bush has seen the pictures, and all of a sudden the situation in Iraq is real to him. Before now, Bush's handlers had been able to keep him isolated from the details on the ground. I'm starting to think that the ban on images of the coffins of our soldiers is as much or more to keep the president in the dark as it is for the rest of us. 700 dead, that's just a number, it's abstract, but a coffin represents a real, dead human being. The question is, then, is the cat really out of the bag for good, or will Bush decide it's too bright, too stark, too cold out here in the real world and return to the warm, dark comfort of his bubble? Update:Upon further reflection, it's quite possible that Bush's reactions to the two episodes above did not come about because he actually cared about the pain and degradation he saw in the photographs. No, he went soft because the whole world knows he saw them. As long as there is the tiniest shred of a fig leaf to hide behind, he'll do so, but he can't let stand incontrovertable evidence that he's heartless, er, "uncompassionate." Maybe he does care what we think. No wonder he so cheerfully tells anyone who will listen that he has no direct contact with the news. Update 2: Dwight Meredith much more eloquently and thoroughly notes the same grim possibility: The final possibility is by far the most troubling. Perhaps Rumsfeld informed the President of the abuse in terms that made clear that Americans had subjected Iraqis to vile torture but the President was not concerned and took no action because he was not told that pictures existed that would make the abuse both public and indisputable. I'd like to stress that Dwight only mentions this as one of four possible explanations for the recent string of events, the others being reporter error, source error, or Rumsfeld error. Although he leaves the question open, the circumstantial evidence he assembles is pretty deep. |