The Noble Pundit

Quick Links

Before we get to the quick links for tonight, don't forget that the deadline for Carinival of the Capitalists submissions is 6 pm Eastern tomorrow! Email your entry to cotc - at - cbnoble.com or capitalists - at - elhide.com Looks like we're going to have well over 20 entries, so don't be left out!

Also, take a look at the blogroll. Many new names have been added to it over the last few days. Go pay them a visit!

And now for tonight's quick links:

Saudi terror plot in "final stages" - It's tough when the evil minions turn on you. Really, really tough.

Afghan Women Heal War Trauma with Opium - I wonder how many new addicts the war really created - and how many are old addicts that are just now boiling to the surface since the Taliban has left. I'm guessing that this is a deep rooted problem just now coming to light because of the war, not created by it.

Taliban Resurgence Undermining UN Afghan Aid Work - Is there any great surprise here?

'Shock and Awe' Barrage Hits Patent Office - You would think that companies would show a little more ingenuity than this...

Many Husbands Make Woes For Indian Women - With them all being brothers, I'll bet determining paternity is a pain. And that's in addition to all the other problems associated with this kind of relationship.

N. Korea Is Making Kissy, Too

Looks like Iran isn't the only tyrannical dictatorship making lovey-dovey noises these days. Everyone's favorite nutjob dictator, Kim Jong Il has deemed it worthy to study the US security proposal which they recently dismissed as "laughable" and "not worth considering."

Apparently, in return for N. Korean promises to disarm (which we all know to be as ironclad as holey rice paper), the US will: provide economic and humanitarian aid, will open diplomatic ties, build them a nuclear power plant, and we must include a non-aggression treaty.

In essence, their "simultaneous actions," of which they are so fond, boil down to real actions on our part, and mere words and promises on theirs. If Bush agrees to this, it will be one of the worst decisions of his Administration.

Kim Jong Il, Fearless Leader with the Hitler salute, is a man who cannot be trusted. Any agreement with him that requires us to act first is nothing more than a unilateral concession and appeasement. And we all know how that turns out.

Look At Our Evil Oppression!

In an effort to continue our evil oppressive ways, the US Army today announced the abolition of the nighttime curfew in Baghdad.

Meanwhile, in preparation for Ramadan, coalition officials moved to ease conditions for Baghdad's 5 million people by abolishing the nighttime curfew in effect since the fall of the city in April and reopening the Tigris bridge.

The Islamic month of fasting begins with the sighting of a new moon and lasts for four weeks. Muslims must abstain from food, drink and sex during the day, but evenings are marked by lavish meals and social gatherings lasting far into the night.
.....
Most Iraqi cities no longer have a curfew.

See how we're putting them to heel? See how we're curtailing their freedoms? See how we're trying to destroy Islam by denying them their right to worship? See, see, see?

"The curfew can be lifted due to the reduction in the crime rate in the city and the overall improvement in the security situation," the U.S.-appointed Baghdad city council statement said. "Despite some highly publicized attacks by terrorists and supporters of the former regime, the overall security situation in Baghdad has improved."

See how unsuccessful we are? See how we're failing miserably and the situation is uncontrollable? We must open our eyes! We must see the evil we have wrought in Iraq!
</sarcasm>

I'll grant that things still aren't perfect over there. We still have some issues that need to be resolved, as the events around the downed BlackHawk shows. But all in all, things are going much much better than the doom and gloom in the quagmire crowd would have us believe.

Iraq isn't perfect, but it is a hell of sight better than it was when Saddam the People Shredder was still in power.

Should We Cozy Up To Iran?

Faye Bowers of the Christian Science Monitor is asking if it is time for a thaw in US-Iranian relations. I emphatically say "no."

So the Iranians have a few members of Al Qaida. So they might even be willing to turn them over - in return for concessions on our part. What ever happened to the notion that we don't negotiate with terrorists?

If Iran is truly willing to talk about turning these folks over, it is not because of some change of heart regarding terrorism; it's not because the regime wants truly normalized relations with the US. It's because of the pressures that our mounting on the regime, from within and without. Turning over the Al Qaida members removes one of the internal pressures (although it would be replaced with a milder version in the form of angry Al Qaida sympathizers) while also mitigating one of the main external pressures - the US insistence that Iran cooperate in the War on Terror. It would buy the regime time to crackdown on the internal dissidents, so that they can better focus on the external threats.

Iran really isn't showing any signs of changing their ways. They are now admitting to non-compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and there are still calls to withdraw from the NPT considering it to be an affront to their national sovereignty.

The Iranian regime is still not interested in playing nice with the rest of the world. Currently, they're playing a propaganda game, trying to split the West along the pacifist/non-pacifist fault line. Why would such an oil-rich country want to develop nuclear power - unless they had ulterior motives? The Iranian nuclear program is not peaceful in nature and the fact that they have been sloppy with "lab testing" while knowing that Al Qaida is running around in-country is beyond irresponsible.

Yeah, Iran wants to cuddle in front of the fire with us, but it's a bonfire and they plan to try to burn us, again.

This is not the time for a thaw in relations. To the contrary, it's time to cool them of some more.

Politically Embarassing Sheep?

"...52,000 politically embarrassing Australian sheep..." I don't think the author intended that line to sound as funny as it does. Almost immediately, I started wondering about the politics of these sheep that might make them so embarrassing. Are they Nazi sheep? Perhaps they're pacifist lambs? Or maybe, they're just evil ewes (oh wait, Frank J. tells me that's supposed to be Jews. I was close, right?). No matter, they are now in political exile in Eritrea.

All kidding aside, while it is lamentable what has happened here, I really find some of the reaction to be over the top. It ranges from conspiracy theory:

"However, I would suggest that the timing of the announcement was cleverly orchestrated to ensure that media scrutiny of the condition of the sheep was avoided."

That last one really bugs me. Raising animals for export certainly has to be providing jobs for Australians. I don't know what rationale the Saudis were using for buying the sheep, but I can see how the export trade could help nations that incapable of raising a quantity or quality of livestock that helps to provide sufficient food or clothing materials.

Anytime quantities of livestock are transported over great distances, whether it be by herding them, putting them in a railcar, or putting them on a ship, some people will take offense. Sometimes quite a few of the animals will die, especially if distant countries start treating the ship like the New York Garbage Barge of a few years back, like happened this time. What many of the anti-animal trade folks ignore is that by selling live animals, Australia actually promotes the eventual end of the live animal trade.

Ever heard the phrase give a man a piece of fish and feed him for a day; give him a hook, teach him how to fish and feed him for a lifetime? All the humanitarian food programs out there right now give people the food. We give them grain; we give them meat; we give them dairy products. Australia is giving them the animals, teaching them to care for and to nourish them. Long term, which choice is more humanitarian?

Of course, 52,000 live, politically embarrassing sheep is too much for the animal righters.

Animal rights activists had been calling for the animals to be slaughtered at sea and suggested the unexpected deal with Eritrea had been kept secret to minimise (sp.) a bad press and prevent independent scrutiny of the animals' condition.

So we're going to slaughter them at sea so that independent scrutiny can determine that they are all, in fact, dead - and that they died at sea, so the trade must be stopped. Doesn't that call clash with their goal of protecting the animal's lives, no matter what the consequence on humanity? Kill the sheep, piss off the activists; keep them alive, piss them off anyways. Doesn't quite seem right.

Oh well, must be what happens when you try to ship Christian sheep to a Wahabbi Islamic nation.

Politically embarrassing sheep...I still can't get over how funny that sounds.

The Wall

Ariel Sharon is now talking about building a buffer zone in the Jordan Valley which would encroach into the West Bank. This has the pro-Palestinian side up in arms, as one might expect.

Israel is claiming the fence is needed "to prevent infiltrations by Palestinian suicide bombers." The Palestinians, of course, claim that it is "a ploy to shrink the space allotted to their future state."

I'm sorry, but when I read stories like this, I can absolutely understand the Israeli need for the fence.

A second senior Palestinian militant was arrested at Nablus's Rafidia hospital where he ran a cell of the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades from the hospital's basement, the [Israeli security] official said, adding the man was armed and ''in perfect health.''

So the Israelis are going in to take one of the members of that charity known as Hamas, who was accidentally injured while attempting to donate a bomb to the Israeli military, and they come across an armed and healthy militant from the Al-Asqa Martyrs Brigade. Now maybe it's just me, but if I found members of Hamas and the Al-Asqa Brigade, sitting around with a gun, I'd start to think that there was some kind of terrorist planning going on there.

Hamas has been a busy bunch of little charity bees lately. In addition to holding talks with the Al-Asqa people, they have also agreed to "enhance 'field cooperation'" with Islamic Jihad. I'm guessing that they're not trying to increase donations to their latest clothing drive.

Israel is under attack, face it. The terrorist attacks at home and terrorist threats overseas. The Israeli people don't feel safe. So their government is responding to the needs of its people to satisfy that safety need.

The wall certainly won't be perfect. It won't keep out all the terrorists; it won't help with missile threats in Toronto. But it will help much more than the current system. It might even make the sight of Israeli tanks rolling through Palestinian towns less common.

So why do the Palestinians object so vehemently? And why does the US object?

The Palestinians don't fear the fence or the separation per se. They fear the loss of access to success much, much more. They fear that the fence will make impossible the dream of driving Israel back into the sea. The fence would become a symbol of their failure.

The Palestinians know that they have yet to build anything, other than a terrorist network. Oh, they can destroy stuff real well, but they cannot build, they cannot create, they cannot maintain. Without access to all the prosperity that the Israelis have built, Palestine is doomed to failure. Do they have people who are intelligent, hard-working, and prosperous? Some, sure. But the government and the majority of the people are not. They are a people who live in the cult of vicitimhood. They are jealous of the success around them and like petulant children can only scream and throw temper tantrums. It's just that their tantrums include bombs.

I really have problems with our objections to the fence, also.

Washington has criticized the barrier due to its intrusion on territory Palestinians plan for their state.

That completely ignores reality. The Palestinians plan on using all of Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza for their "new state." To think, assume, or wish otherwise is the ultimate in blinkered vision. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, and the Palestinian Authority itself are all dedicated to the destruction of Israel and the dispersion or murder of the Jews currently living there.

So why are we insisting on preventing the Israelis from taking steps to defend themselves. We tell them they have to find non-violent means of controlling the problem. The wall is non-violent. And yet we complain that it might intrude on the land the Palestinians want to use for setting up their new state. Well, so does every house that gets built, every synagogue, every office building - they're all intrusions on land the Palestinians want to use for their new state.

Israel has a right to defend itself. If they think the wall will further that endeavor, more power to them.

Speedbird

Yesterday marked the passing of an era. The Concorde made its final scheduled flight in airline service.

For a couple of decades now, the Concorde has been the way for the jet set to travel from New York to London. Flying over two times the speed of sound, it brought Europe closer to New York than San Francisco or Los Angeles. Now the fastest airplane between JFK and Heathrow is the 747, which takes over twice as long to make the crossing.

I'm sure that somewhere, a bunch of environmentalists are popping champagne corks. Concorde was too noisy, too polluting, too fast, and flew too high for their tastes.

I once had the opportunity to climb around on one of the planes while it was in maintenance at Heathrow. The cabin was small, the seats weren't overly comfortable, and the cockpit was antiquated. But even so, you realized that you were standing in an engineering marvel. It was similar to the Boeing 247 - except that there was no equivalant DC-3 coming along after it to make the concept profitable. Concorde pushed the edges of the technological envelope, but no one ever bothered to follow through. After it came out, the world lost its will or interest to pursue projects like this (remember it came out just as we put a man on the moon). Never again have we been willing to take the risks necessary to achieve these kind of advances.

The era of the supersonic passenger flight is, for now, over. The Concorde is already on its way to becoming just a memory. Sure one or two will end up in museums somewhere, but nothing quite matches the majesty of watching it as it rolls across the ramp at Heathrow; nothing quite matches the graceful appearance of the airplane in flight; the powerful roar of the four Rolls-Royce Olympus engines at take-off; or the funny look the drooping nose gives the plane during landing. Concorde truly was unique.

Quick Links

Only two links tonight, as I haven't been feeling well all day.

Debate erupts anew: Did Thera's explosion doom Minoan Crete?

Bye Bye, Beringia Anthropology and Archaeology of The Americas

For whatever reason, the last few days I've been finding quite a few articles like this. I like them, so I link them.

Don't forget to get your entry in for the Carnival of the Capitalists! The deadline is 6 pm Eastern on Sunday. Got a whole bunch of good entries today that I'm still reading through. Email yours to cotc - at - cbnoble.com or capitalists - at - elhide.com

A Unabomber In Training

I really love some of the anti-technological advancement crowd. It seems as though no technology that improves the quality of life is acceptable. Bruce Sterling proves my point in his column over at bcentral.com.

Nuclear weapons? Useless and barbaric. Forget the fact that their mere presence kept the Cold War cold, forget their importance to our national security against such kindhearted nations as the Red Chinese, forget all that. Nukes are an absolute evil in his mind.

Coal power? It's dirty, get rid of it. Never mind that it comprises 25% of our electrical supply. Forget the fact that the only practical way to replace our coal power plants is by building those dastardly nuke plants. We wouldn't want to even contemplate the prospect of "blackened skies over China." They must use a much better brand of coal over there.

He wants to get rid of internal combustion engines. One of his reasons: "...if you stand inside a closed garage with any internal-combustion engine, it will kill you. That is bad." Like we didn't already know this. Getting around this problem is pretty simple - open the damn door.

I could go on and on as he did, rebutting each of his arguments for getting rid of the light bulb, manned spaceflight, prisons, and DVDs. I can agree in principle with containing the land mine problem, but I really fail to see how cosmetic implants and lie detectors are these horribly evil advancements that he wants us to believe they are. Relatively useless? I guess it depends on your point of view. But are they truly one of the most evil and despicable advancements of mankind? Hardly.

I really have issues with columns like this because the author sounds so elitist never cares what the consequences of his actions might be, and never really proposes a solution to the "problems" he raises. Yes, he mentioned fuel cells as a possible replacement for the internal combustion engine, but is it practical to bring one to market now? No. It's a concept still in the proving stage.

It's one thing to bring up items for debate without having a definitive solution in mind. It's not the greatest way of accomplishing things, but if handled right (meaning both sides of an issue are considered) then it may contribute to the betterment of society.

But to demagogue points using words like: "death wish," "destructive addiction," "eye-watering stink," "tribal rage," "stupid," "little point," "giant, two-million-person ghetto," "aberrant," "alien," "too crude," "voodoo," "Orwellian," "fiendish spam," and "miserable, endless war of attrition" is not to debate. It is designed to prejudice; to stifle debate by asserting a position - using no factual proof - and then proceeding to defend it by saying "Well, disprove my statement."

Some technologies, however, are so blatantly obnoxious that the human race would rejoice if they were obliterated. A wise society would honor its young technical innovators for services rendered in annihilating obsolete technologies that are the dangerous hangovers of previous, less advanced generations.

Perhaps we would be wise, but only if we rejoiced because they had developed a real, viable alternative to the "obsolete" technology. Without a real alternative, we are progressing into the past. I see no reason to rejoice in people being forced to read by candlelight because the country cannot produce enough power to light their fluorescent light tubes.

I wonder how many acid raindrops in China he created by writing and publishing this dreck on his computer. I think it's time for him to turn off the car, open the garage door and to go see what wonders our modern technological world has to offer.

Reminder!

Don't forget your Carnival of the Capitalists entry! The deadline is 6 pm EST on Sunday. Send them to cotc - at - cbnoble.com or capitalists - at - elhide.com before then and take part in this week's festivities. The entries have been a little slow coming in, although there was a decent burst this evening. All of them are extremely impressive and should make for an excellent roundup this week.

Quick Links

Who Destroyed Megiddo? Was It David or Shishak? - The destruction of Armageddon. Such a pleasant topic, it is. Actually, I find it to be extremely fascinating. If I ever get enough money that I can tell the world to kiss off, I'm going to go and volunteer at a bunch of these biblical dig sites. It would be a lot more interesting to me than discussing the types of wood used in furniture.

Team finds secret of mummies' preservation - Keeping with the same theme of studying really old dead people, here's a report on how they may have finally discovered the way the Egyptians embalmed their mummies - by reading Pliny the Elder, a Roman scholar who died some 2000 years ago. We known the answer all this time, yet we just discovered it. Amazing.

Satanic Ritual Cancelled By Salem Knights of Columbus - I don't really know what to say. Who scheduled it in the first place? Did they not notice that it was a pagan ritual? Does someone need some religious diversity training?

Father, Daughter Sentenced In Tax Case - Ah, our tax dollars at work. This girl managed to get a half a million dollar refund check from the IRS - for slavery reparations. And to make it worse, the IRS sent it, allowed her to cash it and blow over half of it before they figured out that Daddy had put a huge captial gains refund on her tax return. Did someone in the IRS not think it was odd when this girl suddenly claimed this massive deduction? Did it not trigger a manual review - before it cost the taxpayers $266,000? It should have.

Why Are They Suspicious?

Reading along this evening, I came across two articles that seem to be pointing to the fact that the West has a justification for being suspicious of the intentions of the Muslim world.

I'm sorry you feel that way

and

Is Europe a Province of Islam? The Danger is Called Dhimmitude

Rather interesting reading.

Egypt Goes To Sea

I don't think Egypt has been considered a naval power in the world since the days of Antony and Cleopatra. But the news coming out of Alexandria is that Egypt is once again harboring regional ambitions and is expanding it's naval fleet as part of that effort.

Now to a point, I think that this is getting a little overblown. They've added eleven (11) new battle units and what they have on order seems to consist of fast attack craft and Harpoon missiles. In other words, their great naval expansion is the creation of eleven new missile boat units.

That's certainly nothing to sneeze at. Look no further than the USS Stark to see what a missile can do to a modern warship. But, but the same token, this is not the same as the Egyptians suddenly figuring out how to build Arleigh Burke or Ticonderoga type ships.

They're setting up a navy designed to fight a guerilla war on water. It sounds like it's being designed as a raider navy - one that pops up out of nowhere, hits you with a small punch, and leaves before you can react. Against an Israeli Navy of similar composition, this could certainly be viewed as a significant threat. But against a true blue water navy designed for power projection, like the US Navy or the Royal Navy, this is more like an irritant than a threat.

But it is something that bears watching. Today it's fast attack craft. What will it be tomorrow?

Pro-Life Jeb

I like Jeb Bush, I really do. I voted for him, I think he's done a fairly good job as governor of Florida, and I'll probably vote for him again. One of the main things I like about Jeb is that I never doubt his conviction in a position. I may think it's absolutely ludicrous, but I don't doubt that he is sincere in his support for it.

Jeb is a pro-life governor, no doubt about it. No one who lives in this state who pays any attention to anything at all could ever doubt that. Jeb's most recent action, to issue an order under the new authority granted to him by the legislature restoring Terry Schiavo's feeding tube is completely consistent with his previous positions and stated beliefs. There are some on the other side of the debate who wish to make this conviction seem like some great evil. And that's all fine, too. They're entitled to their opinions and to express the fact that they think Jeb is too pro-life.

One of the reasons I believe Jeb has been so successful in this state is because, like his brother, he is very down-to-earth. He seems like the kind of guy you could walk up to and start up a conversation on anything - and he'd talk about it with you. He doesn't put on an appearance of being above the average citizen of Florida.

Or, at least he didn't. Until Tuesday that is.

"I'm probably the most pro-life governor in modern times"

I really don't care if Jeb is or isn't the most pro-life governor in modern times. I don't care if he thinks he's the most morally upstanding governor in modern times. All the chest-thumping and figurative fingers pointing to God here does nothing but polarize a tragic issue, as the linked article demonstrates.

Jeb was elected to be governor for all the people of this state. I appreciate the fact that he has taken a special, personal interest in specific cases in which his personal convictions ran strong. For that he should be commended. Taking a sometimes unpopular stand for what you believe in is a very difficult thing.

But he's taken his stand. He made things happen and he did his job. Once the State Senate passed the bill, Jeb should have shut up, signed it, issued the order, and moved on. He had done his duty for Terry Schiavo, it was time to get back to working for the rest of us again.

If Jeb wants to make a political issue of this, as I'm sure his opponents will, the time for him to go on the offensive with it is when he formally hits the campaign trail for re-election. Answering a few questions about it? Yeah, he'll have to do that beforehand - this is a "big" news story. But does he really need to go on the offensive to defend his action?

The governor's main responsibility is to, hang on here, govern. The nature of his position is such that there will always be people harping on something or other that he does. If he stops to defend against every attack, he will fail in his job. If he spends too much time defending against one attack, he will fail in his job. As governor. Jeb has one great advantage over his attackers: they are focused on but one issue. In almost every case, at any point, he can end the discussion by outflanking his opponents with the "big picture." He can point out that governing a state as diverse as Florida requires attention to more issues than one particular one whether it be education, transportation, taxation, Medicare, the Department of Children and Families, or a feeding tube. If others want to debate and discuss the issue ad nausieum, more power to them. He's going to move on to the job of governing everyone, not a special interest.

It's time for Jeb to "big picture" the whole Terry Schiavo affair. He did what he could. He contributed to and influenced the public debate. He staked out a position, defended it, and then followed through when given the power to exercise that position.

The longer Jeb stays involved in the mud-slinging, the more likely it becomes that he's going to lose the support of many folks like myself. The above quote sounds, to my ear at least, aristocratic, elitist if you will. Like Jeb is more moral, more ethical, more right, than any of the other previous governors the state has had. And he probably is. But smugness is not a trait of a down to earth man. Arrogance is not a trait of a man with whom you would want to discuss anything. If Jeb isn't careful, he's going to prove correct (to some people at least) all those liberal Bush-hating stories of the Bush family feeling aristocratic and above the rest of us.

It's time to find something else to do, Jeb. Maybe it's time to look at education or transportation again. Or maybe all the problems in nursing homes.

Do something other than thump your chest over your actions, no matter how honorable they may have been, in the Terry Schiavo affair.

Quick Links

There are no quick links this evening, as I was out most of the night.

Instead, I'll just leave you with a reminder that you Carnival of the Capitalists entry is due by Sunday! cotc - at - cbnoble.com or capitalists - at - elhide.com

Also, there is a discussion going on in the comments at BusinessPundit and at Jay Solo's Verbosity about possibly changing the name to something else. I've already entered my vote for Wealth of Notions. Get your votes in early and often!

OK, But What Are The Penalties?

Earlier this evening, I was out having dinner with the family. The place that we went just happened to have on CNN and while I was talking with my other half I see a headline scroll by at the bottom of the screen:

Pinellas County, FL passes law banning public suicide

Now I'm guessing that it was never really approved of, but why do we need a law banning public suicide. Think about it. How do you enforce it? If they succeed, they're dead. If they fail, they will almost certainly qualify as being mentally incompetent.

If Pinellas County wanted to do something, they should have passed a law against exploiting a suicide for commercial gain. This one is nothing more than a feel good waste of paper.

If I find a story to link to, I will.

Quick Links

The Quick Links are kind of short tonight as I really didn't find a whole lot to comment on, outside of the Terry Schiavo situation, which I don't want to comment on, yet.

In the mean time, I'd like to call your attention to the fact that I've added some new blogs to the blogroll, including: Wizbang, You Big Mouth, You!, Stage Left, and Kin's Kouch. I'm scouting around, looking for potential entries to the Carnival of the Capitalists and I'm blogrolling interesting looking sites as I'm going. Get your entry in today! cotc - at - cbnoble.com or capitalists - at - elhide.com

Human Rights 101 Trains High School Students to Be Global Citizens - You know, this is a wonderful idea - except that most of these kids don't know how to be local citizens, much less global ones. Maybe this time would be better spent teaching them the values of community.

Boy's Internet research snags him in FBI web - Well, I guess I know what kind of reports my kids won't be writing for quite a while.

Running Mate Spot Still Gives Graham Chance on Ticket - Bob Graham is just out to prove that he hasn't got a clue. It is really getting embarassing watching him. You want to feel bad, you really do. Give it up, Bob. At this point, even your re-election to the Senate is in question, assuming you start devoting eveything to it now.

Middle East Roundup

Found a few interesting news items and editorials coming out of the Middle East today.

World's Help Is Needed to Rebuild Iraq - Iraq's charge d'affaires in Moscow has a great article in today's Moscow Times imploring some of the hesitant nations of the world to join in the rebuilding of Iraq, today. The arguments he uses are the same ones that many bloggers have been using for quite a while, most importantly that Iraq is rebuilding more than its infrastructure - it's rebuilding its social fabric.

Time for an International Pro-Democracy Tribune for Iran - A well argued call for more peaceful action designed towards pressing the Iranian regime to the breaking point.

The Iranian pro-democracy movement is carrying a double burden of freeing Iran from a Medieval state and at the same time freeing the world from a major sponsor of terrorism. It makes all sense for the Western democracies to support the Iranian pro-democracy movement and it makes perfect sense for Iranian movement to seek that support and cooperate with the international forces that are willing to help our struggle for secularism, democracy, and human rights, as long as there are no strings attached, and it is all in the open and not in secret deals.

IAF Film Shows Critics of Bombing Misinformed - It's a case where I would like to snicker at the peaceniks claiming that Israel is the big bad evil empire killing those poor Palestinians without warning. But at the same time, it looks like many of these politicians were probably ambushed, with having their prerecorded sound bites airing right after the expose of the video. I'll reserve my snickers until they have a fair opportunity to retract their tripe. In other words, until tomorrow.

Political correctness makes Gitmo a sieve - The problems at Gitmo are really ridiculous and of our making. But we should still be able to put some faith in the guys down there.

Jew-boy's Site Goes Dooooooown!!!!!!! - Found via A Small Victory. I hate to say it, but this sounds like a case of Haganah getting hit with a less sophisticated, more demonstrative, version of his own medicine. He gets hosting companies to refuse to host Jihad sites, the Jihadis take down the hosting company to shut him down. Tit for tat. I think most of its importance comes from the fact that it shows that we are in a multi-front war with technology being just one of the battlefields.

Art, Messages, & Artists

Yesterday, Dean Esmay posted a lengthy post on Leni Riefenstahl in which he considers whether or not it is possible to separate the art from the artist. It's a very interesting question - one that has made me think ever since I first looked at the post yesterday - and one that I think brings on a side question: is it possible to separate the message from the art?

As Dean noted at the end of his post, there is no clear or simple answer. Reason being the answer is unique for each of us and may even be unique for each individual instance. This isn't a factual question, like mathematics; it isn't even a theoretical debate like economics. This is, at its root, a personal feeling that virtually cannot be influenced by others. Either we can separate them or we can't.

Let's take the Triumph of the Will, the one film that seems to be the most tightly woven into the perception that is Leni Riefenstahl. A documentary of the 1934 Party Congress, it carries an underlying, morally repugnant message of the grandeur and glory of the Third Reich. Outside of a few neo-Nazi skinheads, I don't think that anyone would be at all sympathetic to the message of the film.

First question I come to when looking at a movie like Triumph is can I separate the offensive message contained within to see the beauty and skill in the actual artistry of the film? Some people cannot - the message is simply too overpowering, too obvious. Personally, I can separate the message from the art. Does it make me a bad person to do so? Those who cannot separate the two may think so - and from their point of view, they would be justified. We all get outraged by people who see something worthwhile in something that we view as patently offensive. I felt the same way towards people who thought that the crucifix in urine was art - I simply could not understand how they could find anything redeeming in that image (I still can't, but that's beside the point). So there are times when I can separate and be offended by the message of the art, while still appreciating the artistry involved.

The other question - and the one which Dean posed - is can you separate the art from the artist?

Again, it is a deeply personal issue. Triumph I view more as a reflection of the time and society from which it was created than I do as a reflection on Leni Riefenstahl. I believe that each of her films is capable of standing on its own artistic merit. Her films are not great because Leni Riefenstahl was associated with them, instead she is held in high regard because she was associated with films of such artistic merit. Can everyone or should everyone be able to make this distinction? No. Again, personally, I vary from person to person. For instance, I can't stand anything from Quentin Tarantino. But, it's because I believe his movies are successful because they are his, not vice versa. And after watching less than half of Pulp Fiction, I decided I never wanted to waste any more of my life on his tripe again. But other people love his movies. Does this mean that I'm wrong not to separate Pulp Fiction from Quentin Tarantino? No. It is a personal decision; a personal choice and one that I have to live with the consequences of.

None of this is intended to be a foray into moral relativism. The unmistakable message of Triumph, and Olympiad to a slightly lesser extent, is revolting. Just because I am able to see past the message to the art and to the unique genius of the artist doesn't mean that I condone the message. If you can't see past the message, that's ok. There is no absolute answer available here. Different art speaks to different people in different ways.

The work of Leni Riefenstahl isn't the only art where I see these issues at play. I see it also in the Moscow Subway and the Coliseum in Rome. The Moscow Subway is generally considered to be one of the architectural gems of the world, yet it was designed so magnificently to promote to the world the grandeur and greatness of the Stalinist Soviet Union - not exactly a model of virtue by any reasonable standard. It, too, celebrated and propagandized for a regime that murdered tens of millions, yet it is rare to hear people deploring it, or it's architects and engineers, as the symbol of a barbaric regime. The Coliseum in Rome was a great, glorified, public death chamber. Thousands of men and animals might die there in a single day, all for the amusement of the mob. It is the lasting symbol of a violent expansionist imperial tyranny that conquered most of the known world through force of arms. It is the symbol of a regime that practiced decimation as a form of military discipline. Yet no one is complaining about the artistic merit of the Coliseum.

Separation of art from the message or the artist is a personal issue. Some people can do it in some cases; some people cannot in some cases. The ability or inability to do so in a particular instance does not reflect in general on a person's intelligence or morality, it only reflects on their personal feelings about a particular work of art.

There is no clear cut, right or wrong, answer. Opinion is simply opinion, everyone has one.

Quick Links

Don't forget your Carnival of the Capitalists entry: capitalists - at - elhide.com or cotc - at - cbnoble.com! Got some great entries so far - don't be left out!

No Candy On Halloween? Yale Study Suggests Toys As Alternative - Halloween without candy is like Easter without eggs, Christmas with presents, New Year's without booze, the Fourth without fireworks - it's blasphemy! Which makes the only surprising thing here is that it didn't come from UC Berkeley.

Eleven killed in Israeli airstrikes in Gaza; Islamic groups threaten revenge - The cycle of violence goes round and round, round and round, round and round all through the town.

U.N. Report: U.S. War on Terror Radicalizes Arabs - The US doesn't create radicalized Arabs, radicalized Arabs create radicalized Arabs.

The French Take A Stand

Well, at least the French people did. Or some of them. OK, so it was just the smokers, and it was a rather selfish stand. But it was a stand! It's progress.

Turns out that the French government, architects of the heat-wave debacle, actually is concerned about the health of the average Frenchman on the street. They are out to reduce the health issues associated with smoking by raising the price of cigarettes to the point where only the gainfully employed French will be able to chose between a pack of cigarettes or a new Peugeot.

The French people, particularly those under the age of 25 (who still have several years to wait before getting something resembling a real job), have decided that enough is enough. Ninety percent of tobacco shops closed today. French folks were running around going through nicotine withdrawals and being more cranky than usual (and probably much more friendly to smoking American tourists than they usually are).

Will this be enough to reverse the socialist backslide of France? No. But, if there are enough of these mini-revolts, enough of these outrages, maybe, just maybe the people will start to figure out that Chirac and his cronies are not the great people they like to pretend to be.

Why My Dog Doesn't Carry

We've all heard the stories about man shoots dog, right? Well how about one dog shoots woman.

Do we need to design special trigger guards with the smaller paw in mind? Maybe have a keyed safety lock for the safety so that the safety can't be made unsafe unintentionally? Maybe we should pass a national canine gun registry. Or maybe even simply outlaw dogs having access to gun (although then you get into that whole "If dogs with guns are outlawed, only outlaw dogs will have guns" thing).

I know this is tragic and I know that I'm being unfairly sarcastic, but still....imagine the embarrassment in the hospital trying to explain that your dog shot you - as their taking the blood for the drug test and tying you to the bed to prevent you from harming yourself anymore.

Remind me not to tick the dog off anymore...

Statistical Manipulation

Human Rights Watch is at it again. This time, they're condemning the US Army for not keeping count of the civilian casualties in Iraq. To the table, as proof of our outrageous behavior, they bring: "evidence of 94 civilians being killed by the US army in the capital and confirmed 20 cases between 1 May and 30 September."

Let's see. An end to major hostilities was announced in, what was it, now? Oh, yeah. May. So, of the 94 deaths being exposed here, 74 occurred while Baghdad was in a war zone and was a major goal for our forces. How many people were killed in Berlin as the Red Army advanced on the city? How many were killed in London during the Blitz? How many were killed in Sarajevo? 74 deaths in the capital city of a belligerent is not an unreasonable number. Civilian casualties are an unfortunate part of war. But, I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that Saddam would have found a way to off more than 74 Iraqis in that same time span.

And what of the other 20, since May 1?

The report said civilians were most likely to be killed during raids, at checkpoints, and after ambushes.

So, people are getting caught up in the fire created by the actions of the Iraqi insurgents who continue to attack us. Again, it's unfortunate, but when certain Iraqis are trying to conduct a guerilla war using the civilian population for cover, some deaths are again, unavoidable.

94 deaths is unfortunate. But in the grand scheme of things, taking into account the state of Baghdad for the given time frame, it is remarkable. I would have reasonably expected a higher number of casualties. It is a testament to the restraint of our soldiers under fire that the number is not higher.

Some people will never be happy with anything the US does. Maybe HRW would have more credibility if they had been deploring the number of Iraqis shot, shredded or shocked over the last 12 years. Maybe they would have more credibility if they had "exposed" the number of Iraqi civilians killed in Baghdad for propaganda purposes, by Saddam, after the commencement of hostilities.

Maybe if they came off more as concerned about human rights and not anti-Americanism. Maybe.

What Is A Promise Worth?

Mike Northover and myself have been going back and forth over the gold standard issue. Pretty much we've come to the point where I favor some sort of a return to the standard, whereas he wants to continue on with the current fiat system. Today, however, he linked to an article from The Economist which looks at how our current economy is based on promises and how that may become a problem down the road.

In my last post on reverting to a gold standard (which by the way, would not need to be strictly a gold standard, a bimetallic or even tri-metallic system could work just as well), Thomas left a comment, which I think is rather important for a number of different reasons:

With GNP growing 2-4% a year can we really dig up enough new metal out of the ground to keep up? Since we clearly can not, than a gold/silver standard commits us to deflation. Good for people with money in the bank, very bad for most of the rest of us with debts.

Thomas is absolutely correct in his assertation that reverting to a gold standard would lead to deflation, which is bad for those with debt (like me also, Thomas). But the real problem isn't in the deflation itself, it's in the way our economy has been being primed for the last few decades.

Prior to moving off the gold standard, economically we went through cycles of inflationary pressures and deflationary pressures. Inflation was caused more often than not by the consequences of excess savings flooding the market chasing after too few goods. It encouraged businesses to expand, taking on more debt in the process. Deflation was more often than not the consequence of too much debt and the resultant overexpansion it created. Deflation weeded out the inefficient companies and forced the others to streamline in order to maximize efficiency and therefore profits. Neither extreme was pleasant, but both played an integral role in maintaining our economic efficiency.

Once we left the gold standard, it became politically unacceptable to suffer through the rigors of deflation. Companies went bankrupt; people lost their jobs and life was generally hard during those times. Through a constant expansion of the money supply, deflation could be warded off, with the added side benefit of companies being able to repay debt in inflated dollars, rather than in virtually nominal ones like they had in the standards' days.

And what has been happening for a while is a constant expansion of debt coinciding with a steady deterioration of savings. Companies are willing to expand through debt because they expect the payments to be inflated into reasonable amounts. Consumers take on excessive debt on the expectation, justified or not, of constantly rising incomes to make their debt loads manageable. This is not healthy behavior.

One of the great virtues of the gold standard was that it introduced real consequences to the assumption of debt while simultaneously providing real incentive for saving when the balance started to get out of whack. No company or individual was be willing to take on additional debt loads if they felt that their revenue or income was going to be decreasing, as servicing the debt load becomes more difficult. On the contrary, the would be more apt to save that money for a time when it would be better spent. When the time came, the cash was on hand to take advantage of new opportunities, without having to immediately resort to debt for funding.

The lack of deflation since we left the gold standard has given many people a false sense that deflation is an absolute evil with no redeeming attributes and that we are no longer subject to the inflationary/deflationary cycles of economic history.

Deflation is uncomfortable. Deflation is unpleasant. But it does have a balancing effect on the debt/savings continuum.

And there is nothing that has made us exempt from the economic cycle. Just as companies go through cycles, so to does the economy. Inflation and deflation are the growth and contraction phases of the economic cycle. Both are necessary to the maintenance of a healthy economy.

Which is something our debt-loaded society desperately needs.

Carnival Of The Capitalists #2 Is Up!

Jay Solo is hosting this week's Carinval of the Capitalists and it looks like it's a good one! Go over and take a look!

I will be hosting this week's Carnival. I'll be taking entries through Sunday at 6 pm Eastern. You can email them to me at cotc - at - cbnoble.com or you can use capitalists - at - elhide.com. Get those entries in!

If you have any questions or are unsure what it's all about, either shoot me an email or visit Jay's Carnival Info Page.

Spherewide Short Story Symposium #2

Michael Williams over at Master of None is now taking entries for the second Symposium. The last one went great, with 23 outstanding stories - and my two entries.

If you're interested, information on the Halloween Symposium can be found here.

Quick Links

Dean Gets Standing Ovation from Arab-Americans - Howard Dean has no more right to deny the flag to anyone than I do to deny it to him. The flag is not Howard Dean's to give to people - as he said himself, it belongs to every American citizen - including those he would deny it to.

'Ghettopoly' No Bigger Insult Than MTV Rap - This is getting blown way out of proportion to what it is - a game. A tasteless and trite game, but nonetheless, a game. I still stand by my original question: don't we have more important things to worry about?

Israeli media slams as ''Anti-Semitic'' Chirac refusal to join EU condemnation of Malaysian PM speech on Jews - Did they really expect Chirac to do the right thing? Come on now.

TERRORISM HEADLINES OF THE WEEK - From The Search For International Terrorist Entities. Looks like an interesting site.