That's right, last night the President the First Lady of the United States were mere blocks from my home. Apparently they were having dinner at Karl Rove's house, totally unaware that I was lurking in the dark just beyond the limos, the 30 unmarked black Suburbans, the uniformed secret service cars, the press vans and the ambulance.
And by lurking I of course mean driving past and rubbernecking as I tried to figure out what the fuck was going on. If I had known at the time that the Maximum Leader were inside, I might have stopped to yell my latest treatise on foreign policy at the windows of the Roves' very ugly home. I hear he likes it when you question his decisions.
Monday
Wednesday
This Just In: Castro Not Dead
Surprising and angering the
When he took a header during a public appearance and was immobilized for several months, many in
Monday
Warning: Don't Believe Me
Alright, I’ll admit it. I am biased.
But so are you, and more importantly, so are all the pundits you watch on TV and read in the newspaper.
At the most basic level, we are all biased in our own favor. I don’t go around saying that I should be taxed more heavily or that my civil liberties should be suspended for the sake of the state. People may believe that others should pay more taxes, that others shouldn’t be allowed to say and do certain things, but very few of us are stupid enough to explicitly attack our own economic or political status.
In the same way, media outlets and journalists don’t go around saying that their information collection is deeply flawed or that people shouldn't trust them as their only source of news. In fact, they say just the opposite. They make themselves out to be credible, unbiased, and authoritative.
OK, let’s take those one at a time.
Credible? Well, that depends. Do you like unidentified sources? How about reporters who fake stories or play up sensational but irrelevant details (see astronaut in diapers)?
Unbiased? Raise your hand if you know which 24 hour news channel is the Republican channel. The Democratic outlets are less aggressive in their ideological evangelism, but they are no less stubborn when it comes time to pound certain “truths” into our brains.
Authoritative? The “all the news that’s fit to print” attitude of most news outlets is betrayed by their clearly selective reporting. A cute white girls getting kidnapped is a story for days, but the thousands being gang raped and murdered in African civil wars count themselves lucky to receive a moment of silence on the evening news.
The media is an information filter. If you are a passive consumer of media, it chooses what information you receive and what you do not. This in turn affects what you believe about the world and how you identify your place in it.
As a result of our continued reliance on too few sources of information, our understanding of the intentions and policies of our leaders is hopelessly muddled.
Consider that the vast majority of Americans believe that they are in the “middle class.” That is to say, people with incomes from $30,000 to $300,000 a year identify as part of the same socioeconomic group. That they are incorrect from a sociological standpoint is no matter. Their beliefs and identities have been shaped by a standard social perspective beamed into their homes and classrooms since childhood.
This confusion, what the communists might call a breakdown of class consciousness, allows modern politicians to make appeals to the “middle class” (meaning you) advocating policies that favor the elite (meaning them) in the guise of helping the poor (meaning the people you look down on). Insane drug policy, excessive regulation, wars, poorly targeted foreign aid, and the general ossification of our political system can all be viewed through this lens.
Until all media comes with warning labels like packs of cigarettes ("Warning: Viewing this program may result in smallmindedness, the inability to distinguish truth and lies, and cancer)it’s our job as responsible citizens and consumers of media to challenge their assertions of impartiality and with them the doctored images of the world we’ve been given.
But so are you, and more importantly, so are all the pundits you watch on TV and read in the newspaper.
At the most basic level, we are all biased in our own favor. I don’t go around saying that I should be taxed more heavily or that my civil liberties should be suspended for the sake of the state. People may believe that others should pay more taxes, that others shouldn’t be allowed to say and do certain things, but very few of us are stupid enough to explicitly attack our own economic or political status.
In the same way, media outlets and journalists don’t go around saying that their information collection is deeply flawed or that people shouldn't trust them as their only source of news. In fact, they say just the opposite. They make themselves out to be credible, unbiased, and authoritative.
OK, let’s take those one at a time.
Credible? Well, that depends. Do you like unidentified sources? How about reporters who fake stories or play up sensational but irrelevant details (see astronaut in diapers)?
Unbiased? Raise your hand if you know which 24 hour news channel is the Republican channel. The Democratic outlets are less aggressive in their ideological evangelism, but they are no less stubborn when it comes time to pound certain “truths” into our brains.
Authoritative? The “all the news that’s fit to print” attitude of most news outlets is betrayed by their clearly selective reporting. A cute white girls getting kidnapped is a story for days, but the thousands being gang raped and murdered in African civil wars count themselves lucky to receive a moment of silence on the evening news.
The media is an information filter. If you are a passive consumer of media, it chooses what information you receive and what you do not. This in turn affects what you believe about the world and how you identify your place in it.
As a result of our continued reliance on too few sources of information, our understanding of the intentions and policies of our leaders is hopelessly muddled.
Consider that the vast majority of Americans believe that they are in the “middle class.” That is to say, people with incomes from $30,000 to $300,000 a year identify as part of the same socioeconomic group. That they are incorrect from a sociological standpoint is no matter. Their beliefs and identities have been shaped by a standard social perspective beamed into their homes and classrooms since childhood.
This confusion, what the communists might call a breakdown of class consciousness, allows modern politicians to make appeals to the “middle class” (meaning you) advocating policies that favor the elite (meaning them) in the guise of helping the poor (meaning the people you look down on). Insane drug policy, excessive regulation, wars, poorly targeted foreign aid, and the general ossification of our political system can all be viewed through this lens.
Until all media comes with warning labels like packs of cigarettes ("Warning: Viewing this program may result in smallmindedness, the inability to distinguish truth and lies, and cancer)it’s our job as responsible citizens and consumers of media to challenge their assertions of impartiality and with them the doctored images of the world we’ve been given.
Wednesday
The Economics of Empire: Why nobody really cared when Bremer lost $9,000,000,000.
If a private company noticed that 363 tons of U.S. currency had gone missing, they would be alarmed right? Not so with the government. It can just print some more.
Everybody remembers the images of U.S. troops passing out greenbacks in Baghdad back in 2003. It turns out these were not just isolated incidents, but part of a concerted effort to buy the “hearts and minds” of the Iraqi people. All across the country, U.S. soldiers and CPA officials were handing out hundreds like party favors, paying people for lost property and relatives, and using cash to compensate contractors submitting bills into the millions of dollars.
What we would consider outrageous waste and criminally negligent accounting back home are just part of running an empire.
You see, in Iraq the greenback is nothing but monopoly money. Their price system and domestic markets are sufficiently insulated from world currency exchanges that the Treasury is actually quite free to run the printing press. The important part for you future emperors to remember is that the increase in money supply is accompanied by a corresponding increase in the number of people who do business in dollars. So long as Iraqi markets operate in dollars and keep it out of the U.S. there is no problem. Money for nothing.
Money printing is horribly inflationary under normal circumstances, but due to Iraq’s economic isolation, the effect is distributed over a longer period of time as cash slowly filters back into the international market.
The so-called “inflation tax,” the gradual erosion in the value of the dollars we all hold, allows the Bush administration to come out in favor of tax cuts while still shoveling cash into the Sunni Triangle. That Congress is cut out of the deal is just gravy for the administration.
The effects will be felt for years, but the extra nickel you pay every time you go to the grocery story will be impossible to trace back to the Commander in Thief.
Brilliant.
Everybody remembers the images of U.S. troops passing out greenbacks in Baghdad back in 2003. It turns out these were not just isolated incidents, but part of a concerted effort to buy the “hearts and minds” of the Iraqi people. All across the country, U.S. soldiers and CPA officials were handing out hundreds like party favors, paying people for lost property and relatives, and using cash to compensate contractors submitting bills into the millions of dollars.
What we would consider outrageous waste and criminally negligent accounting back home are just part of running an empire.
You see, in Iraq the greenback is nothing but monopoly money. Their price system and domestic markets are sufficiently insulated from world currency exchanges that the Treasury is actually quite free to run the printing press. The important part for you future emperors to remember is that the increase in money supply is accompanied by a corresponding increase in the number of people who do business in dollars. So long as Iraqi markets operate in dollars and keep it out of the U.S. there is no problem. Money for nothing.
Money printing is horribly inflationary under normal circumstances, but due to Iraq’s economic isolation, the effect is distributed over a longer period of time as cash slowly filters back into the international market.
The so-called “inflation tax,” the gradual erosion in the value of the dollars we all hold, allows the Bush administration to come out in favor of tax cuts while still shoveling cash into the Sunni Triangle. That Congress is cut out of the deal is just gravy for the administration.
The effects will be felt for years, but the extra nickel you pay every time you go to the grocery story will be impossible to trace back to the Commander in Thief.
Brilliant.
Tuesday
Tinfoil Hat Alert
The FBI, taking a page from our friends at the NSA, has expanded its domestic snooping to include monitoring and recording huge amounts of Internet traffic without specific warrants. The technique, known as "full pipe recording," is an expansion of a program called Carnivore that was discontinued as a result of its constitutionally questionable techniques.
Apparently, rather than abandoning the illegal approach embodied in the old program, the FBI has chosen a new more innocuous name (DCS1000) and expanded its capture of non-criminal Internet traffic. The creation of its new database - and the network analysis and data mining it allows - may enable "lawmen" to go after people who discuss drug use, for instance, after they get done investigating the ostensible target of the original wiretap.
I have also recently learned that the FBI submitted as evidence recordings made from the cellular phones of mobsters while the phones were NOT IN USE. Combined with the GPS and triangulation capabilities of the cell network, this means that law enforcement can precisely determine your location and then listen to any conversations within a 15 foot radius of the cell phone sitting in your pocket. There is no way to tell if somebody is listening and no way to stop it short of removing the batteries. Experts believe that this technique can be employed even when the phone is turned off, and the government may even have access to images in view of the phone's camera lens.
Your own personal telescreen!
Apparently, rather than abandoning the illegal approach embodied in the old program, the FBI has chosen a new more innocuous name (DCS1000) and expanded its capture of non-criminal Internet traffic. The creation of its new database - and the network analysis and data mining it allows - may enable "lawmen" to go after people who discuss drug use, for instance, after they get done investigating the ostensible target of the original wiretap.
I have also recently learned that the FBI submitted as evidence recordings made from the cellular phones of mobsters while the phones were NOT IN USE. Combined with the GPS and triangulation capabilities of the cell network, this means that law enforcement can precisely determine your location and then listen to any conversations within a 15 foot radius of the cell phone sitting in your pocket. There is no way to tell if somebody is listening and no way to stop it short of removing the batteries. Experts believe that this technique can be employed even when the phone is turned off, and the government may even have access to images in view of the phone's camera lens.
Your own personal telescreen!
The Long History of Allied Torture
To follow up on the "Letter from Gitmo," I just thought I'd take a moment to point out some resources for people interested in the illustrious history of Allied torture. Leaving aside the alleged war crimes of our troops in the field, there are many examples of systematic and deliberate torture to obtain intelligence or simply to intimidate would be adversaries.
In the aftermath of World War II, the British operated their own concentration camps for German POWs and later for Communists captured on the continent or trying to enter Britain. Torture methods included starvation, beatings, exposure to extreme cold, sleep deprivation, and the use of torture implements captured from old German prisons.
In 1946, the US established a school in Panama dedicated to training military and secret police forces in Latin America. Among its graduates, you will find an infamous list of strong men and dictators who operated death squads, detention centers, and torture chambers across the continent. They were known for "disappearing," torturing, dismembering and murdering labor organizers, university professors and students, opposition members, indigenous leaders, and suspected communists. Methods include the usual beatings, burning, and broken bones, but the school's specialty seems to be the use of powerful electric shocks, especially to the genitals. The School of the Americas continues to operate in Fort Benning Georgia to this day, although the name has been changed.
In 2006, major news outlets reported on the existence of secret CIA torture prisons in Europe and the Middle East, and the practice of exporting detainees to third countries for some softening up before interrogation by Americans is well documented. The CIA and other American intelligence agencies have long practiced "coercive interrogation," but the large scale operations we see today are probably new. New less messy torture methods include "simulated drowning," sensory deprivation, exposure to extreme heat and cold, use of loud music, sleep deprivation, dogs, beatings, verbal attacks and sexual humiliation, a tactic found to be especially effective in the Muslim world.
I could go on about specific cases I've unearthed, but I can't decide if I want to drink whiskey or throw up first. Maybe I'll just drink whiskey till I throw up.
In the aftermath of World War II, the British operated their own concentration camps for German POWs and later for Communists captured on the continent or trying to enter Britain. Torture methods included starvation, beatings, exposure to extreme cold, sleep deprivation, and the use of torture implements captured from old German prisons.
In 1946, the US established a school in Panama dedicated to training military and secret police forces in Latin America. Among its graduates, you will find an infamous list of strong men and dictators who operated death squads, detention centers, and torture chambers across the continent. They were known for "disappearing," torturing, dismembering and murdering labor organizers, university professors and students, opposition members, indigenous leaders, and suspected communists. Methods include the usual beatings, burning, and broken bones, but the school's specialty seems to be the use of powerful electric shocks, especially to the genitals. The School of the Americas continues to operate in Fort Benning Georgia to this day, although the name has been changed.
In 2006, major news outlets reported on the existence of secret CIA torture prisons in Europe and the Middle East, and the practice of exporting detainees to third countries for some softening up before interrogation by Americans is well documented. The CIA and other American intelligence agencies have long practiced "coercive interrogation," but the large scale operations we see today are probably new. New less messy torture methods include "simulated drowning," sensory deprivation, exposure to extreme heat and cold, use of loud music, sleep deprivation, dogs, beatings, verbal attacks and sexual humiliation, a tactic found to be especially effective in the Muslim world.
I could go on about specific cases I've unearthed, but I can't decide if I want to drink whiskey or throw up first. Maybe I'll just drink whiskey till I throw up.
Poverty and Politics
Persistent poverty is a political problem.
It is the result of decades of irresponsible regulation, spending, and legislation which have imposed unacceptable costs on the majority of developing societies while conferring enormous rents on the people who have access to power.
Everywhere we go in the developing world, we see convoluted legal systems, arbitrary and manifestly unjust allocations of rights, and a middle class that is totally dependent on the state for its high living standards. This dependency and the enormous gap between the haves and the have nots creates pervasive fear of change and a systemic inability to reform, even in the face of hard economic facts.
The result is that most of the world’s poor “opt out” of the decaying formal legal structure, falling back on alternate forms of self-governance that can protect their assets and their lives. The central government’s power to enact policy often extends little beyond the center of the capital city, although as gate keeper to the outside world and the owner of many guns, it can play an incredibly disruptive role in the lives of its citizens.
The governments of the world are increasingly at odds with the independent structures that have sprung up around them. Violent clashes with police aside, proof of this adversarial relationship comes from the fact that the people who occupy these new spaces go by all sorts of dirty names in the press. The proletariat, informals, tax evaders, drug users, punks, anarchists, hustlers, squatters, criminals, illegal immigrants, smugglers, narco-terrorists, and insurgents are all part of the counterstate array.
The complexity, diversity, and extent of these alternative societies should not be underestimated. Even in countries with apparently liberal political systems, these extralegal forces often represent the majority, not some fringe of radicals and nonconformists. They represent the three quarters of the world that remains “unglobalized” in the sense that their political, social, and economic structures are unrecognized and even deliberately excluded by the global elite.
It should be noted that their attempts at nonparticipation in the formal economies of their countries does not necessarily signify resistance to globalization. In fact, they often work to bypass state institutions that are themselves obstacles to integration and commerce. Most of these people just want what everyone in the developed world wants: to work, to learn, and to prosper, to exert some control over their lives, and to provide more for their children than they were afforded.
With that said, the environment of inequality and exclusion can foster radical and violent ideologies that cut across national borders and attack the state system at its weakest points. It is important to remember that while the leaders may have a clear vision of their political objectives, the cannon fodder does not. The rank-and-file of the revolution is not likely to have read Marx.
As Claude Bowers noted in June 1945,
"The danger of communism comes from the misery of the masses, and where governments show no disposition to alleviate the economic condition, or even to hold forth hope of a higher standard of living. I venture to say that not one “communist” in ten knows what communism is. He understands it is something extremely opposite to the system under which he suffers and he joins the communists as a protest striking blindly and stupidly. He is convinced that nothing could be worse than his present state. Here again, as all through history, we encounter the stupidity of the over-privileged in refusing to concede anything to the man bellow."
The “rank and file” extralegals of the world are not the enemies of civilization, they are the enemies of their particular oppressors. It would be a shame if they destroyed the one to get at the other. We have already seen the consequences of ignoring their plight.
The crisis of state legitimacy has reached proportions that many in the developed world can scarcely imagine. We wring our hands about the handful of “failed” states, places where government has utterly collapsed or where war has reshuffled communities so many times that people are in a permanent state of flight. We are right to be concerned with these places, but the much larger problem is that all but a handful of states in the world are failed or failing if we apply any sort of objective standards to their performance.
The essence of democracy is not in written constitutions or ballot boxes, and it is not unique to western culture. It has to do with the idea that the just government must conform to the people, not the other way around.
The rise of economic informality shows how most people have voted with their feet against the regimes that profess to "represent" them.
It is the result of decades of irresponsible regulation, spending, and legislation which have imposed unacceptable costs on the majority of developing societies while conferring enormous rents on the people who have access to power.
Everywhere we go in the developing world, we see convoluted legal systems, arbitrary and manifestly unjust allocations of rights, and a middle class that is totally dependent on the state for its high living standards. This dependency and the enormous gap between the haves and the have nots creates pervasive fear of change and a systemic inability to reform, even in the face of hard economic facts.
The result is that most of the world’s poor “opt out” of the decaying formal legal structure, falling back on alternate forms of self-governance that can protect their assets and their lives. The central government’s power to enact policy often extends little beyond the center of the capital city, although as gate keeper to the outside world and the owner of many guns, it can play an incredibly disruptive role in the lives of its citizens.
The governments of the world are increasingly at odds with the independent structures that have sprung up around them. Violent clashes with police aside, proof of this adversarial relationship comes from the fact that the people who occupy these new spaces go by all sorts of dirty names in the press. The proletariat, informals, tax evaders, drug users, punks, anarchists, hustlers, squatters, criminals, illegal immigrants, smugglers, narco-terrorists, and insurgents are all part of the counterstate array.
The complexity, diversity, and extent of these alternative societies should not be underestimated. Even in countries with apparently liberal political systems, these extralegal forces often represent the majority, not some fringe of radicals and nonconformists. They represent the three quarters of the world that remains “unglobalized” in the sense that their political, social, and economic structures are unrecognized and even deliberately excluded by the global elite.
It should be noted that their attempts at nonparticipation in the formal economies of their countries does not necessarily signify resistance to globalization. In fact, they often work to bypass state institutions that are themselves obstacles to integration and commerce. Most of these people just want what everyone in the developed world wants: to work, to learn, and to prosper, to exert some control over their lives, and to provide more for their children than they were afforded.
With that said, the environment of inequality and exclusion can foster radical and violent ideologies that cut across national borders and attack the state system at its weakest points. It is important to remember that while the leaders may have a clear vision of their political objectives, the cannon fodder does not. The rank-and-file of the revolution is not likely to have read Marx.
As Claude Bowers noted in June 1945,
"The danger of communism comes from the misery of the masses, and where governments show no disposition to alleviate the economic condition, or even to hold forth hope of a higher standard of living. I venture to say that not one “communist” in ten knows what communism is. He understands it is something extremely opposite to the system under which he suffers and he joins the communists as a protest striking blindly and stupidly. He is convinced that nothing could be worse than his present state. Here again, as all through history, we encounter the stupidity of the over-privileged in refusing to concede anything to the man bellow."
The “rank and file” extralegals of the world are not the enemies of civilization, they are the enemies of their particular oppressors. It would be a shame if they destroyed the one to get at the other. We have already seen the consequences of ignoring their plight.
The crisis of state legitimacy has reached proportions that many in the developed world can scarcely imagine. We wring our hands about the handful of “failed” states, places where government has utterly collapsed or where war has reshuffled communities so many times that people are in a permanent state of flight. We are right to be concerned with these places, but the much larger problem is that all but a handful of states in the world are failed or failing if we apply any sort of objective standards to their performance.
The essence of democracy is not in written constitutions or ballot boxes, and it is not unique to western culture. It has to do with the idea that the just government must conform to the people, not the other way around.
The rise of economic informality shows how most people have voted with their feet against the regimes that profess to "represent" them.
Friday
Letter From Gitmo
The LA Times prints a letter by a current prisoner in Guantanamo Bay.
After you read this letter, you may also want to find this book, Arthur Koestler's "Darkness at Noon."
I'll let Jumah al-Dossari speak for himself.
Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba — I AM WRITING from the darkness of the U.S. detention camp at Guantanamo in the hope that I can make our voices heard by the world. My hand quivers as I hold the pen. In January 2002, I was picked up in Pakistan, blindfolded, shackled, drugged and loaded onto a plane flown to Cuba. When we got off the plane in Guantanamo, we did not know where we were. They took us to Camp X-Ray and locked us in cages with two buckets — one empty and one filled with water. We were to urinate in one and wash in the other. At Guantanamo, soldiers have assaulted me, placed me in solitary confinement, threatened to kill me, threatened to kill my daughter and told me I will stay in Cuba for the rest of my life. They have deprived me of sleep, forced me to listen to extremely loud music and shined intense lights in my face. They have placed me in cold rooms for hours without food, drink or the ability to go to the bathroom or wash for prayers. They have wrapped me in the Israeli flag and told me there is a holy war between the Cross and the Star of David on one hand and the Crescent on the other. They have beaten me unconscious. What I write here is not what my imagination fancies or my insanity dictates. These are verifiable facts witnessed by other detainees, representatives of the Red Cross, interrogators and translators.During the first few years at Guantanamo, I was interrogated many times. My interrogators told me that they wanted me to admit that I am from Al Qaeda and that I was involved in the terrorist attacks on the United States. I told them that I have no connection to what they described. I am not a member of Al Qaeda. I did not encourage anyone to go fight for Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden have done nothing but kill and denigrate a religion. I never fought, and I never carried a weapon. I like the United States, and I am not an enemy. I have lived in the United States, and I wanted to become a citizen. I know that the soldiers who did bad things to me represent themselves, not the United States. And I have to say that not all American soldiers stationed in Cuba tortured us or mistreated us. There were soldiers who treated us very humanely. Some even cried when they witnessed our dire conditions. Once, in Camp Delta, a soldier apologized to me and offered me hot chocolate and cookies. When I thanked him, he said, "I do not need you to thank me." I include this because I do not want readers to think that I fault all Americans.But, why, after five years, is there no conclusion to the situation at Guantanamo? For how long will fathers, mothers, wives, siblings and children cry for their imprisoned loved ones? For how long will my daughter have to ask about my return? The answers can only be found with the fair-minded people of America.I would rather die than stay here forever, and I have tried to commit suicide many times. The purpose of Guantanamo is to destroy people, and I have been destroyed. I am hopeless because our voices are not heard from the depths of the detention center. If I die, please remember that there was a human being named Jumah at Guantanamo whose beliefs, dignity and humanity were abused. Please remember that there are hundreds of detainees at Guantanamo suffering the same misfortune. They have not been charged with any crimes. They have not been accused of taking any action against the United States. Show the world the letters I gave you. Let the world read them. Let the world know the agony of the detainees in Cuba.
After you read this letter, you may also want to find this book, Arthur Koestler's "Darkness at Noon."
I'll let Jumah al-Dossari speak for himself.
Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba — I AM WRITING from the darkness of the U.S. detention camp at Guantanamo in the hope that I can make our voices heard by the world. My hand quivers as I hold the pen. In January 2002, I was picked up in Pakistan, blindfolded, shackled, drugged and loaded onto a plane flown to Cuba. When we got off the plane in Guantanamo, we did not know where we were. They took us to Camp X-Ray and locked us in cages with two buckets — one empty and one filled with water. We were to urinate in one and wash in the other. At Guantanamo, soldiers have assaulted me, placed me in solitary confinement, threatened to kill me, threatened to kill my daughter and told me I will stay in Cuba for the rest of my life. They have deprived me of sleep, forced me to listen to extremely loud music and shined intense lights in my face. They have placed me in cold rooms for hours without food, drink or the ability to go to the bathroom or wash for prayers. They have wrapped me in the Israeli flag and told me there is a holy war between the Cross and the Star of David on one hand and the Crescent on the other. They have beaten me unconscious. What I write here is not what my imagination fancies or my insanity dictates. These are verifiable facts witnessed by other detainees, representatives of the Red Cross, interrogators and translators.During the first few years at Guantanamo, I was interrogated many times. My interrogators told me that they wanted me to admit that I am from Al Qaeda and that I was involved in the terrorist attacks on the United States. I told them that I have no connection to what they described. I am not a member of Al Qaeda. I did not encourage anyone to go fight for Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden have done nothing but kill and denigrate a religion. I never fought, and I never carried a weapon. I like the United States, and I am not an enemy. I have lived in the United States, and I wanted to become a citizen. I know that the soldiers who did bad things to me represent themselves, not the United States. And I have to say that not all American soldiers stationed in Cuba tortured us or mistreated us. There were soldiers who treated us very humanely. Some even cried when they witnessed our dire conditions. Once, in Camp Delta, a soldier apologized to me and offered me hot chocolate and cookies. When I thanked him, he said, "I do not need you to thank me." I include this because I do not want readers to think that I fault all Americans.But, why, after five years, is there no conclusion to the situation at Guantanamo? For how long will fathers, mothers, wives, siblings and children cry for their imprisoned loved ones? For how long will my daughter have to ask about my return? The answers can only be found with the fair-minded people of America.I would rather die than stay here forever, and I have tried to commit suicide many times. The purpose of Guantanamo is to destroy people, and I have been destroyed. I am hopeless because our voices are not heard from the depths of the detention center. If I die, please remember that there was a human being named Jumah at Guantanamo whose beliefs, dignity and humanity were abused. Please remember that there are hundreds of detainees at Guantanamo suffering the same misfortune. They have not been charged with any crimes. They have not been accused of taking any action against the United States. Show the world the letters I gave you. Let the world read them. Let the world know the agony of the detainees in Cuba.
Sunday
You don't have to pay income taxes!
"America: Freedom to Fascism."
If you can ignore the crummy filming and apparent lunacy of the producers, this documentary has some interesting information. The interviews when Rasso is not himself speaking are quite good. Just watch it with an eye for the moments when the gears slip and he launches into his own little dream world. Even if it weren't about a topic close to my heart, his delightfully paranoid conclusions would be worth a view.
Also, to my LA associates, you will notice that much of the documentary is shot at a corner in Venice Beach that has perhaps the highest concentration of crackpots and conspiracy theorists in the in lower 48 states. Way to build credibility.
If you can ignore the crummy filming and apparent lunacy of the producers, this documentary has some interesting information. The interviews when Rasso is not himself speaking are quite good. Just watch it with an eye for the moments when the gears slip and he launches into his own little dream world. Even if it weren't about a topic close to my heart, his delightfully paranoid conclusions would be worth a view.
Also, to my LA associates, you will notice that much of the documentary is shot at a corner in Venice Beach that has perhaps the highest concentration of crackpots and conspiracy theorists in the in lower 48 states. Way to build credibility.
Thursday
100 Hour Orgy
As the Democrats take control of Congress, the Washington scandal clock is reset by the ceremonial placing of hands on books and the mouthing of oaths.
This majority swept in on a reform platform, promising to ram new laws through to correct the excesses of their Republican colleagues. Unfortunately for us, this “hundred hour orgy” is nothing but a publicity stunt and a thinly veiled loyalty test for incoming members. The issues at stake are decidedly trivial, and are unlikely to change the way things are done in Washington.
The leadership wants to know who will play ball, who will bow to the party and vote the way they want - regardless of the details of a given bill - when it is required of them. Am I the only one to notice that Pelosi and the Democrats are taking pages from the notorious playbook of Tom “The Hammer” Delay?
Boxing out the opposition, demanding lock-step party discipline, and passing legislation with no time for consideration or debate? As the oaths of office fade in their minds and Congress settles back into "business as usual," the precedent is set for the kind of one-sided Democratic circle jerk that can only produce a new and deeper round of corruption, graft, and incompetence.
The clock is ticking.
This majority swept in on a reform platform, promising to ram new laws through to correct the excesses of their Republican colleagues. Unfortunately for us, this “hundred hour orgy” is nothing but a publicity stunt and a thinly veiled loyalty test for incoming members. The issues at stake are decidedly trivial, and are unlikely to change the way things are done in Washington.
The leadership wants to know who will play ball, who will bow to the party and vote the way they want - regardless of the details of a given bill - when it is required of them. Am I the only one to notice that Pelosi and the Democrats are taking pages from the notorious playbook of Tom “The Hammer” Delay?
Boxing out the opposition, demanding lock-step party discipline, and passing legislation with no time for consideration or debate? As the oaths of office fade in their minds and Congress settles back into "business as usual," the precedent is set for the kind of one-sided Democratic circle jerk that can only produce a new and deeper round of corruption, graft, and incompetence.
The clock is ticking.
The Silver Parachute
For many years, executives being laid off from major corporations have been offered so-called golden parachutes, generous severance packages designed to ensure that no management personnel goes away angry or impoverished because the company has fallen on hard times. These multi-million dollar arrangements drew widespread criticism because rank and file workers were often given little more than 2 weeks notice when their contracts were terminated.
Those days are over.
The Ford Motor Company - since its creation a pioneer in labor relations - has once again bucked the trend, this time by offering generous optional buyouts to some 75,000 hourly workers as it downsizes.
Ford has been hit hard by competition in the U.S. market, and in an effort to cut costs and slough off unneeded capacity, it has started closing plants. Many feared that these firings would mean financial ruin for thousands of workers, particularly those who were approaching retirement and were too old to relocate and find new work. Without getting into the structure of the buyout program, the bottom line is that Ford has been able to significantly downsize without leaving families in the gutter. In fact, many workers were positively ecstatic about the opportunity to go back to school or start their own business with the money and support they received from Ford.
Downsizing is a serous challenge for any large organization. People plan their lives around their jobs, and pulling the rug out from under thousands of families can have effects that ripple across the economy. Moreover, the political and commercial consequences of such decisions are such that many organizations continue to operate with large numbers of obsolete or unnecessary workers rather than face the media firestorm.
In my opinion, our beloved government is one such organization. It is the nation’s largest employer with something like 20 million Americans on the payroll at the local state and federal levels. Despite labor saving information technologies and the rise of private firms offering to perform traditional government services for profit, the size of the government has continued to swell.
Even the most “small government” administrations have proved incapable of popping this pimple because firing people is just plain unpopular. We have entered an era when government not only provides public goods but also secure jobs paid with public funds. This “make work” mission, largely a product of the New Deal, has infected our civil service corps with a sense of entitlement instead of a sense of responsibility.
I believe that job security and just compensation are important to attract the best people to government, but when it becomes impossible restructure the public workforce, political reform itself becomes impossible.
This idea of the “silver parachute,” selective, attractive, optional buyouts that leave both workers and taxpayers better off, may be a powerful tool to enact the kinds of public sector reforms that our country so obviously needs.
When it comes to governments, that which does not evolve is dying.
Those days are over.
The Ford Motor Company - since its creation a pioneer in labor relations - has once again bucked the trend, this time by offering generous optional buyouts to some 75,000 hourly workers as it downsizes.
Ford has been hit hard by competition in the U.S. market, and in an effort to cut costs and slough off unneeded capacity, it has started closing plants. Many feared that these firings would mean financial ruin for thousands of workers, particularly those who were approaching retirement and were too old to relocate and find new work. Without getting into the structure of the buyout program, the bottom line is that Ford has been able to significantly downsize without leaving families in the gutter. In fact, many workers were positively ecstatic about the opportunity to go back to school or start their own business with the money and support they received from Ford.
Downsizing is a serous challenge for any large organization. People plan their lives around their jobs, and pulling the rug out from under thousands of families can have effects that ripple across the economy. Moreover, the political and commercial consequences of such decisions are such that many organizations continue to operate with large numbers of obsolete or unnecessary workers rather than face the media firestorm.
In my opinion, our beloved government is one such organization. It is the nation’s largest employer with something like 20 million Americans on the payroll at the local state and federal levels. Despite labor saving information technologies and the rise of private firms offering to perform traditional government services for profit, the size of the government has continued to swell.
Even the most “small government” administrations have proved incapable of popping this pimple because firing people is just plain unpopular. We have entered an era when government not only provides public goods but also secure jobs paid with public funds. This “make work” mission, largely a product of the New Deal, has infected our civil service corps with a sense of entitlement instead of a sense of responsibility.
I believe that job security and just compensation are important to attract the best people to government, but when it becomes impossible restructure the public workforce, political reform itself becomes impossible.
This idea of the “silver parachute,” selective, attractive, optional buyouts that leave both workers and taxpayers better off, may be a powerful tool to enact the kinds of public sector reforms that our country so obviously needs.
When it comes to governments, that which does not evolve is dying.
Friday
History II
The document posted below was found in stack of papers from the U.S. Army General Staff, and although it was probably written sometime during 1944, I rather wish it had been circulated in 2003 as the country prepared to invade Iraq. Many of the observations could apply verbatim to our current ill-fated war.
I challenge you, oh my loyal readers, to provide a single historical example of a foreign army conquering another on its home soil only to be greeted as liberators. I don't care how bad the regime was, that's just not how human beings work, particularly when you consider that a sizeable group profited enormously from the corrupt regime. Most of Iraq may be happy the old bastard is gone, but to believe that they would treat us as anything but the occupying force we are is insane.
We were simply unprepared for the demands of a full scale occupation. The initial disorder, looting, reprisals and the subsequent insurgency were utterly foreseeable, and in fact were foreseen by the planners that Rumsfeld and his deputies dutifully ignored.
As I stood in the audience of a rock concert last week and turned to notice Paul Wolfowitz standing beside me in all his portly glory, I was torn between the desire to engage him in a knock down drag out debate on foreign policy or give him a big sloppy Wet Willy for his foolishness. Then I remembered that he probably had security with him.
I challenge you, oh my loyal readers, to provide a single historical example of a foreign army conquering another on its home soil only to be greeted as liberators. I don't care how bad the regime was, that's just not how human beings work, particularly when you consider that a sizeable group profited enormously from the corrupt regime. Most of Iraq may be happy the old bastard is gone, but to believe that they would treat us as anything but the occupying force we are is insane.
We were simply unprepared for the demands of a full scale occupation. The initial disorder, looting, reprisals and the subsequent insurgency were utterly foreseeable, and in fact were foreseen by the planners that Rumsfeld and his deputies dutifully ignored.
As I stood in the audience of a rock concert last week and turned to notice Paul Wolfowitz standing beside me in all his portly glory, I was torn between the desire to engage him in a knock down drag out debate on foreign policy or give him a big sloppy Wet Willy for his foolishness. Then I remembered that he probably had security with him.
Wednesday
What was that thing about history repeating itself?
My weekly trip to the National Archive in College Park, MD turned up this document:
SECRET
The Secretary of War after reading the following memo commented "this is a remarkably good paper" and directed that it be circulated.
Memorandum For:
Subject: Observations on Post Hostilities Policy Toward Japan
1. To be realistic, post hostilities policy toward Japan must be based upon:
a. Recognition of the probable reaction of the American public over a period of time. A policy which does not win the continuing support of the American public is doomed to failure.
b. Recognition of the lessons taught by history with respect to relations between the conqueror and the conquered.
2. The most important points to be noted in connection with a and b above would appear to be the following:
a. The American public will unquestionably become restive under a prolonged occupation of Japan by American forces. It will not wish to assume the burdens of governing Japan over an extended period. Demands for withdrawal are likely to begin within 6 months after the surrender of Japan and thereafter to build up increasing political pressure to that end.
b. Even under the most just and equitable administration, resentment against a conquering nation exercising direct political and military control over a vanquished nation inevitably tends to increase over a period of time. Difficulties arise which present the ruling nation with the alternative of either EXTENDING AND TIGHTENING CONTROL OR WITHDRAWING WITHOUT accomplishing THE DESIRED OBJECTIVES.
c. The conquering nation CANNOT IMPOSE ITS FORM OF GOVERNMENT, IDEALS OR WAY OF LIFE EXCEPT BY PERMANENT MILITARY OCCUPATION AND IMMIGRATION.
3. The formulation of our policies toward post hostilities Japan, therefore, requires the highest degree of statesmanship. We must look forward as well as backward. We must:
a. Avoid to the maximum extent possible policies dictated by current war hysteria which subsequently the American public will repudiate or which will involve commitments which the American public will be unwilling to fulfill.
b. Attempt to accomplish the maximum degree of progress towards the regeneration of Japan in the minimum amount of time. Our degree of success in accomplishing this objective will depend upon the intelligence with which we approach the problem of the relations between victor and vanquished.
...
5.b. Allied Mlitary Gvernment is bound to be bungling, undiplomatic, and inefficient. We must give full recognition to the fact that we do not have sufficient personnel with the proper vision training and ability to carry out the task effectively.
(caps mine)
SECRET
The Secretary of War after reading the following memo commented "this is a remarkably good paper" and directed that it be circulated.
Memorandum For:
Subject: Observations on Post Hostilities Policy Toward Japan
1. To be realistic, post hostilities policy toward Japan must be based upon:
a. Recognition of the probable reaction of the American public over a period of time. A policy which does not win the continuing support of the American public is doomed to failure.
b. Recognition of the lessons taught by history with respect to relations between the conqueror and the conquered.
2. The most important points to be noted in connection with a and b above would appear to be the following:
a. The American public will unquestionably become restive under a prolonged occupation of Japan by American forces. It will not wish to assume the burdens of governing Japan over an extended period. Demands for withdrawal are likely to begin within 6 months after the surrender of Japan and thereafter to build up increasing political pressure to that end.
b. Even under the most just and equitable administration, resentment against a conquering nation exercising direct political and military control over a vanquished nation inevitably tends to increase over a period of time. Difficulties arise which present the ruling nation with the alternative of either EXTENDING AND TIGHTENING CONTROL OR WITHDRAWING WITHOUT accomplishing THE DESIRED OBJECTIVES.
c. The conquering nation CANNOT IMPOSE ITS FORM OF GOVERNMENT, IDEALS OR WAY OF LIFE EXCEPT BY PERMANENT MILITARY OCCUPATION AND IMMIGRATION.
3. The formulation of our policies toward post hostilities Japan, therefore, requires the highest degree of statesmanship. We must look forward as well as backward. We must:
a. Avoid to the maximum extent possible policies dictated by current war hysteria which subsequently the American public will repudiate or which will involve commitments which the American public will be unwilling to fulfill.
b. Attempt to accomplish the maximum degree of progress towards the regeneration of Japan in the minimum amount of time. Our degree of success in accomplishing this objective will depend upon the intelligence with which we approach the problem of the relations between victor and vanquished.
...
5.b. Allied Mlitary Gvernment is bound to be bungling, undiplomatic, and inefficient. We must give full recognition to the fact that we do not have sufficient personnel with the proper vision training and ability to carry out the task effectively.
(caps mine)
Tuesday
The Lost Generation
I fear that my generation, a cohort still struggling to define itself, is paralyzed by the hugeness of the changes we have witnessed. In our short lives, the tidy if dangerous geopolitical landscape of our fathers has simply decomposed. How are we to make sense of the world when all we have known is the deepening confusion of the people in charge? How are we to move with any sort of resolve through the shifting sands of this new era?
We came into a world shadowy with the communist threat, the biggest arms race in history peaking as we put away our first memories. At the tender age of 7, we were introduced to a newly democratic and capitalist world without war. At 8, we watched “smart bombs” turn Iraqi tanks inside out for the first time.
Our parents struggled through recession amid talks of decline. Just a few years later, they were building big houses in the suburbs with the dividends from their stock portfolios.
We were the first children to use the internet, the first students for whom its resources were indispensable. We have watched it evolve from a formless free-for-all of nerds and hackers to the most useful tool since fire.
At 17, the towers came down and the new nightmare began. We were just old enough to form ourselves under the image of Old America, the strong and beneficent champion of freedom. As a result, we felt most keenly what was lost when we were forced to accept the New American Empire and the security apparatus that accompanied it.
As we sat glued to the television news through the attack, the invasions, and the insurgency, we asked ourselves, who are these people and why do they want to destroy us? In the subsequent months and years, we would learn the answer to that question and many more we would never have thought to ask.
Our view of the world as a friendly and open place is shattered, yet with each year it becomes more important for us to be good global citizens. If we retreat within ourselves and the fortified borders of our state, we will never reverse the tide of provincialism and violence.
Though deeply flawed, our country still contains within it the seeds of something great. The revolutionary ideas that we embody as a nation – that we try to embody, pretend to embody – will outlast our corrupt politicians and our drowning bureaucracies if our generation can keep the ideas vibrant.
The intellectual will required to renew the world’s governments is not a simple thing to muster however. Repeating the tired words of the founding fathers as if they were gods is not enough anymore. New scholarship, new writing, and new compromises are necessary to make freedom, peace and prosperity real in this world. We the youth of America have the power to resist the agonizing slide into mediocrity, the power to resist the temptations of apathy, the power to resist those who would make us free people in name only.
Our generation is engaged in a struggle for clarity and understanding in a world of mixed messages and bad data. The battle for the future begins in our minds, and so far we are losing.
We came into a world shadowy with the communist threat, the biggest arms race in history peaking as we put away our first memories. At the tender age of 7, we were introduced to a newly democratic and capitalist world without war. At 8, we watched “smart bombs” turn Iraqi tanks inside out for the first time.
Our parents struggled through recession amid talks of decline. Just a few years later, they were building big houses in the suburbs with the dividends from their stock portfolios.
We were the first children to use the internet, the first students for whom its resources were indispensable. We have watched it evolve from a formless free-for-all of nerds and hackers to the most useful tool since fire.
At 17, the towers came down and the new nightmare began. We were just old enough to form ourselves under the image of Old America, the strong and beneficent champion of freedom. As a result, we felt most keenly what was lost when we were forced to accept the New American Empire and the security apparatus that accompanied it.
As we sat glued to the television news through the attack, the invasions, and the insurgency, we asked ourselves, who are these people and why do they want to destroy us? In the subsequent months and years, we would learn the answer to that question and many more we would never have thought to ask.
Our view of the world as a friendly and open place is shattered, yet with each year it becomes more important for us to be good global citizens. If we retreat within ourselves and the fortified borders of our state, we will never reverse the tide of provincialism and violence.
Though deeply flawed, our country still contains within it the seeds of something great. The revolutionary ideas that we embody as a nation – that we try to embody, pretend to embody – will outlast our corrupt politicians and our drowning bureaucracies if our generation can keep the ideas vibrant.
The intellectual will required to renew the world’s governments is not a simple thing to muster however. Repeating the tired words of the founding fathers as if they were gods is not enough anymore. New scholarship, new writing, and new compromises are necessary to make freedom, peace and prosperity real in this world. We the youth of America have the power to resist the agonizing slide into mediocrity, the power to resist the temptations of apathy, the power to resist those who would make us free people in name only.
Our generation is engaged in a struggle for clarity and understanding in a world of mixed messages and bad data. The battle for the future begins in our minds, and so far we are losing.
Thursday
Well, the Votes Are In
Nothing to say I haven't said already, but everyone keep your fingers crossed for an uneventful lame duck session.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)