When liberals put the case for civil liberties, they sometimes claim that obnoxious measures do not help the fight against terrorism anyway. The Economist is liberal but disagrees. We accept that letting secret policemen spy on citizens, detain them without trial and use torture to extract information makes it easier to foil terrorist plots. To eschew such tools is to fight terrorism with one hand tied behind your back. But that—with one hand tied behind their back—is precisely how democracies ought to fight terrorism.
Speaking of which, has anybody else noticed how Michael 'I love JFK' Bay seems to have sneaked an anti-Abu Ghraib statement into Transformers (I am of course referring to the Bumblebee torture scene) - or am I seeing depth where there is only (albeit rather magnificently shot) shallowness?
American, Canadian and British soldiers or vets: please read this
We (a group of journalism students and myself, being their professor) are doing a story on the Dutch military expedition in the Afghan province of Oruzgan. The Dutch military puts great emphasis on its presumed diplomatic way of dealing with the locals.
This so-called 'Dutch approach' has however drawn criticism from other allied soldiers.
In order to be able to either corroborate or disprove these criticisms, we would like to speak (or email) with soldiers or veterans of other western nations who have had contact with Dutch soldiers in either the Afghan or Iraqi theatre.
Results will be published in a major Dutch news outlet. This is not just an exercise for our students: they are practicing for the big stage.
Survey: US immigration officers are a bunch of pr*cks
I've said it before and I'll happily repeat it: I love (going to) the United States, but I dread the employees of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), as they manage to make a German shepherd on acid look quite friendly by comparison. In short, even though I did apply for a Green Card, I would rather eat three bowls of Special K soaked in gasoline than encounter one of those rather frustrated sons of a gun that pass for government employees on American airports.
US immigration and customs officials are viewed as "arrogant, rude and unpredictable" by foreign business travellers in a survey by the Discover America Partnership, a group of US business leaders concerned about the impact on the economy.
(...)
"We deliberately sampled an elite group of business travellers who are more likely to feel positive towards the US than most people in their own countries," said Geoff Freeman, the director of Discover America Partnership. "All they are asking is to be treated with respect, professionalism and courtesy: they are not asking for America to reduce its security measures."
Respect, professionalism and courtesy are three words I have never, ever associated with US immigration officials. How can a country which harbors such a friendly people hire such rude a**hats to extend the first welcome?
Yesterday was the kind of day that makes you wonder which species has a higher sense of ethics: man or the tiger snake. Suffice it to say I was in less than jubilant spirits when I drove to the cinema to watch 'United 93' with Bob, my publisher.
While driving, I was listening to a business news radio station that devoted some minutes to a series of classical concerts that are currently taking place in Amsterdam. They played a musical piece I'd never heard before. Yet, with temperatures currently soaring well into the 80's, my eyes watered, and my bad mood lifted.
(Remember kids, invest in a good sound system in your car. It may well kill you one day, whilst you slam into a wall due to excessively wet eyes.)
I could barely make out the name of the composer, but upon return from 'United 93' I looked up the station's website and found out his name was Charles Ives, and the piece they played was called 'The Unanswered Question'.
Now, if you want deeply existential stuff that's equally depressing, there's usually plenty of it in your local book store or concert hall. Dutch literature in particular revels in portraying even the happiest occasion as the ultimate proof of life's futility.
And that is precisely why my skin flared while listing to Ives in the car. Ives poses the question, but he doesn't profess to know the answer. All without mocking the trumpet that asks the question. Instead, it keeps on asking the question until only the silence of the violins remains.
Happy Fourth of July, and never mind the frustrated woodwinds.
Do you remember the guy that swallowed 40,000 MDMA pills and lived? The quantity this mdmaholic took got a lot of attention, less so the fact that it's apparently possible to swallow loads of this supposedly highly dangerous drug - up to 25 pills a day for years on end - and live. Try drinking alcohol at comparable intake levels and you'll end up not with memory problems that may or may not be transitory, as this guy did, but as a 120 percent proof corpse. So it's not entirely surprising, though welcome, that this case leads The Lancet to propagate an end to prohibition, at least for purposes of medical research:
Exaggerated risks of harm have contributed to the demonisation of psychedelic drugs as a social evil. But although this dangerous reputation—generated and perpetuated by the often disproportionately stiff penalties for their use—is helpful for law enforcement, it does not correspond to the evidence. Rather, the social prescription against psychedelic drugs that hinders properly controlled research into their effects and sideeffects is largely based on social and legal, as opposed to scientific, concerns. To maximise research into therapeutic benefits without exacerbating real social harms a legal structure that recognises this distinction is sorely needed.
There they lay, dying. Cut off at - nay: below the knee. And there was nothing now that could save them, not even the water I tried to feed them, despite it having been enriched with more chemicals than can be found on an average Saturday night in an Amsterdam club.
Over the following days and nights, I sat still, staring at them, pausing only for the fulfillment of essential biological functions such as eating and sleeping. And during that time, I slowly watched them fade away, until, this morning, they died.
Secretary Van Ardenne of International Development alienates herself from her own civilization by uttering unacceptable criticisms of freedom of speech in an Arab newspaper
It was a small, but useful diplomatic victory. Thanks to secretary Ben Bot (CDA party or Christian Democrats, AD) the European Union has altered a statement on the Danish cartoons in order to make sure it couldn't be interpreted as support for those who felt an apology on the part of the Danish was in order. There is no reason whatsoever to meet extremists halfway.
Not quite as useful was the article that Bot's fellow CDA member Agnes van Ardenne wrote for Arab newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat. The secretary of International Development painted 'those that make a lot of racket about freedom of expression' as dangerous 'fundamentalist secularists' who use the guise of tolerance to target religion. Whereas, according to Van Ardenne, it is 'an undeniable fact' that religion constitutes 'one of the binding factors of our time'.
To those that have seen the Twin Towers in New York collapse, or who have read the Qu'ran, this fact may not seem as self-evident. But the most painful result of Van Ardenne's statements is that they constitute a knife in the back of advocates of free speech such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Geert Wilders, brave politicians who need around the clock security in order to be protected against the 'binding' effects of Islam.
The secretary used a visit to Yemen to plead for 'reconciliation rather than alienation', but alienated herself from her own civilization by launching an unacceptable assault on criticism of religion.
The (free market, AD) VVD party was angry because the secretary went against the policies of the Dutch administration. But the reality is much worse. Agnes van Ardenne has committed intellectual treason against the foundations of liberal democracy.
(This article was originally printed in Dutch news weekly Elsevier. Reprinted with kind permission of editor-in-chief Arendo Joustra of Elsevier. Please respect Elsevier's copyright. Translation mine.)
Two Iraqi documents dated in March 2003 — on the eve of the U.S.-led invasion — and addressed to the secretary of Saddam Hussein, describe details of a U.S. plan for war. According to the documents, the plan was disclosed to the Iraqis by the Russian ambassador.
(...)
An Iraqi intelligence service document saying that their Afghan informant, who's only identified by a number, told them that the Afghan consul Ahmed Dahastani claimed the following in front of him: That OBL and the Taliban are in contact with Iraq and that a group of Taliban and bin Laden group members visited Iraq.
(...)
This is an intriguing document that suggests Saddam Hussein's regime had a strong interest in the mechanics and legalities of financial contributions to French politicians. Several former French politicians are implicated in receiving oil vouchers from Iraq under the U.N. Oil for Food program.
Of course, one source means no source, and any claims resulting from the above ABC investigation need to be corroborated. But I'd reckon this article would have drawn a lot more attention if it were to claim rather the opposite from the above.
Update 10.10, 25/3/06: I'm eating my words; the Russian link is all over news.google.com. It took them a day, but that's pretty good for the MSM. After all, they get paid, so why hurry.
Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati: Western culture and civilization - and especially criminal America - are heading towards a serious collapse.
Crowd: Allah Akbar.
Allah Akbar.
Allah Akbar.
Khamenei is the leader.
Death to those who reject the rule of the Jurisprudent.
Death to America.
Death to England.
Death to the hypocrites [Mojahedin-e Khalq] and Saddam.
Death to Israel.
Christianity sucks. I never got to hear such riveting speeches in church when I was a kid. When I read this stuff in western newspapers, it tends to be a satirical piece in The Onion. Speaking of which, it seems the crowd could use some Onion schooling in divinity:
(By the way, I will post more on the Hofstad group verdict later on. Several politicians have commented on the verdict, which is a direct violation of the trias politica. Moreover, any comments at this time are hugely premature, since the full verdicts have not been made available to the general public yet; only a summary has. And as they say: 'Death of a Salesman' is summarized by its title.)
CIA analyst Douglas Biryla advised the public at large to skip the latest video tape from fugitive Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden Monday. "This latest offering doesn't have anything his post 9-11 work lacks—just the usual ominous threats of total annihilation to the West," Biryla said. "Despite some nice remastering work courtesy of Al-Sahab, it's not bin Laden's best , and certainly not mandatory viewing outside of the intelligence community or bin Laden's more hardcore fans."
First I read this, then this. Which makes it all the more important to sign this, if you haven't already. It's not over yet, in fact, the battle for freedom of speech may be just beginning.
According to the Dutch ministry of health there's no reason whatsoever to keep your cats inside in order to prevent the spread of H5N1. There's hardly any chance of them getting infected anyway.
Oh really.
According to Dr. Kuiken (which translates as Dr. 'Chick') and Dr. Rimmelzwaan (which translates as Dr. Swan - I am not making this up), the risk is definitely there. And Nature seems to think so as well.
Fortunately, Ender is much too busy sleeping anyway.
A Muslim cultural institute in Germany on Monday criticized Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad for disparaging the Holocaust, daring him to visit the Auschwitz concentration camp.
"In this place of horror he can again deny the Holocaust, if he has the courage," a spokesman for the Islam-Archiv-Deutschland Central Institute told the German Catholic press agency KNA.
Those who rise up against the expression of ideas are strikingly similar. No one is less tolerant than those demanding tolerance. Despite differences of culture and creed, they all seem to share the notion that there is only one way of looking at things, their way.
A LEADING imam in the mosque where the July 7 bombers worshipped has hailed their terrorist attack on London as a “good†act in a secretly taped conversation with an undercover reporter.
Hamid Ali, spiritual leader of the mosque in West Yorkshire, said it had forced people to take notice when peaceful meetings and conferences had no impact.
Derogatory noises from the left about a journalist having used unsavory reporting practices start in 3, 2, 1...
Seems the scriptkiddies that attacked Danish websites made a little movie about their exploits. Download it here (right click, save as). (Via Infovlad and PMM Blognoot.)
'If Chinese radicals were ransacking Western embassies because of a cartoon, and were backed by the Chinese government, we would be outraged, demanding apologies, severing relations, and so on. But when Muslims do it, backed by Islamist governments, we are supposed to take it on the chin, to "respect" their religious traditions, issue mealy-mouthed statements, etc. In many ways, this is the real offense: treating Muslims as if their violation of global norms, and thralldom to medieval conceptions of politics and religion, were somehow acceptable.
They are not acceptable. Islam must reform itself if it is to have a proud and noble place again among the great religions of the world. Muslim countries must allow freedom of religion for other faiths - and allow their citizens free votes in free elections. Dabbling in Holocaust denial by a current government should be treated as a form of insanity or fascism, rather than as some kind of thing to be "understood". Those who are addicted to the narcotic of religious fanaticism do not need enabling or excuses. They need an intervention. Especially when they are on the verge of wielding nuclear weapons.'
“That does not happen by accident; there has to be some kind of acceptance by the state to let that kind of demonstration to go ahead,†US deputy secretary for European affairs, Kurt Volker told reporters on Monday.
"I don't believe there is a question of legitimacy for Europe, the United States or others to apply sanctions."
Compare his attitude to that of Spanish prime minister Jose Barosso, who today writes in the International Herald Tribune, along with prime minister Recep Erdogan of Turkey:
Freedom of expression is one of the cornerstones of our democratic systems and we shall never relinquish it. But there are no rights without responsibility and respect for different sensibilities. The publication of these caricatures may be perfectly legal, but it is not indifferent and thus ought to be rejected from a moral and political standpoint.
Choosing my holiday destination this year is getting easier by the minute. I think I'll settle for Copenhagen (with sincere apologies towards any female readers who until now maybe thought I was capable of reproducing through agamogenesis).
'Buitenhof', a Dutch news show, just showed Hans van den Broek, a former secretary of foreign affairs. Mr. Van den Broek likes to cave in to violence. To paraphrase what he just said: 'If cartoons create all this mayhem, then you should wonder if publishing them is worth all that.' In other words, the limits of freedom of speech are determined by those who are quickest in being willing to use violence.
Islam makes very large claims for itself. In its art, there is a prejudice against representing the human form at all. The prohibition on picturing the prophet—who was only another male mammal—is apparently absolute. So is the prohibition on pork or alcohol or, in some Muslim societies, music or dancing. Very well then, let a good Muslim abstain rigorously from all these. But if he claims the right to make me abstain as well, he offers the clearest possible warning and proof of an aggressive intent.
How can we expect immigrants to integrate into western society when they are at the same time being taught that the west is decadent, a den of iniquity, the source of all evil, racist, imperialist and to be despised? Why should they, in the words of the African-American writer James Baldwin, want to integrate into a sinking ship? Why do they all want to immigrate to the west and not Saudi Arabia? They should be taught about the centuries of struggle that resulted in the freedoms that they and everyone else for that matter, cherish, enjoy, and avail themselves of; of the individuals and groups who fought for these freedoms and who are despised and forgotten today; the freedoms that the much of the rest of world envies, admires and tries to emulate." When the Chinese students cried and died for democracy in Tiananmen Square (in 1989) , they brought with them not representations of Confucius or Buddha but a model of the Statue of Liberty." Freedom of expression is our western heritage and we must defend it or it will die from totalitarian attacks.
Meanwhile, the Boston Globe seems to have lost it in an article which doesn't even manage to accurately recall the history of the Danish Mohammed cartoons. For them, and for anyone else who mistakenly thinks the cartoons were a brazen attempt at creating a riot (an argument which would be called 'blaming the victim' in any other situation), look towards The Guardian.
Wow, again. The Guardian, Der Spiegel, de Volkskrant - some lefties do get it.
Further clues that the current unrest is orchestrated
Gateway Pundit has a well-sourced story which offers further clues that the current unrest abot the Mohammed cartoons may be orchestrated. Compulsory reading.
One issue that puzzles many Danes is the timing of this outburst. The cartoons were published in September: Why have the protests erupted from Muslims worldwide only now? The person who knows the answer to this question is Ahmed Abdel Rahman Abu Laban, a man that the Washington Post has recently profiled as “one of Denmark's most prominent imams.â€
(...)
On its face, it would appear as if nothing were wrong. However, the Danish Muslim delegation showed much more than the 12 cartoons published by Jyllands Posten. In the booklet it presented during its tour of the Middle East, the delegation included other cartoons of Mohammed that were highly offensive, including one where the Prophet has a pig face. But these additional pictures were NOT published by the newspaper, but were completely fabricated by the delegation and inserted in the booklet (which has been obtained and made available to me by Danish newspaper Ekstra Bladet).
OK, that's it. Following the lead of Samizdata, Andrew Sullivan and, uh, Samizdata yet again, I think today's events prove beyond any doubt that the Danish deserve the full backing of the western world, by which I do not mean to refer to my 'colleagues' working for the British and American mainstream press who seem to have been engaged in a fierce competition for the Chamberlain Award this past week.
One problem though. What do the Danes produce apart from feta cheese and Carlsberg? Here's a start, but suggestions on what to buy can be left in the comments section or emailed to me directly. I will put up a list here.
And please, do copy the flag and the call for a Danish buycott, and sign this petition while you're at it.
I'm not going to join into the William Blum condemnation choir, because others have voiced their criticism of Mr. Blum much more eloquently than I ever could. Instead, I'm wondering why hardly anyone in the blogosphere seems to have recognized the importance of Osama Bin Laden referring to an American author to back up his hatred of the United States.
Some may find this disturbing. I think it's comforting. The West, for all its flaws, is still its own worst critic. For all our internal differences, perhaps we can agree that our openness to intellectual self-flagellation is something to cherish. The very fact that we have a word for 'hubris', and that it got its current meaning, hopefully will prevent us succumbing to it.
(But I've been accused of being a delusional optimist before.)
Not all French are cheese eating surrender monkeys. Here's Chirac with some statements on the use of nuclear weapons (that's "nucular" for Republicans) that Bush could never have made without having been branded as a genocidal maniac.
...but you might want save your bullets just for them, rather than your allies:
US commanders were so worried that their men were shooting at the British because they failed to recognise the Union Jack or other distinguishing military markings that, in an unprecedented move, they asked the British Army to supply vehicles, men and flags to teach their soldiers what their allies looked like.
A British officer in Basra said: “The Americans can be pretty pumped-up. Sometimes they fire in broad daylight when we are travelling at two miles per hour, shouting that we are British out of the window and waving the Union Jack. If they shoot, our drill is to slam on the brakes and race in the opposite direction.â€
So of course, at the same day Dutch public television airs a tearjerking report about Somalian refugees that fled the Netherlands to go and live in Leicester where they can be themselves (i.e. by not learning the local language), unlike in nasty and intolerant Holland, Blair's about-to-be-successor makes this statement (or will), which of course goes unreported on Dutch PBS:
"The English language, he will say, should be made an essential element of citizenship, through mandatory language courses for jobseekers found wanting."
I'm wondering if the Somalian family will now flee British tyranny back to the Netherlands, where there's an entire village working for PBS that should be happy to make them feel right at home, whatever it takes.
Anyway, enough jesting.
Unlike most Dutch, I don't feel it should be obligatory to learn our language. Hey, it's a free country. I do feel, however, that if you refuse to do so (note: being unable to is a different matter), you should not be entitled to welfare or other support by the state, as such a refusal seriously diminishes your chances of being able to provide for yourself since most employers will need - or at least prefer - an employee that speaks the lingua franca. If you can get by without learning Dutch, fine. If you can't, don't expect the natives, whose language you want no part of, to pay your way.
Brown goes on to make some excellent points about appreciating national identity, a theme which has become somewhat contaminated in Europe ever since a few idiots in Italy and Germany made a big mess out of things. I've argued before that you can't expect immigrants to appreciate their host country if they're not even sure what that country is supposed to stand for, and if citizenship ceremonies have all the flair and excitement of a fishing licence being issued. There's no need to haul out the brown shirts, I hope, to appreciate that version of nationalism. And at the very least, Brown doesn't seem to think so.
In his speech Mr Brown will embrace the patriotism of the US, saying: "In any survey our most popular institutions range from the monarchy to the army to the NHS. But think: what is our Fourth of July? What is our Independence Day? Where is our declaration of rights? What is our equivalent of a flag in every garden? Perhaps Remembrance Day and Remembrance Sunday are the nearest we have come to a British day - unifying, commemorative, dignified and an expression of British ideas of standing firm for the world in the name of liberty."
The Dutch have one advantage over the Brits, fortunately (other than having beaten them in nearly all naval engagements, but let bygones be bygones). At least we've won our independence, unlike the Brits, which we annually celebrate by sending a large percentage of our population to the Spanish costas to harass the locals. Serves them right for having occupied us.
Hate speech laws, torture, religious intolerance: they all destroy what we are fighting for, according to Pieter. And I am inclined to agree:
Of course the left never subscribed to the classical liberal values of individualism and freedom and the right - while in theory the port of call for these values - will only protect these fundamental values to a limited extent. If the right accepts torture and resurrects demagogues, we are in deep trouble.
It’s time to really understand what we’re fighting for, as there is indeed a war going on. No one is disputing that. It’s how we fight it, that is what's important. If we let the hate-speech law proponents frame the way forward, we lose. If we adopt the new right's approach of tearing apart our enemy, we lose too. That is what is at stake.
If anyone knows of other companies that pursue these kind of discriminatory and sexist policies, please let me know in the comments section. Because it's quite apparent that they exist.
Other airlines One News spoke to have similar guidelines. They say it's to protect male passengers from potential allegations as much as the children.
How very thoughtful. Assuming they're referring to potential false allegations, for I don't see why they would want to protect someone from a truthful one, wouldn't it be a better idea to deal with the people making such false accusations?
(Either that, or I want to be seated next to really pretty single women in exchange.)
'The cost to America of staying in Iraq may be high, but the cost of retreat would be higher. By fleeing, America would not buy itself peace. Mr Zarqawi and his fellow fanatics have promised to hound America around the globe. Driving America out of Iraq would grant militant Islam a huge victory. Arabs who want to modernise their region would know that they could not count on America to stand by its friends.'
My position on Guantanamo Bay is well known: since the prisoners there don't fall under the protection of the Geneva convention, and habeas corpus doesn't apply, Congress should adopt laws which classify them as - well, as something other than nothing - and which guarantee some sort of due process. They've had four years to do so and I think it's about bloody time they got on with it.
That being said, I do not buy into the meme that the people who were staying there are for the most part innocent bystanders who were at the wrong place at the wrong time, as Dutch quality broadsheet NRC Handelsblad seems to allege in an article today:
'Jamal al-Harith (38) did not have an alibi, and was released, like other British citizens, after the British government had exerted pressure (on the American administration, AD). The Jamaican website designer, whose birth name is Ronald Fiddler and who converted to Islam, was a holiday maker in the border area between Pakistan and Afghanistan. When the bombardments on Afghanistan started, he wanted to leave.'
Yeah, I like to go hiking in dangerous, remote areas of the world too, especially when Al Qaeda training camps are within walking distance and America is about to start bombing the shit out of it. Napalm reminds me of the sunny sugar cane fields of Jamaica. Puh-leeze.
Of course, making sure the legislative and judiciary branch get to weigh in on what happens at Gitmo doesn't just make sense in a constitutional way, but also PR-wise. For the claims of the Bush administration that Gitmo is a necessity would become a lot more credible if they are supported by a different branch of the state, especially if that branch is not necessarily a political ally of the current administration.
Is a lie. It's just that the Republican who does have some pretty sound ideas about how to go forward is not in charge of the Department of Defense. For that, we still have Donald 'I Don't Do Quagmires' Rumsfeld, supported by Dick 'Last Throes' Cheney.
(Try reading this article while holding your breath.)
I ended my subscription to James Taranto's 'Best of the Web' a while ago after a particularly vicious ad hominem attack on Andrew Sullivan. Now it seems I might have been prescient. The Wall Street Journal's defense of waterboarding is simply sickening. Both Andrew Sullivan and Marty Lederman take it to pieces. I'll add my two cents, responding to this particular sentence from the WSJ:
As for "torture," it is simply perverse to conflate the amputations and electrocutions Saddam once inflicted at Abu Ghraib with the lesser abuses committed by rogue American soldiers there, much less with any authorized U.S. interrogation techniques.
That's a strawman argument, and a pretty nasty one at that. Instead, Sullivan (and, may I add humbly, yours truly) have consistently argued that we should not let our standards be determined by anything the enemy does.
Morality is not an ecological concept which changes along with the rest of the environment: that's opportunism. Which is probably the one weapon you might want to refrain from using in a war which is more about values than about territory.
Some have argued that similar practices take place in the American military during training exercises. However, to me there's a huge difference in undergoing such an ordeal on request in an army which is all-volunteer to begin with. In that case, you can be relatively certain the government won't do anything stupid because (a) you are going to sue the hell out of them, (b) they need you as a soldier (c) the interrogators don't harbor any feelings of hostility towards you.
Now compare that to a real-life war situation, where interrogators may or may not show similar restraint towards enemy combatants whom they might hold responsible for murdering some of their loved ones. We've had a number of prison deaths on our hands already.
Or do this little mind game. Imagine the one person you hate the most. Now imagine you trying to choke him, letting go just before he loses consciousness. Then imagine you do it again. And again. And again.
(The Philips Award will be given out to organizations that engage in self-defeating marketing, just like Dutch electronics company Philips, who with their campaign 'Let's make things better' made it abundantly clear that they themselves felt their current product range sucked.)
I'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories but if there was ever a thing that made me consider the crackpot explanation of Al Qaeda as a CIA-Mossad ploy it's this. Al Qaeda has decided the proper way to instill fear into the Poms is to tell them they want to kill their beloved queen, Elizabeth II.
Yep, if I wanted to get my enemy angry, that's the way I would go about it. Keep this up and even the British Green Party will soon favor lobbing cruise missiles at terror bases around the world. Provided they use biofuel, of course.
In an excellent op-ed The Economist eloquently explains why Bush should sign the McCain Amendment - not because America is an evil country, but precisely because it is one of the greatest democracies in the world:
In the cold war, America championed the Helsinki human-rights accords. This time, the world's most magnificent democracy is struggling against vile terrorists who thought nothing of slaughtering thousands of innocent civilians—and yet the administration has somehow contrived to turn America's own human-rights record into a subject of legitimate debate.
Mr Bush would rightly point out that anti-Americanism is to blame for some of the opprobrium heaped on his country. But why encourage it so cavalierly and in such an unAmerican way? Nearly two years after Abu Ghraib, the world is still waiting for a clear statement of America's principles on the treatment of detainees. Mr McCain says he will keep on adding his amendment to different bills until Mr Bush signs one of them. Every enemy of terrorism should hope he does so soon.
We are better than our enemies. There is no shame in signing an amendment to that effect; only strength.
This is not about the moral status of terrorists or mass murderers. It's about us, the moral status of the West, and places where as a civilization, we simply will not go as a matter of policy.
Indeed. I for one refuse to let my moral standards be defined by those whom Mr. Bush aptly described as 'thugs and murderers'.
The only way something good can come from the current French riots, is when Sarkozy - a largely self-made immigrant's son who has not been corrupted by the ENA elite - manages to rise to power and rid the French semi-democracy of its oligarchic sclerosis.
Before that, I fear there will be a lot of bloodshed, for what else can the French do but to deploy the army if this continues? Read Le Monde, through Google if your knowledge of French is insufficient.
This, in turn, will lead to further escalation, casualties and a lot of deaths before this is all over.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'll go stock up on guns and ammo in case some 'second generation Dutch' get similar ideas.
(I'm only kidding of course - everybody knows that in the Netherlands, only criminals carry weapons, especially since the police are failing their gun exams en masse. So please, if you must send me your spare weaponry, do so in a package that doesn't arouse the suspicion of customs.)
They've now started shooting at government officials in the Netherlands. Ms Verdonk, secretary of Immigration, was the target.
Update 5/11, 23.10: the NFI (Dutch Forensic Institute) has announced that it wasn't a bullet that damaged Ms Verdonk's office window, contradicting an earlier statement by the prime minister, which has since been withdrawn. They still don't know what did cause the damage.
'It's not a stretch to conclude that our draconian approach to drug use is the most injurious domestic policy since slavery. Want to cut back on prison overcrowding and save a bundle on the construction of new facilities? Open the doors, let the nonviolent drug offenders go. The huge increases in federal and state prison populations during the 1980s and '90s (from 139 per 100,000 residents in 1980 to 482 per 100,000 in 2003) were mainly for drug convictions. In 1980, 580,900 Americans were arrested on drug charges. By 2003, that figure had ballooned to 1,678,200. We're making more arrests for drug offenses than for murder, manslaughter, forcible rape and aggravated assault combined. Feel safer?'
I could compare those figures to those of 'liberal' Holland, but that would be driving the point home. And never mind that, from a libertarian point of view, the government has no business in interfering when I want to use either alcohol, tobacco or - gasp - MDMA; provided of course I don't interfere with the freedom of others by (for example) robbing them or endangering their welfare by getting behind the wheel.
'If having taken drugs doesn't disqualify journalists from pontificating as to how public policy should be shaped - and there's no evidence from the newspapers leading the calls for Cameron to come clean that it does; one of them retains the former addict Will Self as a columnist - why should it disqualify politicians?'
Update 18/10: Via AS: there've never been more marihuana arrests. Meanwhile, Canadian researchers find clues that pot may actually be good for your memory (color me sceptical).
There's 10 caps already in my fridge. I bought them in March after a particularly nasty bout of flu, so I'd be able to deal with a future flu virus somewhat more easily.
Of course, if that future virus should be the H5N1 variant the stuff will come in quite handy too, but that's not why I bought it.
Though after reading this article by Charles Krauthammer, or this article about vaccine supply shortages or this one about limited Tamiflu stocks, I probably could be convinced otherwise.
You may want to consider buying Relenza as well.
(Fellow Dutch paranoids can email me if they can't get their doctor to prescribe it to them, which in the Netherlands is not entirely unlikely, even if you pay for the stuff yourself. Mind you, these drugs are expensive, and they have a limited shelf life, especially Relenza. Plus, the entire H5N1 thing may just be a huge scare rather than a genuine threat.)
In case any of you want to donate, a comprehensive list of organizations can be found here. Dutch residents can transfer their contributions to giro 800800.
Thanks to Pieter: finally there's an English version of an excellent article by Marcel Crok, a Dutch science journo, on the so-called 'greenhouse effect'. Crok won the 'Glass Griffin' with it, a prize for talented young science hacks.
President Bush referred to Mohammed Bouyeri, the assassin of Theo van Gogh, in his speech yesterday. Here's what Bush said:
'In a courtroom in the Netherlands, the killer of Theo Van Gogh turned to the victim's grieving mother and said, "I do not feel your pain -- because I believe you are an infidel."'
'I don't feel your pain, I can't. I don't know what it is to loose a child that was brought into this world with pain and tears. It is in part because I am not a woman. But it is also in part because I can't feel with you. That's because I believe that you are an infidel.'
Admittedly, that's a little less suitable if soundbite material is what you're after. But it is relevant to get the full quote, because Mrs Van Gogh, Theo's mother, seemed, in the smallest of ways , somewhat comforted in the notion that Mohammed Bouyeri at least explained himself, which he hadn't until she had challenged him earlier (albeit indirectly) during the trial. This at least seems apparent from his closing words:
'Maybe my words will offer some measure of comfort, a little bit, for Mrs Van Gogh. That's all, I don't care about the rest.'
Call me a sentimentalist or an incurable optimist, but if a religious terrorist can see beyond his own hatred and notice the pain in a mother's heart, then perhaps there is some hope for the human race after all. Despite his incapability to empathize, there's hope in the attempt.
(This new award will be given to those that betray their principles in order to gain recognition from others, and who are therefore not the kind of people you'd want to go sailing with, unless to leave them in the New York harbor, Sopranos-style.)
Ben Bot, of the Dutch ministry of Foreign Affairs, is not my favorite member of the government (not that there are ones I like at the moment, but anyway). He has spoken with understanding about Syria's president Assad in the past, and only recently failed to stand up for the right of left-wing organizsation 'De Balie' to hold a debating night on violations of human rights in China. The Chinese embassy had protested that debating night taking place. It did anyway, but without government funding for it, whereas other approved parts of a China festival that was taking place at the moment did get their euros.
Now Mr. Bot has made the case that the US and the UK shouldn't have gone to war with Iraq. Now I know many sensible people that were and are opposed to that war. I myself was and am in favor of the decision (even though I lament some aspects of its implementation). It's an issue on which reasonable people can disagree.
If there's one thing I hate, however, it's when someone changes his decision on such an important topic because he didn't like how it worked out, and now seeks to gain from his lack of backbone. I strongly suspect this to be the case with Mr. Bot, who made a few half-assed statements about the war 'possibly not having been a good idea', at the same time stating 'the US and the UK's decision was understandable'.
If there's one thing on this planet I hate more than partisan bigotry, and that goes for both the left and the right, it's non-partisan opportunism.
'You can be a hippie-dippy hey-man-I-love-everybody-whatever-your-bag-is-cool backpacking Dutch stoner, and they'll blow you up with as much enthusiasm as if you were Dick Cheney.'
He has a point there. I used marihuana (oops, there goes my shot at the American presidency, even if the Schwarzenegger Amendment gets through) a total of six times in my life. Five of those were in Australia, when I was indeed backpacking, and where (the ACT and Nimbin excepted) marihuana is looked down upon a lot more than here. I never had to buy it myself. There was always an Englishman, American or Ozzie around distributing the stuff, eager to share the proverbial forbidden herbs (or was that fruits? orang-utans? sloths?).
It just isn't as much fun when the authorities/your parents/the neighbours don't frown upon you using the stuff.
I'm trying to identify the Hiberno-English aspects of this article, but I'm afraid that since I was born in the Netherlands, I've met with limited success thusfar and would greatly appreciate some insights (or craic, if all else fails). It's been too long since I did my BA thesis in fair Baile atha Cliath.
Any and all insights welcome, both through email or in the comments section.
It's for a good cause, you might just help me to ace a course in 'Cross-cultural journalism' (which is required if I want to get my MA degree in journalism anytime soon), or at the very least, prevent me from flunking it.
It's an old one, but this is by far one of the best articles dealing with European hypocrisy towards America.
'Hertsgaard illustrates Americans’ ignorance of world geography by telling us about a Spaniard who was asked at a wedding in Tennessee if Spain was in Mexico. I once told such stories as well (in fact, I began my professional writing career with a fretful op-ed about the lack of general knowledge that I, then a doctoral candidate in English, found among my undergraduate students); then I moved to Europe and met people like the sixtyish Norwegian author and psychologist who, at the annual dinner of a Norwegian authors’ society, told me she’d been to San Francisco but never to California.'
Just the other day, a well-educated acquintance of mine complained of an American who didn't know that The Hague, our political 'capital', wasn't the real capital of the Netherlands. Of course, she fell mute when I asked her about the capitals of Rhode Island, New York and Florida. (Providence, Albany and Tallahassee.)
What' s this, a serious webpage or 'Spot the odd one out'?
(Philosophy buffs out there who can read Dutch may consider purchasing this set. It's cheap, and it's sold by a pharmacy chain, but the selection seems interesting.)
George emailed me this article written by Amartya Sen, former Master of Trinity College at Cambridge University. Although six years old, it fits in nicely with today's not entirely superficial appearance of Francis Fukuyama on Dutch television. (The website of Dutch PBS incorrectly portrays Fukuyama as the 'resident ideologue' of the Bush administration, which is bollocks: Fukuyama voted for Kerry and opposed the war against Iraq.)
The Washington Post is publishing a good blog on the John Roberts SCOTUS confirmation hearings. (Via Andrew Sullivan. Of course, the Netherlands already had their first MSM blog in 2003, but I'll refrain from bragging ;-)
India buys diesel subs, but the most interesting part is somewhat further on:
In a joint declaration, the sides also said they would "work towards the conclusion of an agreement on bilateral co-operation in the nuclear field".
It hasn't been widely reported (other than in the indispensable Economist) that India is on its way to become a de facto recognized nuclear power (recognized by the West, that is - Pakistan might beg to differ). Of course, a navy is not something India needs for its western borders, but nuclear subs are useful when it comes to dealing with countries that it is separated from by huge mountain ranges.
Dutch Red Cross starts fund raiser for hurricane victims
And good for them!
Earlier today, the Dutch government offered the American government assistance in the form of expertise.
Also earlier today, I made a pledge for a national fund raiser. (If only all my wishes were granted this quickly.)
The American government obviously isn't prepared to tackle the current disaster on its own, which is why the relief organizations operating in the affected area need our help. Those organizations are virtually entirely dependent on charity. Some of them even refuse government grants to maintain their independence. However, many Dutch don't have credit cards and are thus unable to donate directly to the American Red Cross if they want to.
To my great relief, the Dutch Red Cross now has offered a solution to this problem. Those of you who want to chip in, can now transfer your contribution to giro 19800.
A few commercials during unsold commercial slots bringing the account number under the attention of a larger audience wouldn't hurt, but hey, it's progress.
Below you'll find my pledge to donate to AmeriCares.
Here you'll find links to:
• The Truth for Relief list of participating blogs. May I respectfully suggest you sign up as well. There are far too few European blogs participating as of yet.
• Glenn Reynold's roundup.
• Technorati coverage here and here.
Maybe I should follow the example of captain Danjel Bout. It seems to be an unfortunate law of the Internet that it brings out those which Dutch writer Karin Spaink calls people with 'modem balls'. That is, people who are real heroes when they can give you a piece of their mind from a safe distance. Up close? Probably not so. Read Bout's post: it's sickening.
Good luck guys. Maybe the Dutch can help rebuild the place afterwards. God knows we went through (a rather moist version of) hell once. Since then, we've indulged in a few nifty gadgets.
Hopefully it won't be as bad in New Orleans.
(On the bright side: getting through the list of potential names for your baby girl suddenly got a bit easier.)
Sherrie Gossett has an update on this earlier post regarding a Dutch porn website which grants GI's access in exchange for war pics. Sherrie also writes:
'I'm reminded of a Wired article on the Abu Ghraib photos that quotes a soldier saying: "I cannot help but wonder upon reflection of the circumstances, how much longer we will be able to carry with us our digital cameras, or take photographs and document the experiences we have had."'
This in turn reminded me of this interesting article in the Guardian (no, that is not an oxymoron), which makes the case that Big Brother has arrived, but in a truly unexpected form:
'Thus it is interesting to note the police appeal for photos, video and cameraphone media in the wake of the terrorist outrage. It could be these, rather than CCTV, that contain the key clue to the identity of the bombers: confirmation that Big Brother is "us", not "them".'
Granted, the article is very negative, as seems to be obligatory with any article on privacy issues, but the point is valid. Oakley already produces sunglasses which contain a Bluetooth headset for a cellphone. Pretty soon the phone itself will be integrated, and shortly after that, a camera. This genie isn't just out of the bottle, the little guy is growing very quickly.
I am really sad to say that in the end we agreed on nearly everything, except for the fact that we both seemed to think the other guy makes judgments too quickly, so annoyingly, we even agreed on that.
Now I know why moonbats debate the way they do: they're afraid of reaching a consensus.
A Dutch porn website offers American GI's free access to its 'meat supply' if the GI's send in pictures of gored and/or killed Iraqis instead. At least, according to Belgian newspaper De Standaard, which in turn quotes this Italian blog.
Other Czechs, he elaborates, use "Munich" as a shorthand for what they see to be France's failure to support the robustly pro-freedom American policies in Europe. For the latter group, the list of grievances includes some events which were well-known at one time, which have been forgotten by almost all Americans, but which are vividly remembered by many Czechs--such as France's withdrawl from the NATO military command during the DeGaulle presidency.
I found out about the latter a few years ago and I'm still pissed, even though the Netherlands has a good relationship with both the EU (well, not at the moment) and the USA. I can only admire a nation which is proud of itself. (The Dutch could do with a bit more pride, every now and then.) But for the Czechs, who were behind the Iron Curtain, matters were not as easy. I, for one, got miffed for another reason, namely when I dug deeper into this matter and found this little article:
On 7 March 1966, General de Gaulle announced to President Johnson that France was withdrawing from the integrated military organisation. On 1 July 1966, French representatives stepped down from positions in the military organisation. NATO moved out of its headquarters in Versailles and Fontainebleau on 1 April 1967.
General de Gaulle nonetheless maintained French participation in the Atlantic Council. France remained a member of NATO and all its structures except the integrated military command. Instructions were given to prepare for co-operation between French and NATO forces in the event of war, subject to France's decision to participate. The Lemnitzer-Ailleret agreements made comprehensive provisions for possible French intervention alongside Allied forces. Lastly, France maintained its land forces already stationed in the Federal Republic of Germany.
Somehow the bold part doesn't make me sleep better at night. Nor did it go down well with some Dutch, at the time:
Reactions abroad were strong, especially in the USA where anti-French demonstrations were held, but also in Great Britain and the Netherlands.
What I'd like to know, but couldn't find anywhere: are the arrangements that De Gaulle made still in place? I couldn't find any proof to the contrary, but since absence of proof is not proof of absence... France has always been a country which does only what it damn well pleases (< flamebait> maybe that's why the French hate Americans, they are too similar < /flamebait>). For example, they've only stopped nuclear testing in 1996, whereas the UK and the USA stopped in 1991 and 1992 respectively. I wouldn't be surprised to find out nothing has changes since the sixties.
I am not going to say ‘I told you so’, but that’s solely because I didn’t say it on this blog before, but on a Dutch mailing list called Deining. That’s where I first voiced my suspicion that the death of Brazilian Mr. Jean Charles de Menezes had been caused by an SAS (special forces) soldier. Now the Times of London speculates on this as well, and it claims to have found clues in press photographs.
Whether the SAS story pans out or not, the following quote from what is arguable the best scifi series ever, Battlestar Galactica, can never be repeated enough:
"There's a reason why you separate the military and the police. One fights the enemy of the state. The other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, the enemies of the state tend to become the people."
BTW, if there's anyone who's managed to sit through the final scene of this week’s episode, ‘Home’, and listen to Adama's lines without needing a really big glass of ‘perspective and soda’ afterwards, you must be emotionally dead inside. That was some damn fine acting, Mr. Olmos.
Note this line in particular, which seems to support the notion of unilateral action western imperialism.
When a single international actor challenges the aggressor, the probability that the killings will escalate drops while the probability that the killings will decrease jumps.
Charles Groenhuizen's 'Americans aren't crazy'. I'll post some snippets later on. For now, just one paragraph that struck me especially, loving both the Netherlands and the USA:
'Collectively speaking the Dutch are friendly and show solidarity, but unlike in the States, people often don't show a lot of individual kindness. (...) America is a tough society with good manners. The Netherlands are a caring society with bad manners. What can we learn from one another?'
Read more about it here (the film that's hyperlinked there is in English, the blog entry itself is in Dutch. Sorry to make it this complicated, but the site I'm linking to, Blognoot, is a paid blog, i.e. it provides part of my rent. Only fair to give them the pageviews too.)
Taken on its own merits, the Shuttle gives the impression of a vehicle designed to be launched repeatedly to near-Earth orbit, tended by five to seven passengers with little concern for their personal safety, and requiring extravagant care and preparation before each flight, with an almost fetishistic emphasis on reuse. Clearly this primitive space plane must have been a sacred artifact, used in religious rituals to deliver sacrifice to a sky god.
As tempting as it is to picture a blood-spattered Canadarm flinging goat carcasses into the void, we know that the Shuttle is the fruit of what was supposed to be a rational decision making process. That so much about the vehicle design is bizarre and confused is the direct result of the Shuttle's little-remembered role as a military vehicle during the Cold War.
End the shuttle now, and use the funds to finally get us on Mars. I've got a bet running, you know.
And I thought I was delusional for dreaming of a world where off-the-shelf copies of Scarlet Johansson could be easily obtained. Turns out the BBC is being accused of being pro-Israel.
Guess there's a first time for anything. Read the whole story. I have a feeling this one is going to spin out in the next couple of weeks.
Since none of you guys bothers to send in submissions (no Hirsi Ali pun intended).
So it's on to the UK then.
It seems I'm not the only one who's kinda fed up with inflammatory comments these days. Scott Burgess gives one of his commenters an appropriate fisking:
'I thought this example held some interest, only because it so accurately reflects a couple of specific attitudes commonly voiced by many on the left; namely:
* That the mere reporting of the most blatant expressions of hatred from Islamist extremists and their apologists constitutes something approaching racism (we'll accept this as shorthand, given the commenter's reference to a "racial group", which Islam of course is not).
* That those who suggest that people who despise and loathe their country of residence might be happier in a society that better represents the values they hold are trying to "exclude all dissent".'
Which explains why I am a leftie no more, I might add. Having a heart is no excuse to stop thinking.
(Mind you, I use both hemispheres, although many of my friends would probably want to challenge the mere assumption that I'm capable of thinking at all.)
On Friday, I checked out this nifty running gadget at Amazon.Com.
Never being one to pass up an opportunity to make a few bucks, I availed myself of Amazon's lowest price warranty, and pointed out that a competitor sold the same device for about ten dollars less.
I was told to check back in a few days, and so I did. Today, it turns out, they've stopped selling it altogether!
Well, that's one way to offer a lowest price guarantee - simply stop selling everything you can't offer at a competitive rate.
Via AS, this snippet in an article about China:
'Now we can see why nondemocratic regimes imperil the security of the world. They stay in power by controlling their populations. This control invariably required an increasing amount of repression. To justify this repression and maintain internal stability, external enemies must be manufactured. The result is that while the mechanics of democracy make democracies inherently peaceful, the mechanics of tyranny make nondemocracies inherently belligerent. Indeed, in order to avoid collapsing from within, fear societies must maintain a perpetual state of conflict. (p. 88)'
The anti-Japanese demonstrations in China are of course only the beginning. The Chinese population can for the moment be controlled simply by the huge economic growth that's taking place. Greed is both eternal and ubiquitous. But beware. No prizes for guessing what will happen when the Chinese economy eventually slows down.
The Sun makes fun of it, and so do I, but of course the would-be suicide bombers have a point. They do have rights.
Such as the one to a fair and impartial trial, rather than a kangaroo court. Or the right to be arrested without unnecessary force, rather than simply be shot on sight, as would have happened in many a Middle Eastern country. Or the right to an attorney, paid for by the state, who will be struck off if he doesn't do a good enough job representing you. Try that in Saudi Arabia. Or the right to complain about any perceived maltreatment by the police, after which both a plethora of activist groups and an independent committee will try to get to the bottom of things. Hell, you even get your troubles printed in a non-state controlled newspaper (for the sake of argument, we'll assume Rupert Murdoch is not a one man state yet).
Western values don't equate to lawlessness or impotence. On the contrary. The arrests in England yesterday are a fine example that the west can combine its humanity with decisive action, if needs be.
Even the Beeb has trouble not to sound triumphant about the arrest of the suspected bombers of the failed 7/21 attacks. The Sun, however, is less subtle: they plastered 'Got the bastards' (or something to that effect) all over their front page.
For a while now I've been hoping for a premature 'Reformation' of Islam. Where are the Martin Luthers and John Calvins of Islam? They're not here yet. But hopefully, if the momentum grows, they'll find the courage to speak out.
It would be the ultimate irony if Al Qaeda's terrorist attacks would bring about a liberal reform of Islam.
Why do they call the Guardian "the thinking man's newspaper" again?
Obviously because even a thinking man wants a good laugh every now and then.
As Orson Scott Card once observed, manipulative people who are not too good at it, often try to mislead people by stating exactly the opposite of what is the case.
Examples of this include:
'I am not stupid.'
'You are a hypocrite.'
And, as of yesterday:
'Others have distorted history.'
Read this wonderful piece of revisionist history in the Guardian, which of course starts with the assertion that 'others' are guilty of precisely that which the article aims to achieve.
I said it yesterday: the best pot most definitely no longer comes from the Netherlands. The Dutch should raid the Guardian's headquarters to obtain their crops so that we may secure our future prominence as the THC capital of the world.
Update 18.52: The same guy who wrote the Guardian article just rambled on for over five minutes on Sky News about how it's America's fault Iran hasn't had a revolution of democratic moderates yet. This is presumably because America supports said moderates, which as a result have become unpopular.
So since nothing America supports can be good, for an effective foreign policy à la 'Guardian' it would be better if Mr. Bush came out in full favour of orthodox Islamic clerics. Those would then become unpopular as a result, and Iran would instantly be transformed into a happy place. Newspapers such as the Guardian could then write articles about the hypocrisy of the free West having supported the tyranny of said orthodox Islamic clerics, and argue how much better it would have been if people such as Mr. Bush had instead offered their moral support to Irani moderates.
Only one of their games would have been in London.
Terrorism works - thanks to spineless creatures such as those working at Inter Milan.
These are their sponsors. I suggest dropping them a line to tell them how you feel about this betrayal. Democracy and capitalism are intertwined. Without the free society that Inter Milan now spits upon, there wouldn't even be commercial soccer. If they don't understand the language of morality, perhaps it's the language of money that will do the trick.
From Stratfor's newsletter:
'We can no longer ignore a global upsurge of operations by al Qaeda and like-minded militants. The U.S. and international offensive against al Qaeda and other Islamist militants is now facing a widespread counterattack; further attacks will follow.'
I can only hope the Dutch will bear the pending attacks with the same amount of dignity and stoicism as the British have thusfar.
A few guys thought it was funny to slit a cat's throat (a kitten, really) and watch it bleed to death on video.
The phrase 'sick fucks' comes to mind.
Now, if this were a vigilante blog, I would ask you to decrease your speed to about 15 mph when you see them walking in front of your car, so they'll suffer a lot of pain and don't die instantly.
But this isn't, so I won't.
Alternatively, you could tell them how you feel by availing yourself of their personal information, which is thankfully present online here.
Your letters may not be answered immediately, as the people involved have been arrested by Belgian police.
May they be put in a straitjacket impregnated with mackerel essence, and thrown into an isolation chamber together with about 20 very hungry cats. Or 10, so they get nibbled to death a bit more slowly.
(You can find the video here, but I recommend that you don't watch it unless you've got a really strong stomach.)
An expert on Sky News just offered this bit of wisdom: the attacks in London are not acts of war, but crimes. For in case of true warfare, such as the IRA waged on the UK, the terrorist group makes demands.
Here I was thinking that the Dutch make the best pot in the world.
In crime, there is usually an objective of material gain, or of personal revenge. (Drive-by shootings, mob killings, etcetera, are usually intended to indirectly maximize material gains in the long run.) That is, if there is such an objective, as some crimes, such as involuntary manslaughter, are accidental. Some criminals do make demands (blackmailers and hostage takers come to mind), others simply take what they want.
So forgive me if I don't buy the whole 'making demands' thing being integral to terrorist warfare.
What is happening in London doesn't fit in any crime category. And if no demands have been issued (I'm not sure whether that's true), it should give pause to said expert. For if an enemy doesn't issue demands, it usually means he doesn't want to negotiate, and fight western civilization to the death.
Which the next of kin of 56 Londoners can attest to.
This article from The New Republic, not exactly a right-wing rag:
Guevara might have been enamored of his own death, but he was much more enamored of other people's deaths. In April 1967, speaking from experience, he summed up his homicidal idea of justice in his "Message to the Tricontinental": "hatred as an element of struggle; unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine."
I do own a Ché shirt, but I think I can be forgiven since it's this one.
Update 15.31: Of course Wikipedia already has a new entry.
Update 15.33:First pictures from Adamtime Moblog, including a pub evacuation.
Update 15.44: Four bombs that don't seem to have fully exploded? Could this be a case of one guy making four explosive devices, all with the same design flaw? I can't imagine this to be a mistake during construction, anyway.
'Official leaks from the Pentagon said that India would begin purchasing up to $5 billion worth of conventional weapons, once Congress approves the deal. This requires an act of Congress because current law on non-proliferation bars the sale of a wide array of military technology to countries that have acquired nuclear weapons -- specifically focusing on any technology that might be useful to a nuclear weapons program. Since the technologies that are potentially useful are amazingly diverse, large swathes of technology are excluded from sale. Should Congress approve the bill, it would place India in a position similar to that of Israel (save that Israel doesn't acknowledge publicly that it has nuclear weapons).'
'India will be allowed to purchase Aegis technology, which is designed to protect naval vessels -- and battle groups -- from anti-ship missiles. So far, only Japan has acquired the technology, partly because of its cost. In addition, New Delhi will be able to purchase anti-submarine patrol aircraft. The United States, which until a few years ago regarded the Indian naval build-up -- based on Soviet technology -- as a threat to U.S. control of sea lanes in the Indian Ocean, has now completely reversed its posture. It is selling New Delhi naval technology that will allow the Indians to fulfill one of their key strategic objectives, which is to be able to control regional sea lanes. The United States would not be providing this technology without having achieved a far-reaching strategic agreement with New Delhi.'
All this, of course, has nothing to do with Chinese naval ambitions.
The main problem with the draft Iraqi constitution
It's too European, according to Nathan J. Brown of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace:
'More often qualifications on rights occur in implementing legislation. European constitutions introduced phrasing that suggested that freedoms be defined by law. The original purpose of such provisions was to ensure that only parliament (as the agent of the entire society) would define the way in which a right would operate. This took the task out of the hands of the monarch and the executive and placed it in the hands of those deputized by the nation. But over time it has become clear that defining a right might also mean limiting it.'
Indeed. The Dutch constitution is riddled with phrases such as 'limited to a citizen's responsibility according to the law'. When defining a basic right, every 'but' only serves to dimish it. Incidentally, this was a huge reason for me to vote 'no' in the EU constitutional referendum.
While I am not claiming that the USA is a perfect country - one only needs to visit Amsterdam to see the true pinnacle of civilization *cough* (hey, at least our MDMA is pure) - I do like the concept of laws being judged by the constitution, rather than the other way around.
If it's true that Kofi Annan had a big hand in this constitution, that would sure explain a lot.
(Read the whole draft here. There's some nasty stuff there about Israel too. Hopefully, that will be gone in the final version.)
I am gradually getting a very strong feeling the markets are being manipulated. Not to mention the fact that Chevron is still bidding for Unocal and may want to score a few political points. For example, by scaring a few senators into supporting their bid over China's.
Having done research for, and written a paper on the state of British investigative journalism (it will be published in September at the VVOJ Global Conference), I am not exactly surprised by the notion that there are quite a few very-left-wing journo's in Britain.
'So, after 12 months of living in New York is it any surprise that Israel starts to look a little less evil? And that Europe starts to look a little more parochial? That the US starts to look a little more like it is trying to solve some of the world’s problems, and that it is doing so despite the sometimes unfair criticism of its allies? If in England it always looked like the US was the playground bully. Then from the US it looks a lot more like an embattled headteacher in a problem school.'
The Chinese threaten nuclear war with America if the latter 'attack their territory'. Rather conveniently, the Chinese definition of territory happens to include Chinese ships and planes.
So the cards are on the table. The Chinese are apparently willing to threaten the United States with a nuclear holocaust in order to scare them out of honoring their defense treaty with Taiwan. It seems likely that, considering the Chinese military buildup, they are now testing the waters for actually using their newfound power. Wait for them to start some serious saber rattling when their internal economic problems become apparent to the general populace.
After that, it's probably onwards to Japan, a country which is cozying up to the USA for a reason. Similar moves can be observed in India. And no matter how much I dislike Pervez Musharraf (or any other dictator), it had better be that he clings on to power for a few more years. A fundamentalist rising in Pakistan could indirectly lead to a premature increase in Chinese agression, as India will then have enough on its plate by having to deal with an agressive Pakistan.
Scary. I actually thought this moment would be a few more years away, but the game seems to be in full play.
Seems blowing up children doesn't go down well amongst Muslims either. Anyway, it's definitely not 'Midway', but the Pew Global Attitudes survey in Islamic countries brings excellent news nonetheless:
Osama bin Laden's standing has dropped significantly in some key Muslim countries, while support for suicide bombings and other acts of violence has "declined dramatically," according to a new survey released today.
In a striking finding, predominantly Muslim populations in a sampling of six North African, Middle East and Asian countries also shared to "a considerable degree" Western nations' concerns about Islamic extremism, the survey found. Many in those Muslim nations see it as threat to their own country, the poll found.
(...)
The survey found only 2 percent of people surveyed in Lebanon and 7 percent in Turkey expressed confidence that bin Laden would "do the right thing regarding world affairs," while confidence in the al Qaeda leader dropped from almost a half to about a quarter of those surveyed in Morocco and from 58 percent to 37 percent in Indonesia. Bin Laden's standing went up slightly in Pakistan to 51 percent and Jordan to 60 percent.
The latter is something to watch out for though. If Musharraf's luck runs out, we may have a bit of a problem on our hands. Especially since his 'successor' wouldn't be as prone to please America by keeping hostilities with India to a minimum. And a renewed war between India and Pakistan might give China a window of opportunity on Taiwan.
'Although the relativist attitudes are surely dominant on the left, they are not necessarily their excusive domain, the Dutch and continental European right are equally given to take a more appeasing approach while failing to cast the conflict in the struggle between good and bad. But more than anything else it’s an innate fear to declare “moral superiority” something that in Anglo-Saxon countries can be found both on the right and as we know through Blair, Lieberman and Hitchens: on the left too.'
Just the other night I was debating (well, actually, I was rambling on as always) Dutch politics with a leftie friend of mine and I considered what frightens the Dutch in taking a moral point of view. It is that by doing so, they exclude other opinions.
This is even true in the case that your basic moral conviction is that freedom is good. The latter is the one thing I will never compromise on, but it is also a tenet which is directly at odds with that of Mohammed Bouyeri. He obviously doesn't believe in freedom. only in forcing people to abide by his interpretation of sharia, and killing them if they don't.
So adopting the conviction that freedom is good is, in a sense, very much exclusionary to people such as Mr. Bouyeri. I am not attempting to be sarcastic here, but simply trying to point out the very real philosophical consequence that even freedom has to limit the freedom of some, namely the freedom of its enemies to destroy freedom. In other words: freedom has to deny those who use freedom to disrespect the freedom of others the possibility to become powerful, or freedom itself will cease to exist. It is the classic paradox of the impossibility of being tolerant towards intolerance. Only Jesus could do that, and so we killed him.
Of course, the possibility exists that Mr. Bouyeri is right: that his warped version of God does exist, did order the death of Mr. Van Gogh, and doesn't give a rat's ass about our freedom. However unlikely, I cannot logically disprove that possibility (yes, I've read Popper).
So it is not just a matter of likelihood, but also a matter of faith that I choose to believe in freedom. And unlike Mr. Bouyeri's world view, freedom is the one way of life that excludes the least amount of people and offers the most guarantees (or the biggest lack of dangers, for all the 'half empty' people out there) that it will stay that way.
That's why I believe freedom is good.
And if embracing this value makes me a cultural imperialist, so be it.
From the BBC website:
'I am surprised. If they are UK born, surely they must have seen the thousands of Londoners marching in protest against the War in Iraq back in 2002 and 2003. Why would they kill those same people?'
(Helen, Oxford, UK)
Because these people are fascists, Helen. They consider your respect for the rights of the individual to be perverse, and likewise, don't think your personal opinions should exempt you from their righteous wrath. In their eyes, there's only God's mob and the devil's mob.
'We and you are cordially loathed for freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, open economies, equal - or almost equal - treatment of women, and so on. It is not what we have done wrong that is creating the problem; it is what we do right.'
In other words: if you don't want them to kill you, you'll have to rescind your right to protest - even if it is an anti-war protest. Or, perhaps, especially. For it doesn't seem to be peace that they're after.
"Fuck Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, and backward-ass, cave-dwelling, fundamentalist assholes everywhere. On the names of innocent thousands murdered, I pray you spend the rest of eternity with your seventy-two whores roasting in a jet-fueled fire in hell. You towel headed camel jockeys can kiss my royal Irish ass!"
Even relativism isn't relativistic towards its own core ideology.
It's ironic, in a way, that vice-admiral James Stockdale passed away last week.
He was a champion of stoicism.
In very much the same way the British are displaying it right now.
Only if there's nothing there can terrorists destroy it.
For a few days of well-deserved R&R, if I do say so myself. If any readers know of good gigs there Saturday or Sunday night, me and a mate will be staying at the Westbury in Grafton Street, registered under the name of 'Dasselaar'. (Yes, it's a posh hotel but I got a free coupon...)
Feel free to drop us a line. Or text me at +31 6 45190498. Any excuse for a pint is welcome (not that we'll be needing one).
Anyone feeling the need to look after my cat: click here (and please text me if you see anything out of the ordinary - a mate of mine is checking the cam too and has keys to my appartment.
(Would-be burglars can be consoled that the cat cam takes images of the front door of my house as well (as you can see at the right hand side of the images in the gallery), and sends them to an FTP server at a safe distance from my house, to someone who will call 112 (the Dutch 911) instantly. Smile! Besides, as you can judge by the quality of the carpet, it's not exactly the Hamptons in my house. There's not even a computer, only a laptop, which is coming with me... The webcam is hooked up to a 500 MHz AMD (no, that's not enough to deserve to be named a computer...))
(Oh, and a note to overly cautious readers: the neighbour will be checking on the cat on Sunday and Monday - so if the door on the right side opens, don't worry. However, if you see the door at the BOTTOM side of the screen open, please do worry. This is the door that the cat cam is mounted on - so if the perspective changes radically, there might be something going on as well, and you'd be quite welcome to text me.)
Coincidence or not, just last week I started reading Victor David Hanson's excellent book Carnage and Culture. The book doesn't paint a pretty picture. Hanson is unequivocal in his praise for Western values - but one. The downside (for our enemies) of freedom is that it also makes us the most efficient killers the world has ever seen. We've got something to fight for: ourselves. And though we can be scared, we aren't nearly as easily scared as the enemy:
'In Thucydides' history of the Peloponnesian War, nearly 2,500 years ago the Spartan general Brasidas dismissed the military prowess of the tribes of Illyria and Macedonia, who confronted his Spartan hoplites. These men, Brasidas says of his savage opponents, have no discipline and so cannot endure shock battle. "As all mobs do," they changed their fearsome demeanor to cries of fright when they faced the cold iron of disciplined men in rank. Why so? Because, as Brasidas goes on to tell his soldiers, such tribes are the product of cultures "in which the many do not rule the few, but rather the few the many" (Thucydides 4.126).
In contrast to these enormous armies of screaming "barbarians" without consensual governments and written constitutions--"formidable in outward bulk, with unbearable loud yelling and the frightful appearance of weapons brandished in the air"--"citizens of states like yours," Brasidas assures his men, "stand their ground." Notice that Brasidas says nothing about skin color, race, or religion. Instead, he simplistically connects military discipline, fighting in rank, and the preference for shock battle with the existence of popular and consensual government, which gave the average infantryman in the phalanx a sense of equality and a superior spirit to his enemies. Whether or not we wish to dismiss Brasidas's self-serving portrait of frenzied tribesmen as a chauvinistic Western "construct" or "fiction," or debate whether his own Spartan oligarchy was a broad-based government, or carp that European infantrymen were often ambushed and bushwhacked by more nimble guerrillas, it is indisputable that there was a tradition of disciplined heavy infantrymen among the constitutionally governed Greek city-states, and not such a thing among tribal peoples to the north.'
I see no difference between the Greek phalanxes, and the brave Londoners that are holding the line by continuing to use the Tube.
Of course, I am not happy about the events of today, and my sympathies are with the victims and their families and loved ones. Nevertheless, I've been afraid of something like this for a long time (link in Dutch).
But unlike the Spaniards, the British will not let this get by. Just check out this link at Daily Kos (fer crying out loud) to see what I mean.
Dutch readers may be interested in this roundup by yours truly.
Al Qaeda may just have awakened a sleeping empire.
Americans have a rep for being terrible diplomats (Rumsfeld, for one, comes to mind). This snippet from the most recent issue of The Economist got me thinking, though: (incidentally, if you only have time to read one mag a week, buy the Economist. I know no other publication that I find pleasant to read even on issues I disagree with them on.)
'Warships from across the world gathered in the Solent on June 28th to celebrate the 200th anniversary of Vice-Admiral Lord Nelson's victory at the battle of Trafalgar. (...) The Americans had planned to send the USS Carl Vinson, one of their enormous aircraft carriers. In the event, the USS Saipan, an amphibious assault ship, replaced her. Officially, the Americans blamed "operational availability" for their carrier's absence. But some thought they detected a tactical retreat: the Carl Vinson dwars even the Charles de Gaulle, the pride of the French navy and the biggest ship present at the celebrations - while the Saipan is 38 feet shorter.'
Like quite a few other Dutch, I hate the French for a plethora of reasons (criticism of Dutch soft drug policy (yes, American politicians make comments about that too, but they have no real power over us, unlike the French through the EU, meaning that American comments are intended mainly for their own constituents), 1996 nuclear tests, Rainbow Warrior, agricultural policy in the EU, flooding the market with bad blended cognacs (don't EVER let anyone tell you Courvoisier is good brandy), holding back European economical liberalization, behaving like neocolonials in their former colonies in ways that surpass anything they've ever claimed the Americans are guilty of, being a political but not a military member of NATO, still managing to maintain a virtual class society in the bloody 21st century, them being arrogant wankers in general, etc etc etc).
Therefore, I applaud American self-restraint. Seems they can be diplomats, if they like to be. (Were I in command of the American navy, I would probably have sent the entire 6th Fleet.)
Incidentally, this is what the French aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle looks like, next to the USS Enterprise (please, do snigger):
Soon it turned out that American Hawkeye planes couldn't land on the CdG. The French first had to weld an extra piece of 4,4 metres to its landing deck since it wasn't long enough...
"The insurgency could go on for any number of years," Rumsfeld said in a U.S. television interview. "Insurgencies tend to go on five, six, eight, 10, 12 years."
This is the kind of honesty I was referring to below. A step in the right direction.
(BTW: A note to my colleagues at CNN. In Dutch journalism schools we learn to make a choice. Either you use words for numbers in a sentence, or you don't. And yes, I am grumpy.)
Swede Ulf Hjertstrom, who was kidnapped in Iraq and got threatened with being murdered, doesn't seem to display any unwarranted empathy towards his former captors:
'I have now put some people to work to find these bastards. I invested about $50,000 so far and we will get them one by one.'
Since the article is in an Australian paper we are probably talking Ozzie dollars, which would be about 5 euros if the ECB sticks to its current policies, or half a glass of beer in Sweden. (Which is fine by me, by the way, as I am considering buying a second house in Perth.)
Still, never again let it be said that the only war the Swedes could possibly win would have to be a civil one.
A graveyard should not be used to make political points.
So just as much as I would oppose a museum at Ground Zero hailing the glory of neo-conservatism, or a hall full of paintings portraying 'America's triumphant march to Baghdad', I think the International Freedom Center (IFC) should not be build there. Although I was sceptical of IFC criticism at first, it now definitely looks like the IFC is going to be used to criticize American foreign policy.
That's just wrong.
Not the uttering of such criticisms. The place.
You don't drag corpses through a street to make your point.
Well, at least civilized people don't.
Ground Zero is a place of sadness and death, of love forlorn and mourning.
(I've just tried it, the site accepts non-American signatures as well. If you go here, and select 'Other' for country, you can find several other Dutch people who've put their names up. Also, if you don't mind shivers going down your spine, deselect everything except 'family member'. Chilling.)
Franklin Roosevelt, 1942: 'Your government has unmistakable confidence in your ability to hear the worst, without flinching or losing heart. You must, in turn, have complete confidence that your government is keeping nothing from you except information that will help the enemy in his attempt to destroy us.'
The Economist, 2005: 'Iraq is no Vietnam, but the sooner Mr Bush spells out the truth bluntly, the sooner he will recover his reputation as a straight-shooter with the American people and Congress.'
I support the war in Iraq, but if I hear one more administration official claiming that victory is just around the corner without anything tangible backing up that statement, I am going to murder a chicken. (This one, perhaps.)
The war on terror is not for the faint of heart. Nor do those supporting it, i.e. voters, deserve to be treated as such.
Yes, the Van der Sloot case is in the news here, but it's not wall to wall, as apparently it is in the USA.
The sad fact of the matter is that Aruba is a former Dutch colony, one we would very much like to get rid off, but despite their political secession in 1986 they have chosen to remain part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
The only good that comes from that is that we can have interesting weather forecasts in winter ('Black ice in the entire country, Aruba excepted').
Aruba is probably somewhat comparable to Puerto Rico. They want the advantages of an alliance with the Netherlands (i.e. huge economic benefits), but not the obligations. Only their Supreme Court is still in The Hague. Their local judiciary is very much an Aruban affair.
I've been trying to look up some things about the Aruban way of justice, but have been woefully unsuccesful. I do want to make a few remarks about claims set forth by some 'expert' on CNN. He said that in the Dutch legal system people can be jailed without probable cause (which is bullshit) and that in your first trial you are always tried by just one judge (which is horse dung by the truck load, at least in the Netherlands). It may all be true in the Aruba situation, which I seriously doubt, but from what I remember of my criminal law lessons, in the Netherlands (under *Dutch* law, not the Aruban version!) being busted goes something like this.
The police arrest you, for which they *do* need to have a reason, both legally and practically speaking. If not, lawyers will have a field day with them afterwards. As in the USA, the amount of revenge you can exact on the police is quite dependent on the amount of money you can spend on your attorney.
Basically, the 'Miranda' rights apply in the Netherlands as well: you can't be forced to answer questions, you are not obligated to incriminate yourself, and you have the right to an attorney (courtesy of the government if you're broke).
There is a time limit as to how long you can be held without a judge having reviewed your case. They can hold you for six hours for questioning. The time in-between 0000 and 0900 (night) isn't included, so theoretically you could be held from 0000 to 1500. That's the max.
Then, police need to get permission from the assistant D.A. to hold you for an additional three days. After that, the D.A. gets involved, who can further extend this period by yet another three days, but his decision will be reviewed by a judge. This is why they will usually bypass the D.A. and go straight to the judge after those initial three days and 6 hours. This has the added advantage that the judge can give a ten day extension, rather than a second extension of three days. Further extensions can be given after those ten days, to a maximum of 106 days and 6 hours for all extensions combined. After that, you *have* to be tried.
It is noteworthy to mention that a judge in this phase can only jail you if there is probable cause that you may have committed a crime which warrants four years of jail time or more (incidentally, 'simple theft' such as shoplifting already has a maximum penalty of four years).
When it comes to a trial (if it doesn't, people tend to sue the government for renumeration for time wasted in a holding cell) you are tried by either one or three judges. This is determined by the charges against you. If you are suspected of committing a misdemeanour (not a Dutch legal term, but offences which only warrant a maximum of 6 months jail time or 240 hours community service) you are tried by the 'Enkelvoudige Kamer', or one judge. In all other cases, three judges have to come to an agreement about you being guilty (or not). They also have to provide reasons for their determination (unlike jurors, I might add).
Also, both the D.A. and the defendant can appeal the verdict, first to a circuit court, then to the Supreme Court (which, somewhat like SCOTUS, is supposed only to review the proper application of law, with the exception that the Dutch SC cannot rule on constitutionality - then again, our Head of State doesn't get to appoint SC judges). The doctrine of 'double jeopardy' is something that will probably enter Dutch law in the next few decades or so, as EU regulations tend to move in that direction.
Now, I agree it's not a perfect system, I do see some merits to a jury trial, I am not proud of the fact that it borrows quite a bit from the French legal system (since I hate everything French) -
BUT:
That doesn't warrant the numerous ignorant forum postings on American websites which pretend Dutch law is something of a third world sham.
In other words, fewer Jihadis roaming the streets of Amsterdam (and London). One of them was carrying a machine pistol, which (to our beloved visitors from Georgia) is not legal in the Netherlands.
I really love going to America - but I hate going through immigration. Not just because the people there generally act like jerks - the USA has, without exaggeration, the rudest immigration officials in the western world - but also because it nowadays is harder to get into the USA when you need a visa (read: nearly impossible). Which is not only pissing off foreigners, it is also hurting America, argues Steve Forbes.
Just got home: will the reader that is bound for Amsterdam please contact me again?
Just got home from a business trip and am swamped with email and the paper kind as well.
However, whilst cleaning out my inbox I accidentally deleted an email of a reader that contacted me about his pending visit to Amsterdam. Could you please resend it?
Gerrit Zalm, the Dutch secretary of finance, today received praise from his American colleague John Snow for helping to combat terrorism by cutting off funding. Zalm is not too popular at the moment because it recently turned out he had traded in the guilder too cheaply for the euro to please the Germans. But honor to whom it's due: it's good to hear he occasionally manages to do something right.
Are Iraqi insurgents plotting their bomb attacks from within the Netherlands?
Today it became known that two guys of Iraqi ancestry, one of them with a Dutch passport, were arrested earlier. They allegedly helped Iraqi insurgents blow up Americans. Kudos for busting the guys, but what the hell is wrong at the immigration office? Guess I shouldn't be surprised. Last year, Dutch police arrested Afghan war criminals who had pretended to be asylum seekers. The former head of Afghan intelligence was among them.
'A 300-page constitution, by dint of its very size, sums up the first problem facing Europe: The EU is governed by a bureaucracy whose ways cannot be understood by ordinary citizens, and which does not intend itself to be understood. It is therefore not trusted.'
'The deeper issue is sovereignty. The government of France is asking its people essentially to transfer major elements of sovereignty to a state that France cannot control. The French do not see a common identity with the rest of Europe, and the rest of Europe does not see a common identity with France. The EU is rooted in an alliance of convenience that is rapidly becoming inconvenient. We do not know what will happen with the French referendum on May 29, but the important thing already has happened. If France cannot be absolutely counted on to vote for the constitution, then the constitution is dead.'
Galactica's episode The Hand of God had a seemingly Gaelic victory song which I absolutely loved. Well, I found it. Turns out it's in Hindi, and not Gaelic, but nevertheless, here's your new ringtone. (Actually, I just remembered something from the grand total of two Gaelic lessons I've had in my life: there is indeed a connection between Gaelic and Hindi. Did some Googling, and voilà. The lyrics of the song I linked above can be found here, by the way.)
EU Rota was kind enough to nominate the 'Nuclear Winter' story by 'Lucasdelinkselul' ('Luketheleftwingdick') about the EU constitution to British blogger Tim Worstall. The latter chose to include it in his weekly Britblog Roundup #14, even though I'm as Dutch as stamppot. Which provides all the more reason for a thank you.
Finally a reasonnot to bitch about anti-Americanism. That is, if you're not an American. Of course, the Dutch could be next if we decide to declare war on Iran. (Via Myrtus.)
A time for the British to show they have a backbone
All we've got now are preliminary reports, but indications are someone - or some group - is trying to pull a Spaniard on the British elections today. So far, there is no mention of casualties and the damage seems to be limited to some broken glass.
Best reason to vote Blair if there ever was one.
Good luck today.
Update 21.09: Police are questioning a Dutch worker. Wow. According to Reuters, he's not a suspect though.
I don't agree with him on the cold fusion and bratwurst thing though. This very much overlooked article in The Economist on the subject is food (though not necessarily bratwurst) for thought.
If there's ever going to be another Star Trek series, Rick Berman probably won't be involved:
'I'm not certain that I will be involved in creating the next 'Star Trek' series. I have no idea when that's going to happen, and it very well may be someone new who's going to be doing it.'
Ladies and gentlemen, the wanker has left the building.
• Two Saudis on the flight were brothers who had attended the same Arizona flight school as 9/11 hijacker Hani Hanjour.
• Canada did not give permission to land. This directly contradicts a statement from KLM that they had the opportunity to land there, but did not do so (and chose the very expensive option of flying back to Amsterdam) because of the fifteen horses in the cargo hold. Since the Dutch normally make sausages out of horses (the only proper thing to do with them now that we have cars), this story seems to be wearing kinda thin.
Which begs the question: is it true KLM really couldn't have known this plane would be sent back? American immigration has been a bit on edge since 9/11 (before you start flaming, so would Dutch immigration be if we had suffered such an attack), but one can hardly accuse Canada of being overzealous in turning back flights. And the American terrorist watch list has been distributed to virtually all airlines that have American ports of call, including KLM.
Then there's a matter I haven't read about thus far in American papers about Dutch military police taking two people off flight 685 prior to take-off. No further disclosures about that have been made yet, and Dutch journalists have been unable to dig up more information about this. Perhaps foreign journalists will have more success pursuing this matter. (Yes, foreign. I've noticed on several occasions that Dutch PR folk tend to be more forthcoming towards American hacks. For example, after the Van Gogh murder, the LA Times got answers to several questions Dutch press received a 'no comment' on.)
My new Netkwesties column is up. (Warning: in Dutch.) It deals with the matter of the 'Apple bloggers' that are currently appealing a court order to reveal their source for several articles citing confidential information about Apple.
Bottom line of the article: this is a test case for the entire blogosphere. These bloggers have an opportunity to make a stand for civil journalism, namely by not revealing their sources even if the court should order them to. Instead, I argue they should accept any punishment dished out and go to jail, just like any other journalist worth his salt would.
New civil liberties have hardly ever been granted, but many of them can eventually be won.
(Oh, by the way, Babelfish theoretically offers Dutch-English translations, but it will probably just give you a good laugh.)
Mr. Harald Doornbos is a veteran war reporter. He is no archetypical hawk nor a staunch supporter of the United States. In fact, he used to be a reporter for the communist newspaper 'De Waarheid' (The Truth, or Pravda, if you like) before it went bust. (This doesn't necessarily mean he was ever a communist, by the way. De Waarheid used to be a huge employer.)
However, this doesn't make him overly sympathetic towards Giuliana Sgrena, the Italian journalist who was held hostage by Iraqi insurgents. Some snippets from this article which was published today in a Dutch Christian broadsheet.
'Be careful not to get kidnapped,' I told the female Italian journalist sitting next to me in the small plane that was headed for Baghdad. 'Oh no,' she said. 'That won't happen. We are siding with the oppressed Iraqi people. No Iraqi would kidnap us.'
It doesn't sound very nice to be critical of a fellow reporter. But Sgrena's attitude is a disgrace for journalism. Or didn't she tell me back in the plane that 'common journalists such as yourself' simply do not support the Iraqi people? 'The Americans are the biggest enemies of mankind,' the three women behind me had told me, for Sgrena travelled to Iraq with two Italian colleagues who hated the Americans as well.
(Doornbos goes on to explain how the women demeaned him for travelling as an embedded reporter with the US military, for security reasons. They didn't want to hear about any safety concerns.)
'You don't understand the situation. We are anti-imperialists, anti-capitalists, communists,' they said. The Iraqis only kidnap American sympathizers, the enemies of the Americans have nothing to fear.
(Doornbos tells them they're out of their mind.)
But they knew better. When we arrived at Baghdad Airport, I was waiting for a jeep from the American army to come pick me up. I saw one of the Italian women walking around crying. An Iraqi had stolen her computer and television equipment. They were standing outside shivering, waiting for a cab to take them to Baghdad.
With her bias Sgrena did not only jeopardize herself, but due to her behavior a security officer is now dead, and the Italian government (prime minister Berlusconi included) has had to spend millions of euros to save her life. It is to be hoped that Sgrena will decide to have a career change. Propagandist or MP perhaps. But she should give up journalism immediately.
Of course, every sensible European or American knows that recent positive developments in the Middle East are happening despite of George W. Bush, and not because of him. Or could it be that...
Read this article in Newsweek, not exactly a neocon bastion:
'The other noted political scientist who has been vindicated in recent weeks is George W. Bush. Across New York, Los Angeles and Chicago—and probably Europe and Asia as well—people are nervously asking themselves a question: "Could he possibly have been right?" The short answer is yes. Whether or not Bush deserves credit for everything that is happening in the Middle East, he has been fundamentally right about some big things.'
It is bound to attract some attention when Assad hands over 30 thugs from the ranks of Saddam Hussein to the newly elected democratic government of Iraq - thugs that, I might add, are every bit as Ba'athist (or: an Arab version of nationalistic socialism) as the government of Syria. And whereas it's not exactly noteworthy that Sharon threatens Syria, a Dutch news broadcast reported that even the Palestinians seem to be losing their patience with Assad. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find a secondary source on this, and therefore it should be considered apocryphal for now.
• First there's Vladimir Putin, the guy who's well on his way to change Russia back into the dictatorship it has been for most of its history. According to reader Gerald, Putin managed to state that the Netherlands is not a democracy, but a monarchy. Yeah, and my car doesn't run on gasoline, but on premium unleaded. Hello, Mr. Putin?! The Netherlands is a constitutional monarchy, in which the king or queen has a largely ceremonial role, and in which the prime minister is directly responsible for all actions of the members of the House of Orange. Anyway, I guess I should thank Mr. Putin for pointing out the virtues of democracy: at least we can vote our retard leaders out. (Update: read the transcript here.)
• Bert Koenders, a member of the Dutch Labour party PvdA and connaisseur of expensive restaurants. Today the Dutch government made the very wise decision of sending 165 Special Forces to aid the American and British troops in Afghanistan who are combatting terrorists there. Koenders, knowing full well he'll have to chat up Labour babes on Saturday night (admittedly, they tend to be pretty), put on his most impressive face and went on television stating that he wasn't too sure he wanted Dutch Special Forces to participate in 'kill and destroy missions'. Mr. Koenders, I'm sure the word 'kill' goes down well with your largely anti-militaristic electorate, but they are called search and destroy missions. The 'destroy' part usually takes care of the 'kill' part, and unlike the Dutch Labour party, the military tend to be efficient.
I'm probably not the only one who is trying to make sense of what seem to be the opening moves of a possible confrontation with Syria. As you all know, former prime minister Rafik Hariri was murdered on Monday. Subsequently, the USA have withdrawn their ambassador from Syria 'for consultation'. It seems that the time for silent diplomacy is now well and truly over.
Of course, the USA have a number of reasons to be displeased with Syria, as its Ba'ath party does not exactly have a healthy influence on the state of affairs in the Sunni Triangle in Iraq. But up until now, the USA never bothered to bring the conflict out in the open, which makes me wonder what changed.
As I see it, there are a number of possibilities:
a.) The USA is hoping to capitalize upon anti-Syrian anger currently rife amongst the Lebanese (and perhaps Syrian) opposition. The current momentum of anger, fueled by the moral support of the USA (and the French, see below), may very well provide the Lebanese opposition with enough of an incentive to rise up against the Syrians themselves.
b.) By withdrawing their ambassador, the USA are trying to scare the Syrians into cooperation. This would be corroborated by implicit French support of American policy. Yesterday, during the Hariri funeral, France once again reiterated its position that Syria should remove its troops from Lebanon. France previously supported a Security Council resolution demanding just that.
c.) It's not a bluff; the whole Hersh/New Yorker story about a possible attack on Iran as well as the unmanned drones story were all diversions. In reality, Syria is the next target. This would make strategic sense, as Syria is costing the USA, the Lebanese, the Israeli's and the Palestinians. I can't imagine any sort of peace between the latter two without Syria moving out of the way and stopping to fund the Lebanon-based Hezbollah. The downside is that American forces seem so overstretched I can't imagine them occupying a third country (besides Iraq and Afghanistan). (Of course, a pending Syrian invasion may be the precise reason the USA hasn't been willing to greatly increase its troop numbers in Iraq.). Nevertheless, I also find it hard to imagine the French going along with this.
There probably are other scenarios which I haven't thought of. Considering the current weirdness - Syria and Iran joining up 'against common threats'; a strange explosion in Iran - I'd like to hear them all. Also, does anyone know if there are any websites tracking American troop deployments?
I stumbled upon this posting on the Eason Jordan affair by a guy named Bertrand Pecquerie, who is the director of the World Editors Forum. Pecquerie tries to read proof for what seem to be his personal political views in the fact that Jordan resigned his post as chief news executive of CNN. Pecquerie needs five points to 'prove' that there's more to the Jordan resignation, and it's done in a way that I've noticed to be quite common here in Europe: by propagating the myth of the absent American left, pretending right wing ideas are the only thing you'll find in the USA.
Well, let's deconstruct Mr. Pecquerie's statements. (Press 'Lees verder'.)
The funny thing about this beautiful compilation of photographs is that a lot of them come from the files of Reuters and the AP. Why then, haven't I seen most of them before? No wait, don't answer that.
By the way, if there's an artist out there who can do the same for the Dutch troops in As Samawah, I think that would be a great idea, and I would promote it here ad nauseum (1,400 unique visitors/day).
I've just finished watching Kobol's Last Gleaming, the 13th and final episode of the first season of Battlestar Galactica. There are no words to do justice to the originality and ingenuity of producer Ronald D. Moore, so I will make no further attempt. Suffice it to say that BSG dwarfs everything that was produced in the past decade: that means Star Trek, the X-Files, and yes, Babylon 5 as well.
BSG may just do for scifi what Hill Street Blues and NYPD Blue did in their time for cop shows: rejuvenate the genre, and attract viewers who would in the past not have been interested in scifi. The fact is that SciFi Channel ordered six more scripts before the show even aired in the USA, solely based on ratings in the UK where Sky Channel has bought the rights to air it first.
Brannon and Braga will end where they belong: in the bargain section of my local dvd store.
This is my kind of fanatic: 'It's one of my wishes to die at the gate of the polling station. I want to be a martyr for the ballot box.' Dixit some Iraqi guy, via Andrew Sullivan.
Unfortunately, since there will be two elections in Iraq this year, I am mighty afraid this bloke might just get what he's wishing for.
(Yes, two. One to choose a government which will write an Iraqi constititution, another one in December to choose another government and parliament to either endorse or reject said constitution. The same way any other civilized democracy, such as the Netherlands or the USA, would do it.)
Or, how Islamic and Sikh violence breed Christian intolerance, the beast that we exorcised through a centuries long war which required our best philosophers and our bravest political leaders.
It's been only weeks since a London theatre stopped performing a play which wasn't to the liking of some fundamentalist Sikhs. Now, Christian groups in the UK claim the same right to censorship over a BBC broadcast (which thankfully went ahead).
'What kind of christians are the sort of people who find mocking God and Jesus Christ acceptable? If this show portrayed Mohammed or Vishnu as homosexual, ridiculous and ineffectual, it would never have seen the light of day.'
And so it begins.
These aren't jackboots you're hearing. They're the horns whose ghostly sound accompanies the excommunication of Baruch d'Espinoza from the synagogue, the scraping of the pen which signs Rushdie's fatwa, the crackling of the funeral pires on which the civilization of Enlightenment will eventually perish.
The next time someone starts ranting about how the Christian right is taking over the USA, I'll buy him a one way ticket to London.
(Well, I'd never.) In an otherwise insightful article about the Netherlands, written by a guy who's actually read a book or two about the Low Countries before spouting his opinion.
Nope, still no cure for cancer, HIV or bad driving skills. But physicians are making headway in explaining Gollum's odd behavior:
'Insofar as Smeagol/Gollum has been living alone for hundreds of years, I think we can rule out the possibility that his avoidance of lembas bread is caused by the recent "low-carb" craze.'
Apparently, an anti-nuclear activist has lost his legs after a train in Avricourt drove over them. He had tried to stop the train by chaining himself to the tracks. Are there any partial Darwin Awards too?
Update 17.37: Turns out the guy just bit the dust. I guess nuclear energy is dangerous after all...
Courtesy of VolkomenKut.Com (which means TotallyCunt.Com for all you Yanks): here's a new version of the old song 'Big City'. It starts funny, it ends rather politically incorrect, if not totally xenophobic. Then again, never have I believed in the maxim 'Publish and be damned' more than this week.
Letter of Mohamed B. contained direct threat of Ayaan Hirsi Ali
The Dutch government just released the five page letter which was pinned on Van Gogh's body with a knife by his murderer Mohamed B. The pages can't be found on the internet (yet) but it was just reported that they contain a direct threat of Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a vocal critic of radical Islam. Which makes it all the more ludicrous that her security was extremely lax even on the night directly following Van Gogh's murder on Tuesday.
Update 23.00: according to Dutch PBS, even several experienced journalists were shocked by the contents of the letter, which was written in excellent Dutch. This further compounds the theory that the murderer radicalized in the Netherlands, and not in a distant poor Middle Eastern dictatorship. He was one of us, before his mind got poisoned by radicalism. Very few people have dared to suggest that the murderer was a victim of terrible circumstances that drove him to his act. However, since it's now obvious that he was well educated and led a normal life before he radicalized, these excuses can now be disqualified permanently. He even was a well known and loved volunteer in his neighbourhood. This radical Islamist, at least, didn't get driven into anything. He wasn't a victim - he chose this course of action.
It turns out the letter also threatens Jozias van Aartsen, chief whip of the Liberal Party (which is a right wing party in the Netherlands). Unfortunately, the full text of the letter still isn't available.
The Economist gets it largely right but shirks away from drawing any sharp conclusions:
'Despite the harsh debate begun by Fortuyn three years ago, the country suffers from little overt racism. Fortuyn himself insisted that he was no racist, and bitterly dissented from comparisons between his party and France's National Front. Many immigrant groups, such as Surinamese, Chinese or eastern Europeans, fit quite happily into the Netherlands.'
There is an implicit conclusion in the last sentence, mainly by what isn't said, but The Economist seems reluctant to voice it. The conclusion, however, is spot on: 'Many Dutch feel that the time has come for the Muslim minority to adjust to where they live and adopt Dutch values—precisely the view espoused by Ms Hirsi Ali.'
The Economist also points out that, unless the Dutch mood changes, the entire European Union might feel the backlash: 'After this week, more will feel threatened because their Muslim neighbours do not share their liberal values. Dutch hostility to the prospect of Turkish membership of the European Union may also intensify.'
Reuters suggests a possible connection between the murderer of Van Gogh and the suicide bombings in the Moroccan capital Casablanca, which killed 45 people.
Using three different transcriptions of the OBL tape, Dan Darling makes one of the best attempts thusfar to explain what Osama was trying to achieve with his latest video.
People in my profession are often accused of bending the truth. Of course, journalists would never do such a thing. And especially not people working for CNN, which is, as we all know, a respected news organisation without any bias whatsoever. They wouldn't, for example, take a photograph out of context to make things looking more dramatic.
So when eight U.S. Marines died today, and CNN didn't have any pictures, of the incident, what did CNN do?
That's right: they used a picture of soldiers burning garbage.
Presumably, a New York sanitation worker didn't look scary enough.
'Illegal' Dutch interference in American elections?
Dutch weekly Intermediair features a rather startling article about Americans voting in the Netherlands. Hidden away near the end of the piece is the following section:
'"We owe the Dutch for the willingness among Americans living in the Netherlands to vote in these elections." (...) A lawyer sent a list of American customers in Amsterdam. Other Dutch citizens used a website, www.tellanamericantovote.com, to inform American friends and colleagues. (...) The website was made for free by a Dutch company. Planning and production of all the printed items (election flyers, ed.) was taken care of by a Dutch advertising agency. Dutch citizens also helped out writing press releases. Amongst them was a member of the Jonge Democraten (the youth organization of the Dutch centrist party D66, ed.) and the personal assistant of a VVD Lower House member (the VVD is a free-market liberal party and considered right wing, ed.). This is something (Claire, ed.) Taylor shouldn't be saying, since foreigners are by law prohibited to help with American election campaigns.'
Claire Taylor describes herself as a Democrat in the Intermediair article.
It is of course a complete coincidence that the website the article mentions, Tellanamericantovote.com, is registered to an organization called Americans Against War, based in the Netherlands. The Dutch register of the Chamber of Commerce doesn't show a registered company at the address the WHOIS listing yields, Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal 86, suite b56, in Amsterdam. (However, the listed registrant email address for the site is hostmaster@mokum.org. Mokum.org is registered as being the property of C. Willis. The telephone number is that of Demon Internet in Amsterdam, a major ISP. There is indeed a Chris Willis working at this company. He's the general manager there. This doesn't mean much, since it's really easy to add false information to a .org domain registry record.)
The website itself doesn't seem all that neutral either. I guess you could interpret the big flashing statement that '537 votes put George W. Bush in the White House' as an incentive for Republicans as well as Democrats to do their civic duty. Nevertheless, the request at the bottom of the page to report any election problems to a Democrat legal team seems hardly bipartisan to me.
Because of copyright reasons, I can't provide a scan of the entire clipping. Please contact me through email if you do require assistance. Intermediair unfortunately doesn't include the article on its website.
Disclaimer: the translation is mine and therefore, Intermediair should probably not be held responsible for any inaccuracies that might have accidentally sneaked in.
The same guy who in the previous presidential election declared Bush jr. to be less smart than Gore now states that Bush has got more brains than Kerry. Money quote:
'Linda Gottfredson, an I.Q. expert at the University of Delaware, called it a creditable analysis said she was not surprised at the results or that so many people had assumed that Mr. Kerry was smarter. "People will often be misled into thinking someone is brighter if he says something complicated they can't understand," Professor Gottfredson said.'
The research was done by Steve Sailer, who compared standardised military intelligence tests. This in itself isn't definite proof, but it becomes a whole lot more likely that Sailer is correct when you consider that Kerry never released his SAT scores. (Bush did: he got a respectable 1206 points.) I wonder why.
As for possible journalism bias: the source of this article is the New York Times, which has endorsed Kerry for president.
When I was in London last week to interview journalists about investigative reporting, several of them referred to the Guardian as 'the thinking man's newspaper'. Right. That's why this (ahem) 'quality broadsheet' prints job ads for political assassins:
Quite frankly, the man's either wired or mad. If it's the former, he should be flung out of office: tarred, feathered and kicked in the nuts. (...) He flashes us a dumb little smile, like a toddler proudly showing off its first bowel movement. (...) On November 2, the entire civilised world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod's law dictates he'll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you?
Funny how liberal journalists define a 'thinking man'.
I've just returned from spending two days in London to do work for the Dutch-Flemish Society of Investigative Journalism. Yesterday night, I took a flight from Heathrow to Amsterdam. To say that the security measures took a long time, would be an understatement. I dropped an apple which grew into a tree before I was halfway through. Understandably (I think) I even volunteered to be x-rayed by some new body scanner device (turns out I wasn't carrying any expolosives) so I could save 15 minutes by being moved to the head of the queue to have my luggage irradiated as well.
Of course, the alarm went off.
The (very friendly, so there's no need to invoke Godwin's Law) security officer searched my entire bagage. It was interesting to see what he paid attention to. On his initial run he made careful studie of my disposable contacts. He also flipped through two books. Apparently, terrorists have now become so sophisticated they can make paperthin IED's, as well as explosive saline solutions.
He didn't find anything. So my luggage was screened again, this time item by item.
The red light went off on my first aid kit.
I am quite distrustful of the medical profession in general, and foreign doctors in particular. Hence, I carry an extensive supply of drugs, bandages and a plethora of other stuff, even if I travel abroad only for one or two days. There are many items in my first aid kit you won't find in any ordinary consumer version. This also means there are quite a few things that may look dangerous on a scanner, but aren't.
For example, there's a pair of plastic clamps that you would use in child delivery (I like to be prepared). You couldn't possibly do any harm with them (well, I suppose you could clamp it on an IV of a hospital patient, but those are far and few between on an airliner). It took me only a few seconds to convince the security officer I should be allowed to keep them. He let me.
The security officer then focused on some pinchers, as well as a small foldable pair of scissors, used to cut bandages. Both of them were confiscated. I could understand the scissors part (it was my own fault in being honest enough to bring them up), although how some blunt pinchers constitute a threat I still can't fathom.
This however, was not the most bizarre or worrying part of the story.
The security officer never even looked at the two stitching kits I carry, which were in plain sight during the search.
As I later realized, both of them contain extremely sharp surgical blades as well as rather large needles, and I boarded the flight without any problems.
It's no big surprise that the New York Times has endorsed John F. Kerry for president. What is rather odd though is that the Chicago Tribune, not exactly a right-wing rag, has endorsed George W. Bush.
Some people are actually offering psychological treatment holidays on the Canary Island. Isn't that expensive? Well, yes. But if you're a Dutch citizen, you are never going to notice, since the people who conjured up the idea are trying to get Dutch Medicare (for our Dutch readers: AWBZ) to pay for it. Do you need to be really sick to participate? Well, no. Even a 'mild addiction' is enough. I sure hope my fondness for jellybeans qualifies me. And if not, I'm confident some ex-girlfriends are willing to step forward and testify on my (or is that against?) my behalf.
How I will miss gems of rhetorical cow dung wisdom like these:
'The telegram of this metonymy - a name, a number - points out the unqualifiable by recognizing that we do not recognize or even cognize that we do not yet know how to qualify, that we do not know what we are talking about.'
I couldn't agree more. Being proud of not knowing anything for certain, let alone what he was talking about, is pretty much the central theme of Derrida's philosophy.
Perhaps we could have a (de)constructive debate about what 'being dead' means. That is, if it turns out to mean anything at all.
(By the way, the earlier quote is from a dialogue in which Derrida reminisces about the date 'September 11'. Not the event. Just the date.)
Update 11/10/04 9.38: Rand Simberg has written a hilarious parody.
3.05: Nice opening salvo by John Kerry. Obviously he immediately referred to the WMD report. Bush' rebuttal wasn't bad, but a bit of a slow start.
3.09: The initial big difference between the first and the second debate is that George W. Bush seems more composed. At least, a little. Sometimes, he speaks on the top of his voice. He doesn't sound too relaxed at all.
3.12: Bush rebuttal with the now infamous Global Test again. Good point to refer to the sanctions. Kerry steals his thunder by saying the sanctions obviously worked, since no WMD's were found. Unfortunately for Bush, he can't rebut by saying this still doesn't explain why Kerry also sanctioned the use of force.
3.14: Kerry quotes Chuck Hagel, a Republican senator who is infamous for criticizing Bush on nearly every occasion. I'm not sure that's wise. Also, he criticizes Bush for not allowing France and Germany to bid for Iraqi reconstruction contracts. He'll be lambasted for that for the next fortnight. Bush is again repeating the same thing he already said twice or thrice in the first debate. Also, he should take a lozenge to nurse that throat, and something to calm him down. He sounds like he's on amphetamines or something.
3.18: Finally, a good quote from Bush: 'The war on terror is not just Osama bin Laden.' But please, leave out the endless references to 'firm resolve'.
3.19: Now Bush is comparing himself to Ronald Reagan. This leaves him vulnerable to a Kerry quote amongst the lines of 'Mr. President, you are not Ronald Reagan.' Kerry was already a senator at that time.
3.21: Kerry doesn't go for the Reagan reference. Weakest rebuttal by Kerry so far, he repeats his previous points.
3.23: Now Bush is blaming his generals? What's he doing?
3.25: Kerry is stretching the truth by stating that North Korea wasn't a threat in 2000 - Clinton is probably more to blame for that situation than Bush. Kerry does deliver his point well though. Again Kerry plugs his 'get all the loose nuclear material in four years', a plan even Democratic pundits have labelled unrealistic.
3.26: Bush finally smiles. A good reply to Kerry's point from the first debate that Bush should engage in bilateral rather than multilateral talks with North Korea. Bush' best rebuttal so far.
3.28: 'We don't need mass armies anymore.' Er?! Kerry is going to have a ball with this Bush quote. Stop fiddling with that tie, too.
3.31: Kerry sure mentions 'middle class' a lot. Which sounds about the same as a soap salesman telling you his particular kind of detergent really does remove all stains.
3.32: Did I mention Bush really should calm down?
3.37: Kerry's flipflopping within five minutes. First he criticizes Bush for not spending enough money on homeland security, then he says it's not about the amount of money, but about how you spend it. Bush ignored the opportunity.
3.42: Why is Bush not pointing out that Kerry's position on importing drugs from Canada will cost American jobs, especially since Kerry made such a big deal about his resistance against outsourcing?
3.49: Bush: 'I'm spending so much since I'm spending less.' I almost believe it.
3.51: Kerry on the defensive, explaining his health care plan. He's afraid now?
3.53: Kerry does a Reagan: Read my lips, right into the camera, no new taxes!
3.56: Bush should have waited for the laughter to break before rebutting. Is he hasty on purpose, to convey some sense of urgency? Otherwise, he really should start paying attention to his advisers.
4.00: Bush also should have memorized the environmental bit a tad better. Especially since it isn't his strong suit. He's also stammering again, whereas the only thing Kerry messes up is his creepy smiling.
4.04: Kerry defends Kyoto. I'm not sure that's a good move.
4.07: I'm also beginning to wonder if Kerry is perhaps appearing a bit too slick. His voice is in his favour; nonetheless, his demeanour and the incessant smiling makes me want to grab a black-and-white camera to shoot a remake of Frankenstein.
4.09: Kerry is dodging the whole 'taxing companies that outsource' issue. Bad. Humorous FU by Bush.
4.12: He's also walking like a duck with hemorrhoids.
4.14: And now he equates a religious sentiment with 'a feeling'? Not a good move. Kerry had the upper hand in the first 45 minutes, but is losing it fast now. Even though I actually agree with him on the issue of stem cells.
4.16: Bush' stammering on the issue of stem cells will actually help him. And Kerry now trying to blame Bush for fllipflopping will rebound with those voters who actually care about this issue.
4.19: Did anybody ever tell Bush that he is actually at his best when he speaks slowly, pauses for a few seconds every now and then, and goes with the flow rather than trying to regurgitate pre-written quotes?
4.22: Now Kerry is grovelling. This will not work. Especially not with women, whom he seems to be too desperate to please.
4:26: Bush gets a question in which he is asked to explain a few of his mistakes. That of course is a biased question; Kerry isn't being asked to explain why he is unfit for the job. Bush could have turned this one around though, which he fails to do. Weak ending for Bush.
There was more here, but it got lost due to user error. Overall, I think it is a slight win for Bush. Kerry started off well by being nuanced and well-composed. He overplayed his hand though and ended up looking very opportunistic. This made Bush look steadfast rather than dogmatic. Of course, the polls will show whether or not this assessment is correct.
(Read Hugh Hewitt as well. I'm not really sure he was watching the same debate though.)
Regular visitors probably know I sometimes teach Arab and Israeli journalists through Brenda de Jager of Jemstone, an organization which does a lot of work in the Middle East. Now, Tudor Lomas of the same organization has emailed me to ask if I want to come to Baghdad to teach journalism and internet skills to Iraqis. There'll be no danger, he says, and he writes: 'You would only be in the Green Zone, with full-scale armed protection from the airport into and from the Green Zone.'
This would normally be good enough for me, except for these nasty news items which point out the Green Zone really isn't that safe right now.
Your thoughts, please. This is not a decision I take lightly, nor an opportunity to turn down easily.
Everybody knows those moments when you wonder where your life is going, if it is going anywhere at all. If it ever happens to you again, just visit this page. It'll make you feel a whole lot better.
Robert Novak, the conservative bloke who outed Valerie Plame as a CIA operative, wrote a column in the Chicago Sun-Times predicting a quick exit from Iraq during the (very likely) second term of George W. Bush. Since Novak is a partisan hack with Republican sympathies, this initially got me confused.
Until I remembered a recent article by notable strategist Edward Luttwak, who suggested that the USA should feign withdrawal in order to scare the Iraqi Shi'a into cooperation.
I'm sure it's just a coincidence.
(Aantal verdiepingen gebaseerd op een gemiddelde ruimte van 4 meter per verdieping en het omhoogtakelen naar geostationaire hoogte, zulks voor de nerds onder u.)
Of, zoals de nerds zeggen, bortaS bIr jablu'DI', reH QaQqu' nay'.
Hoe dan ook: vanuit psychologisch perspectief schijnt het heel verstandig te zijn om wraak te nemen. Dat activeert namelijk hetzelfde beloningscircuit als cocaïne.
Kijk dit weekeinde goed in uw achteruitkijkspiegel. Mwuhahahaha!
Het getuigt van meer waardigheid om te gaan lopen dan om in een Daewoo rond te rijden. Hell, ik stap nog liever in een Opa Corsa. En daarom schreef ik gisteren een cynisch stukje op Quotelog over de inzet van Daewoo's bij de Zuid-Koreaanse politie. Een dag later zijn vooral de reacties erg komisch om te lezen. Zoals deze:
'Ben onlangs gespot in een Matiz toen ik met een vriend het centrum van Arnhem onveilig wou maken. We parkeerden voor de kroeg. Geweldig! Meteen kreeg ik sjans met een sociaal werkster die mij zei dat het vast met mijn jeugd te maken had dat ik in zo'n auto zat en mij meteen haar borst aanbood als troost. De meelijwekkende blikken die mij werden toegeworpen werden vervolgens omgezet in daden en ik heb de ganse avond van gratis bier mogen genieten. En dan zegt men dat men in Nederland geen normen en waarden meer kent.'
Momenteel kijk ik in de avonduren naar de briljante documentaireserie The World at War. Mooi hoor, die 32 uur aan oorlogsellende met een bak friet erbij, maar er is één nadeeltje: de makers gebruiken als achtergrondmuziek wel erg veel naziliederen. En die blijven behoorlijk doordreinen in je hoofd. Met als gevolg dat ik er vanochtend ongemerkt eentje neuriede. Best gevaarlijk. Want voor je het weet, haal ik straks een 'Van Baalen' uit bij de slager.
Niet alleen heeft de site MooreWatch een vernietigende serie, ook de site Spinsanity komt met een deprimerend overzicht over manipulaties en verdraaiingen in Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11. De bron van dit artikel is belangrijk, want Spinsanity kun je niet beschuldigen van Republikeinse sympathieën. Artikelschrijver Brendan Nyhan is co-auteur van een binnenkort te verschijnen kritisch boek over... George W. Bush.
En nee, da's niet iets ranzigs uit een Wallen-winkeltje. Af en toe geef ik les aan Arabische journalisten. De organisatie waarvoor ik dan werk, Jemstone, heeft een nieuwe site. Aanbevolen voor journalisten en topfokkers. (En hoera, ik sta d'r ook op. Soon I'll have enough hot air in me to float my own balloon.)
Wat onverlet laat dat ik tegen de Europese Grondwet zal stemmen bij het komende referendum. Niet omdat ik tegen de Europese Unie ben, wel omdat ik het een beroerd ding vind. The Economist legt het helder uit.
Bush die 'voor het eerst' een lans breekt voor toetreding van Turkije tot de EU? Hebben journalisten dan allemaal het geheugen van zo'n ding met gaatjes? De Amerikanen maakten al in maart duidelijk hoe ze over Turkije denken. En terecht. Turkije nog langer op het bankje laten wachten, is niet alleen onfatsoenlijk (de EU traineert al jaren), maar ook bijzonder onverstandig. Het Westen kan niet aan de ene kant beweren democratie in het Midden-Oosten te willen stimuleren, terwijl aan de andere kant het enige succesvolle democratische islamitische land in de regio buiten de deur wordt gehouden.
Het Irak van Saddam wel te verstaan. Waarschuwing: de video bevat zeer gruwelijke beelden.
Het maakt duidelijk tegen welk immoreel systeem het westen vecht. En het maakt duidelijk dat we ons in deze oorlog zelf geen morele uitglijders kunnen veroorloven. En daarom wordt het, zoals Andrew Sullivan schrijft, tijd dat Rumsfeld bekend maakt wat er in het memo 'Coercive Interrogation Techniques approved by the Secretary of Defense' stond. En daarna opstapt.
...hoort daarbij dat iedereen zijn mening moet kunnen vormen op basis van alle beschikbare informatie. Waarom dan heb ik deze foto's nergens gezien in de Nederlandse media (kan natuurlijk zijn dat ik wat gemist heb), en waarom linkt geen Europese of Amerikaanse nieuwssite naar de 'Al Qaeda-website' waarop deze club zijn verklaringen plaatst? Mag ik alsjeblieft zelf bepalen waartegen ik beschermd wil worden?
(Het is waar dat ik op deze site zelf de Berg-video niet heb willen plaatsen, maar daar heb ik in elk geval bij vermeld waar hij gevonden kon worden (via eMule), zodat wie dat wou, hem kon opzoeken. En om deze inconsistentie definitief recht te zetten, hierbij alsnog een link, die nadrukkelijk niet geschikt is voor minderjarigen (en wat mij betreft ook niet voor meerderjarigen). Ik raad het klikken op deze link dan ook af om redenen die ik eerder heb gegeven, maar aan u de keuze.)
De eer gaat naar Mojave Airport - pardon: Spaceport -, vanwaar maandag hopelijk de eerste bemande particuliere ruimtevlucht in de geschiedenis zal worden gemaakt. Mojave Airport heeft een officiële vergunning, onder nummer # LSO 04 009.
Met andere woorden: het wordt nu serieus.
Damn. Al sinds ik jong ben, wil ik een keertje die blauwe knikker van grote hoogte zien (welke jongen niet?). Door lui als Burt Rutan, initiatiefnemer van de ruimtevlucht van komende maandag, is er zowaar een kansje dat die droom ooit betaalbaar gaat worden.
Ontdekte Robert D. Kaplan van The Atlantic toen hij bij een marinebataillon werd gedetacheerd:
'The particular Marine grunts with whom I was embedded had the impression at first that journalists are violent people. I'm not kidding. After all, two reporters who had been embedded with them in 2003 during the war had gotten into a fistfight over a satellite phone, and a Marine captain had had to break it up with a body block.'
Als journalisten van die ferme jongens en stoere knapen zijn, waarom zie ik er dan niet meer tijdens de Wing Chun-trainingen?
Volgens R-Win hoor ik thans bij de Google-404-club, een illuster nerdgezelschap van mensen die Google op een fout hebben kunnen betrappen.
Fijn hoor.
Nu de Mile High-club nog.
Zelfs de frequente, spookachtige bliksemschichten ontbraken niet in deze Mary Shelley-achtige film. En ook nu heeft de menselijke technologische hovaardij een monster gecreëerd, al is het er niet eentje van vlees en bloed, maar eentje van wind en ijs.
Ik kreeg haast 't gevoel dat ik weer net zoals vroeger lekker in de kerk zat, luisterend naar een fijne preek over Ellende, Verlossing en Dankbaarheid. Nu is het alleen niet God die door Jezus deze verlossing brengt, maar een new-age-achtige drie-eenheid bestaande uit de Heilige Moeder Natuur (aan het eind merkt een van de protagonisten op dat de lucht nog nooit zo schoon is geweest, nu de halve mensheid dood is: het is net Noach na de zondvloed), haar Nobele Wilde Zoon (de barmhartige Derde Wereld, die zich lankmoedig opoffert voor de verdrukte, zondige westerse wereld door vluchtelingen een huis te bieden - nadat diens schulden overigens door het westen zijn kwijtgescholden) en de Feminiene Geest (alle helden nemen een 'zachte', verzorgende rol aan - ook de mannen, die zich in tegenstelling tot de vrouwen uiteraard nog wel ouderwets mogen opofferen, want gelijkheid is mooi, maar je moet niet overdrijven).
Oh, en wat betreft klimaatmodellen en dé reden om sceptisch te zijn over het broeikaseffect: GIGO. Computermodellen zijn verre van perfect: stop er onzin in, en er komt nog meer onzin uit. Frappant geval: toen het KNMI alweer een tijdje geleden een betere computer kreeg om weersvoorspellingen te doen, werden die aanvankelijk een stuk slechter. Ik houd de Sagan-doctrine aan: buitengewone claims vereisen buitengewoon bewijs. Voorlopig hoor ik alleen elkaar napratende klimaatdeskundigen, die almaar voortbouwen op hun eigen gegevens waarvan niemand weet of ze om te beginnen wel kloppen. Zo ontstaan eindeloze wetenschappelijke cirkelredeneringen, waarbij het model, en niet de realiteit, de toetssteen wordt.
Wat ook niet helpt, is dat het idee is ontstaan dat alle wetenschappers het eens zijn over het broeikaseffect. Dat is niet waar. Een groot aantal is dat inderdaad, en verenigd in organisaties als het IPCC. (Kun je trouwens nog een baan bij zo'n club krijgen als je, als goed wetenschapper, sceptisch bent over de huidige modellen?) Maar hoeveel mensen weten dat er critici zijn, verenigd in het Heidelberg Appeal, overigens ook in Nederland actief? Op het NOS Journaal ooit gehoord over de ruim 17.000 wetenschappers die de Oregon Petition hebben ondertekend? En wie kent de Leipzig Declaration, ook al van criticasters?
(De ultieme arrogantie lijkt me trouwens dat de mensheid zich het vermogen toedicht om dit soort enorme rampen te veroorzaken, maar dat terzijde.)
Tired
And lonely,
So tired
The heart aches
Meltwater trickles
Down the rocks,
The fingers are numb,
The knees tremble.
It is now,
Now, that you must not give in.
On the path of the others
Are resting places,
Places in the sun
Where they can meet
But this
Is your path,
And it is now,
Now, that you must not fail.
Weep
If you can,
Weep,
But do not complain.
The way chose you -
And you must be thankful.
Volgens het satirische Australische weekblad The Chaser gaat deze 'Preaching To The Converted IV' heten. The Chaser is, net als Moore, behoorlijk anti-Bush. Des te veelbetekenender dat Moore zelfs onder zijn medestanders zoveel irritatie begint op te wekken. Quote: 'Moore told a rapturous audience of left-wingers at Cannes that the key to successful filmmaking was getting your bans right. "Disney told me they weren't going to release Fahrenheit more than twelve months ago. Some people would have kicked up a stink then and there, but I think it's pretty clear that, as usual, I was absolutely correct to wait until just before the Palme D'Or vote."'
Michelangelo had mogelijk het syndroom van Asperger, beweren althans een stel Ierse onderzoekers. Tuurlijk. Over het modieuze gehalte van autisme en aanverwante aandoeningen heb ik hier en hier al eens geschreven.
Meer in het algemeen tel je straks niet meer mee als je niet over de een of andere afwijking beschikt. Advies: kies 'm zelf (er is een ruime sortering), want anders krijg je er eentje toegewezen, al dan niet na je dood. Persoonlijk kies ik voor deze. Officieel voor jeugd onder de 10, maar ach, mannen zijn immers grote kinderen.
'The BBC did not preach to me about the Soviet threat with the same ardour that it preached about racial prejudice. I therefore thought that America was very violent and very backward, and I could never quite understand why such a country was by far the most powerful in the world. If I asked people why, they would say, "Oh well, it's because it's so rich," as if wealth were something that simply descended upon you without the contribution of human effort. As a result, I understood very little about America.'
Steve Den Beste heeft een weinig opwekkende analyse. En ik vrees dat ik het grotendeels eens ben met zijn slotzin: 'We citizens have to start thinking of news reporting as being about as reliable as advertising.'
Voorzichtigheid is geboden; er is vaker vals alarm geweest. Maar tot dusver kwam dat valse alarm altijd van de media, met name van sensationele zenders als Fox. Nog nooit heeft de Amerikaanse legertop de vondst van chemische wapens in Irak bevestigd - tot vanmiddag dan.
Trouwe lezers (dag paps) weten dat ik lid ben van de X Prize-organisatie, die zich tot doel stelt zo snel mogelijk commerciële ruimtevaart mogelijk te maken. Welnu, vannacht kwam het ruimtevaartuig SpaceShipOne daar aardig dichtbij.
Zij hebben de onthoofding van de Amerikaanse zakenman Nicholas Berg veroordeeld, en hoewel ik me vooral van de Wahhabisten in Saoedi-Arabië afvraag hoe gemeend dat is, lijkt het me wel de enige juiste reactie.
Aanvankelijk was ik van plan de video van de moord op deze site te zetten, maar dat doe ik niet. Het kan alleen maar meer haat oproepen - haat tegen moslims, niet tegen Amerikanen, bedoel ik dan. Want zo gruwelijk zijn de beelden (en het geluid helpt ook niet mee). Berg wordt tergend langzaam met wat het botste mes in het Midden-Oosten moet zijn, gefileerd. Een groot deel van zijn eigen onthoofding is hij schreeuwend te horen (totdat zijn keel ook wordt doorgesneden) en dus bij bewustzijn.
Ik word niet zo snel meer misselijk, maar na het zien van de Berg-video had ik zelfs geen zin meer in Bassett-winegums (een van mijn ernstigste verslavingen, naast whiskey en alles wat blond is).
Kortom, als u zonodig moet, zoekt u zelf maar via eMule.
Ik volsta hier met een link naar deze reactie van de Iraakse blogger Zeyad.
Oh, en met deze link naar wat rechtse rakkers die (met goede argumenten) proberen aan te tonen dat de ergste stukken wellicht uit de video zijn geknipt.
Ik kan het me desondanks nauwelijks voorstellen.
Een democratie bestaat bij de gratie van het mandaat van de meerderheid, die rekening houdt met en rekenschap aflegt aan de gehele bevolking, waaronder dus ook de minderheid.
Daaruit volgt dat een democratische regering niet alleen met het hele volk rekening behoort te houden, maar ook de stemmen van eenieder zoveel mogelijk ruimte moet geven.
Een van de implicaties daarvan is dat iedereen, zelfs een uiterst kleine minderheidsgroepering of een individu, het recht heeft om gehoord te worden of zich te laten horen. Het demonstratierecht is daarom een groot goed.
Maar wanneer een minderheid alle andere geluiden wil overstemmen, wordt dat recht misbruikt.
Zoals vandaag in de Amerikaanse Senaat, waar de commissie voor de 'Armed Services' een hoorzitting hield.
De Amerikaanse Senaat wordt rechtstreeks gekozen door de Amerikaanse bevolking en vormt dus een afspiegeling van de voorkeuren van het electoraat. (Er is discussie mogelijk over het Amerikaanse districtensysteem, en ook wordt er op grote schaal gerrymandering toegepast in de VS, maar aangezien deze nadelen voor alle politieke partijen gelden, lijdt iedere partij daar even sterk onder.)
Vandaag diende Donald Rumsfeld (waarover hieronder meer) rekenschap af te leggen voor de misstanden in de Abu Ghraib-gevangenis in Irak. Rumsfeld stond een stevige behandeling te wachten door met name de Democratische senatoren - thans vertegenwoordigers van het minderheidsgeluid.
Die daartoe aanvankelijk de kans niet kregen, omdat een aantal demonstranten de zitting verstoorde, en Rumsfeld voor van alles en nog wat uitmaakte. Uiteraard herhaalde CNN na afloop van de zitting vrijwel meteen de beelden van de demonstranten, nog voordat de zender overging tot een samenvatting van wat de commissieleden te zeggen hadden gehad.
De consequentie: een kleine groep demonstranten met een onduidelijke achterban kreeg aandacht in overvloed; verhoudingsgewijs veel meer dan de volksvertegenwoordigers die daar met een mandaat van het electoraat zaten. Iets waar de demonstranten vermoedelijk op hadden gerekend, of in elk geval gehoopt.
Hoe noemen we het ook weer als het geluid van niet-gekozen personen prevaleert boven dat van de volksvertegenwoordiging?
Lees hier de toelichting van The Economist, waar ik het hartgrondig mee eens ben. Of deze analyse, van de onvolprezen havik-Democraat Thomas Friedman. Of het hoofdredactioneel commentaar van de New York Times.
Als Rumsfeld echt zo dol is op waar Amerika voor staat, en als hij wil dat zijn baas George W. Bush in november de verkiezingen wint, moet hij nu weg. Dan kan zijn opvolger meteen beginnen met het rechtzetten van de juridische misstanden rondom Guantanamo Bay, in plaats van die kwestie aan het Supreme Court over te laten.
Het Amerikaanse leger laat een Canadees bedrijf een spuitsysteem ontwikkelen voor een gladheidsgel. Het spul moet wegen onbegaanbaar maken zodat bij rellen iedereen gebroederlijk over elkaar struikelt en vertederd de warmte van de naaste aanvaardt.
Kortom, asfalteren, dat Irak.
(Via Fark.)
"It is time to stop pretending that Europeans and Americans share a common view of the world, or even that they occupy the same world."
Zo begint Of Paradise and Power, een lucide essay van Robert Kagan over de verhoudingen tussen de Verenigde Staten en Europa.
Ik ben nog maar net begonnen met lezen, maar Kagan weet in drie pagina's meer heldere dingen te zeggen over de huidige geopolitieke situatie dan ik sinds 11 september 2001 in alle door ondergetekende verorberde kranten, tijdschriften en websites gezamenlijk heb aangetroffen.
Nog altijd van de eerste pagina komt het citaat: "Europe is turning away from power, or to put it a little differently, it is moving beyond power into a self-contained world of laws and rules and transnational negotiation and cooperation. It is entering a post-historical paradise of peace and relative prosperity, the realization of Immanuel Kant's 'perpetual peace'. Meanwhile, the United States remains mired in history, exercising power in an anarchic Hobbesian world where international laws and rules are unreliable, and where true security and the defense and promotion of a liberal order still depend on the possesion and use of military might."
Europeanen als aanhangers van Kant, die zich voor eeuwig veilig wanen in het eigen 'Rijk van de Vrijheid' vol inherent idealistische en redelijke mensen; Amerikanen als liefhebbers van Thomas Hobbes, die stelde dat de natuurlijke mens niet meer is dan een beest, en pas 'redelijk' wordt als een sociaal contract hem daartoe dwingt.
Hmm.
Beroepsmanipulator Michael Moore slaat weer toe. De weigering van Disney om Moore's nieuwste film Fahrenheit 9/11 te distribueren, dateert al uit mei 2003, stelt Disney nu in een reactie. De verdenking dat de huidige rel een goedgetimede publiciteitsstunt is, wordt daardoor weer een stuk sterker.
Moore is zondermeer een van de slordigste filmmakers die ik ken. Hoewel ik erg moest lachen om Bowling for Columbine, bleek er later inhoudelijk zoveel niet aan te deugen, dat mijn respect voor Moore volledig is verdwenen.
Fahrenheit 9/11 gaat ondermeer over de vermeende banden tussen Bush en den Bin Laden-familie. Dat belooft weinig goeds. Eerder heeft Moore al eens de foutieve suggestie gewekt dat leden van de Bin Laden-familie na 11 september toch de VS mocht verlaten terwijl er een vliegverbod van kracht was. In werkelijkheid verlieten leden van die (enorme, Bin Laden alleen al heeft ruim 50 broers en zussen) familie het land pas op 18 september - dagen nadat het vliegverbod was opgeheven. Andere nuances vindt u hier.
Niet dat onjuistheid een reden voor censuur is, maar Disney pleegt geen censuur. Het bedrijf is immers niet bij machte (noch van plan) om de publicatie van de film tegen te gaan, het weigert alleen een rol te spelen bij de distributie. Het recht om klanten te weigeren, heeft ieder bedrijf. Hell, ik heb dat wel eens gedaan.
Gegarandeerd dat Moore al lang een deal heeft gesloten met een andere distributeur (de Nederlandse is er al). En ook gegarandeerd dat de Amerikaanse zalen vol zullen zitten met meer mensen dan zonder deze stunt van Moore het geval zou zijn geweest, mensen die stuk voor stuk Disney en de VS zullen kastijden vanwege 'censuur'; terwijl ze toch ongehinderd kunnen kijken naar een in Amerika geproduceerde film, geschreven door een Amerikaanse auteur, gedistribueerd door een Amerikaans bedrijf.
Ik was en blijf voorstander van de Amerikaans-Britse aanval op Irak. Maar voor wat in de Abu Ghraib-gevangenis is gebeurd, bestaan geen excuses. En al helemaal niet als je het officiële Taguba-rapport leest.
Zoals Andrew Sullivan schrijft: 'Those of us who believe in the moral necessity of this war should be, perhaps, the most offended. These goons have defiled something important and noble; they have wrought awful damage on Western prestige; they have tarnished the vast majority of servicemembers who do an amazing job; and they have done something incontrovertibly disgusting and wrong. By the same token, this has been - finally - exposed. We have a chance to show the Muslim and Arab world how a democracy deals with this. So far, the punishments meted out have not been severe enough; and the public apology not clear and definitive enough.'
Amen.
Vanochtend werd duidelijk dat Bush interviews gaat geven aan Arabische tv-zenders om daar te vertellen dat het misbruik van gevangenen 'oneervol en onacceptabel' is.
Inderdaad, en iets minders volstaat niet. Want een democratie bestaat niet per definitie uit betere mensen, maar levert een betere samenleving op omdat de meerderheid de belangen van de enkeling controleert en verdedigt, en vice versa.
Althans, dat is de bedoeling. Aan Bush nu de taak om dat duidelijk te maken, in woord én daad.
(Overigens, dat het NOS Journaal vanochtend naliet te vermelden wat Bush ging zeggen, past in eerdere observaties op dit weblog ten aanzien van de publieke omroep.)
Perswoordvoerder Harald de Kort van SonyEricsson toen ik hem recent aan de lijn had: 'Nee, de opvolger van die P900 zal nog wel een flinke tijd op zich laten wachten.'
Oh. Dan gooien ze op het gadgetsweblog Gizmodo zeker hun solide reputatie te grabbel met het verspreiden van aperte leugens?
Nee, het heeft voor de verandering eens niets met Irak te maken. De nerds onder u zullen weten waar het over gaat (tip: 802.11b!), alle normale mensen klikken hier. Als u zin heeft natuurlijk, ik wil u niets opdringen. (Via BoingBoing.)
Bush ist dumm und böse. Der Irak ist das neue Vietnam. Amerika macht fast alles falsch. Scharon ist am Palästinenserterror selbst schuld. Israel hat uns den ganzen Schlamassel eingebrockt. Deutschland hat sich Gott sei Dank rausgehalten. Jetzt müssen wir nur aufpassen, dass durch unnötigen Sicherheitswahn aus unserem schönen Rechtsstaat kein Überwachungs- und Polizeistaat wird.
(Dat laatste is natuurlijk onzin, en dat de AIVD vandaag in haar jaarverslagmeedeelt dat er slecht greep te krijgen is op terroristische netwerken, moeten we louter zien als een poging van de dienst om zo'n politiestaat ook hier van de grond te krijgen.)
Zin in nog meer staaltjes van de onbevangen Europese blik op de wereld, en de VS in 't bijzonder? Klik hier.
Het is duidelijk: als ik Amerikaans staatsburger was, zou ik op Kerry moeten stemmen. Volgens de President Match dan. Post uw scores desgewenst in het reactiepaneel, ik ben benieuwd.
Valt u iets op? Juist. De publieke omroep plaatst dit bericht op teletekstpagina 109. 109, jawel. Terwijl de nummers 103 tot en met 120 toch echt gereserveerd zijn voor binnenlands nieuws. Blijkbaar is Zuid-Irak thans onderdeel van de gemeente Hilversum.
De Britse professor Barron-Cohen suggereert thans dat autisme een extreme uitvergroting is van typisch mannelijke eigenschappen: minder empathisch, maar meer systematisch denken. Seksespecifieke geestelijke aandoeningen zijn geen nieuw fenomeen: vrouwen lijden bijvoorbeeld weer sneller onder een depressie, wellicht juist vanwege hun empathische vermogens. Toch is dit bericht interessant. Eerder schreef ik op dit weblog over mijn ideeën ten aanzien van Asperger, een momenteel nogal gehypte variant van autisme waaraan zogenaamd steeds meer kinderen, en met name jongens, lijden. Is het misschien denkbaar dat een flink aantal van die jongens helemaal niet onder Asperger lijdt, maar onder een schoolsysteem waar niet-feminien gedrag, ondermeer als gevolg van het geringe aantal mannelijke leraren, als disfunctioneel wordt beschouwd?
Dixit JFK: 'Hamas is a terrorist, brutal organization. It has had years to make up its mind to take part in a peaceful process. They refuse to ... and I support Israel's efforts to try to separate itself and to try to be secure.'
"It's death, either by killing or by cancer. If it is by Apache or by cardiac arrest, I prefer to be by Apache." Aldus Abdel Aziz Rantisi, nadat hij Yassin opvolgde als opperhoofd van het Palestijnse verherbouwingsbedrijf Hamas. Benieuwd welke geestelijk gehandicapte de wraakactie voor de liquidatie van Rantisi mag uitvoeren (geen zieke grap, de vorige keer ging het ook zo).
Dat moest Normandië zijn - ontdekte de Canadese minister-president Paul Martin na zijn toespraak voor 350 soldaten. Gelukkig heet hij geen Bush, dus het zal wel met een sisser aflopen.
Het was al een wat vaag verhaal: Arabische zenders die wel gruwelijke beelden van verminkte Amerikanen in Fallujah laten zien, vinden de executie van een Italiaan opeens te schokkend? Het lijkt erop dat dit schokkende effect hem niet zozeer in de hoeveelheid bloed zat. Nee, de Italiaan Fabrizio Quattrocchi schijnt voor zijn dood de zak over zijn hoofd te hebben geprobeerd weg te trekken en te hebben uitgeroepen: 'Nu zal ik jullie eens laten zien hoe een Italiaan sterft.' Noem me ouderwets, maar dit soort mannen geeft 'macho' een goede naam.
Roept u maar! Er is hier een Saudische massamoordenaar voor u die graag in ruil voor vrede (in onze tijd) wil afzien van grootstedelijke renovaties binnen Europa. Kijken wie dit keer Polen het eerste binnenvalt. (Enkele verdwaalde explosies van achtergebleven cellen in Madrid, Parijs of Amsterdam kunnen niet worden uitgesloten. In het verleden behaalde rendementen bieden geen garanties voor de toekomst.)
Dit filmpje is getver. Met dank aan de Canadese overheid (en Geen Stijl.)
En nee, ik heb niets tegen het doden van dieren voor menselijke consumptie, maar kan dat dan aub wel een beetje normaal, in plaats van zo? Dit is nog erger dan dat gehos met Babe de Buitengewone Big naar het abattoir in Spanje, 20 uur karren verderop.
George Walker Bush is tegen het homohuwelijk, geeft meer geld uit dan welke Democratische president ook en frustreert de vrije wereldhandel middels protectionistische maatregelen. Eerder is 'ie daarvoor op deze site bekritiseerd. (Zacht Ei waarschuwt de machtigste man ter aarde voor de laatste maal, ahem.)
John Forbes Kerry daarentegen neemt de Grondwet serieus (althans dat zegt 'ie), heeft minder rigide ideeën over de vrije markt (al gaan ze mij niet ver genoeg) en lijkt de hand meer op de knip te gaan houden dan Bush. Maar over cruciale beleidspunten als Irak heeft Kerry zich nooit helder uitgesproken.
Tot vandaag dan.
In de Washington Post schrijft Kerry:
While we may have differed on how we went to war, Americans of all political persuasions are united in our determination to succeed. The extremists attacking our forces should know they will not succeed in dividing America, or in sapping American resolve, or in forcing the premature withdrawal of U.S. troops. Our country is committed to help the Iraqis build a stable, peaceful and pluralistic society. No matter who is elected president in November, we will persevere in that mission.
Kerry's stuk zou wat duidelijker kunnen zijn over hoe het volgens Kerry dan wel moet in Irak, en zijn oproep om de Verenigde Naties nauwer bij Irak te betrekken vind ik nogal gemakkelijk scoren. Niet alleen wisten de VN zelf niet hoe snel ze uit Irak weg moesten hollen toen Viella de Mello werd vermoord; ze willen niet eens helpen in Irak (en de vraag is of je überhaupt gezien moet worden met een organisatie waar landen als Soedan en Syrië zitting kunnen nemen in een mensenrechtencommissie, magoed).
Niettemin. Kerry kiest hier niet de electoraal makkelijkste weg door op de anti-oorlogslobby te spelen. Toegegeven, het kan hem stemmen opleveren van linkse Republikeinen, maar ook stemmen gaan kosten, omdat de linkervleugel van de Democratische partij nu wellicht naar Ralph Nader trekt (de Frits Bom van Amerika).
Een dappere keuze derhalve - niet dat je minder mag verwachten van iemand die het nucleaire koffertje wil dragen
Zacht Ei neigt bij dezen ernstig naar steun voor Kerry in november.
Void where prohibited.
'I just long for the day I wake up and find that the Saudi royal family are swinging from lampposts.' Aldus Ken Livingstone, de burgemeester van Londen, zo geciteerd in de Daily Telegraph. Voor de duidelijkheid: de socialist Livingstone is anti-Bush, die hij een gevaar voor de wereldvrede vindt. Nee, dan is deze Derde Weg toch een stuk genuanceerder...
Ik vind dit overigens een walgelijke uitspraak. Leden van een koninklijke familie horen niet aan lantaarnpalen te bungelen. Die hebben recht op een humane publieke onthoofding.
Linksoverzicht Irak: Salam Pax, Iraaks verzet, Blackwater en 'kritische' Nederlanders
Om te voorkomen dat dit weblog alleen maar over Irak gaat, ga ik vanaf nu de posts zoveel mogelijk bundelen. Breaking news - van de orde 'Rebecca Loos heeft het ook met Saddam gedaan' - komt er natuurlijk nog wel tussendoor.
Zolangzamerhand wordt het een dagtaak om de fouten van de publieke omroep recht te zetten, maar vooruit maar weer. Let vooral even op de tweede zin van het nuvolgende Teletekst-bericht.
Nee, lieve mensjes bij Teletekst. In de betreffende Presidential Daily Briefing (PDB) wordt inderdaad over vliegtuigkapingen gesproken. Maar dan wel op een heel andere manier:
We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a ---- service in 1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdel Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists.
En er staat al helemaal niets in over het gebruiken van lijntoestellen als vliegende bommen.
Update 20.12: De naakte feiten weerhielden het NOS Journaal er uiteraard niet van toch te suggereren dat Bush wist (of had kunnen weten) van de aanslagen van 9-11. Die suggestie werd gewekt met een manipulatieve vertaling van bovenstaande tekst, waarin het woord 'sensational' blijkbaar niet van belang wordt geacht voor het Nederlandse volk, en evenmin de context van de kapingen: als pressiemiddel voor het vrijlaten van Rahman. Essentiële informatie, want een kaping voor chantagedoelen eindigt meestal niet in een hoog flatgebouw, dan valt er niet meer te onderhandelen.
Het NOS Journaal haalde verder nog een passage aan uit de PDB waarin de FBI meldt dat er aanwijzingen waren gevonden voor voorbereidingen van kapingen. Ook hier is de NOS manipulatief: een deel van het citaat werd niet vertaald. De oorspronkelijke zin luidt: 'Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks.' Vrij vertaald: de FBI weet het niet en wil niets uitsluiten, of nog populairder uitgedrukt: het kan vriezen of dooien. Behalve in Hilversum, daar gaat men per klapschaats op anti-Amerikaanse Elfstedentocht.
Dat vonden tegenstanders van ruimtevaart misschien al langer, maar ik vind 't nu ook. Hoe komt een club die mensen naar de maan en Mars wil sturen, en wil beginnen met oefenvluchtjes van een jaar, er nu toe om medewerkers te verbieden naar Israël te sturen? Goed, Wierden is veiliger, maar mensen op hoogst-explosieve vuurpijlen naar Low Earth Orbit jakkeren is minder gevaarlijk dan een lijnvlucht naar het Midden-Oosten? Het is bovendien een affront aan de herinnering van de Israeliër Ilan Ramon, de laatste niet-Amerikaan die met de shuttle vloog - en dat niet overleefde.
NASA mag wel uitkijken: nog heel even en de zwaar verbureaucratiseerde organisatie verliest het Amerikaanse monopolie op bemande ruimtevaart. Kan de stekker er gelijk uit? Dan kan het geld mooi naar dr. Robert Zubrin van de Mars Society, bedenker van het door NASA te goedkoop bevonden Mars Direct-plan.
De SOENN-ieten zijn de bevolkingsgroep waartoe Saddam Hussein behoorde. Die zijn al tijden pislink op de Amerikanen en de Britten omdat ze sinds het afzetten van baardmans alleen maar wat te verliezen hebben. Da's niet sinds vandaag, dat is vandaag precies een jaar geleden.
De SHI-ieten daarentegen zijn degenen die relevant zijn. Zij maken als bevolkingsgroep de meerderheid van Irak uit, het is een van hun junior-ayatollah's die thans geflipt bezig is, en waartegen groot-ayatalloh al-Sistani nu dan eindelijk maatregelen heeft getroffen. Zie daarvoor elders op dit blog
Dat Rusland oproept om geen "buitenproportioneel" geweld te gebruiken, lijkt me daarnaast aanzienlijk minder bijzonder dan wanneer ze hadden opgeroepen om alsje, alsje, alsjeblieft wél "buitenproportioneel" geweld te gebruiken. Voeg daarbij dat de bron van de alinea over Rusland een bericht is van Interfax, dat op zijn beurt enkel de site van het Russische ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken citeert, waarop in elk geval op het Engelstalige deel niets is terug te vinden - enkel dit: 'There was expressed serious concern over the lack of progress in the settlement of regional problems and over the escalation of violence.' (En dat ging blijkens het ministerie dan ook nog over Kosovo, Afghanistan, Irak en niet nader gespecificeerde 'andere gebieden' - Tsjetsjenië, anyone?) Maar mochten lezers van dit blog Russisch beheersen: ik hou me aanbevolen voor een vertaling uit de grondtekst - mocht die al aanwezig zijn.
Anyway, never let facts get in the way of a good story.
Ondertussen hieronder een dramatische foto van de huidige situatie in Bagdad, courtesy of The View from Baghdad. Waarschuwing: minder geschikt voor jeugdige kijkers.
Koud heeft al-Sistani zijn fatwa uitgevaardigd of ik krijg dit op de mail (hou rekening met het tijdsverschil van 2 uur met Bagdad):
PRESS RELEASE
COALITION PROVISIONAL AUTHORITY
Baghdad Iraq
Baghdad, Iraq - April 8, 2004 - Ambassador Bremer today issued the following statement:
Today at 1200, Coalition Forces initiated a unilateral suspension of offensive operations in Fallujah in order to hold a meeting between members of the Interim Governing Council, Fallujah leadership and leaders of the anti-Coalition forces, to allow delivery of additional supplies provided by the Iraqi Government, and to allow residents of Fallujah to tend to wounded and dead. During this suspension period, Coalition Forces retain the inherent right of self defense, and will remain fully prepared to resume offensive operations unless significant progress in these discussions occurs.
SpaceShipOne, een ruimtevaartuigje dat commerciële ruimtevaart mogelijk moet maken, heeft zijn tweede proefvlucht gemaakt. Hij behaalde een topsnelheid van Mach 2, oftewel twee keer de snelheid van het geluid, wat knap vlot is voor een privéproject, in dit geval van luchtvaartpionier Burt Rutan. Voor het einde van het jaar moet de SpaceShipOne met minimaal drie inzittenden tot 100 kilometer hoogte (de grens tussen atmosfeer en de ruimte) zijn gevlogen, om dat kunstje binnen twee weken na die eerste vlucht te herhalen. Alleen dan maakt de bouwer, Rutan's bedrijf Scaled Composites, kans op de X Prize: een bedrag van 10 miljoen dollar dat klaarligt voor de eerste private onderneming die commerciële ruimtevaart mogelijk maakt. Waarvan, inderdaad, uw weblogger donateur is.
Waarom begint al-Sadr juist nu een opstand? Was het niet handiger geweest te wachten tot na de overdracht van soevereiniteit aan de Irakezen? Was de verminking in Fallujah bedoeld om een Amerikaanse terugtrekking te forceren? Is de huidige opstand een wanhoopsdaad van al-Sadr, of is het tegenovergestelde het geval: is de langgevreesde Shia-Sunni-alliantie een feit en dreigt er een ramp? Of: wil al-Sadr juist een opstand afronden voor de overdracht van soevereiniteit, zodat het lijkt alsof hij tegen de Amerikanen vecht, in plaats van tegen de eerbiedwaardige al-Sistani?
Deze en andere vragen houden me nu al een flinke tijd bezig. Antwoorden zijn moeilijk te krijgen; in een oorlogssituatie loop je niet met strategische informatie te koop. Van het NOS Journaal word je niet wijzer: vanochtend sprak de nieuwslezer in het kader van de gijzeling van Japanners zelfs over 'de fout' die premier Koizumi heeft gemaakt door (humanitaire) troepen naar Irak te sturen. (Verder zijn ze niet partijdig daar.)
Er zijn wel sites die pretenderen antwoorden te hebben. Zo is er DEBKAfile, een Israelische website die gekenmerkt wordt door z'n hysterische toon en het vermengen van echt nieuws met complottheorieën, die ik daarom een paar maanden geleden uit het linksoverzicht rechts heb gegooid. Een analyse van het (Amerikaanse) bureau Stratfor gaat ernstig in de richting van de 'al-Sadr moest wel'-theorie, al waarschuwt het bureau ook voor een worst-case-scenario.
Bloedig wordt het in elk geval. Een Amerikaanse marinier vergelijkt de huidige gevechten met Belleau Wood: een slag in de Eerste Wereldoorlog (waaraan de Amerikanen vanaf 1917 meededen) waarbij de mariniers grote verliezen leden - maar voor die prijs een belangrijke overwinning behaalden. Die grote verliezen zullen er nu ook komen: met grof geschut schieten kunnen de Amerikanen zich niet veroorloven; iedere verdwaalde kogel is 4 uur haat op Al Jazeera (waar ik deze beelden veel minder zie - en ja, ik kan het ontvangen, ik heb speciaal een schotel gekocht om meer nieuwszenders te kunnen zien.)
Zie deze site van een Amerikaanse hulpverlener in Bagdad: beeldvorming is belangrijker dan feiten. Mijn gisteren geponeerde theorie dat Rumsfeld 'troop rotation' gebruikt als smoes om het (relatief gesproken historisch nogal karige) aantal Amerikaanse militairen in de regio te verhogen, klopt aardig, blijkt uit deze website van de man van een Amerikaanse soldaat: de dame in kwestie was al op weg naar huis en kon alsnog terug naar Irak. Zo belangrijk is beeldvorming blijkbaar dat de VS een excuus aanvoeren voor een in strategisch opzicht legitieme troepenversterking. Beeldvorming is ook de basis van de analyse van een Irak-veteraan: volgens hem is de opstand uitsluitend in publicitair opzicht gevaarlijk, maar niet militair.
Wellicht worden de huidige gevechten inderdaad door een minderheid van de Shi'ieten wordt gevoerd. In grote delen van Irak is nog altijd niets te merken; minister Kamp had het gisteren (tijdens een nauwelijks gerapporteerde toespraak) zelfs over het verminderen van de Nederlandse troepenconcentratie vanwege de rust in dat gebied (al zei hij erbij dat bij uitbreiding van de onrust het aantal ook omhoog zou kunnen).
Hoop levert verder dit bericht van een Iraakse tandarts over een fatwa van groot-ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, waarin al-Sistani oproept tot kalmte. Zoals Stratfor schrijft (de analyse van dit bureau verscheen voorafgaand aan het fatwa van vandaag): 'Ali al-Sistani, the grand ayatollah of the Iraqi Shia, is not only opposed to al-Sadr, but also remains committed to carrying out his basic bargain with the United States. If that is true, then all will be well for the Americans in the end. '
Waarom heeft het dan toch vijf dagen geduurd voordat al-Sistani met zijn fatwa kwam? Ik kan zo snel maar één verklaring bedenken: de Shi'ieten zijn numeriek in de meerderheid in Irak, en zouden dus de macht krijgen bij directe verkiezingen. Zoals Stratfor schrijft: al-Sistani zal vermoedelijk niet zo blij zijn geweest met Washington's mededeling dat voor die directe verkiezingen geen tijd was. Niettemin zijn de Shi'ieten als de dood voor de Soennieten, de groep door wie ze onder Saddam werden onderdrukt. Het vergt niet zo heel veel diplomatiek inzicht om te bedenken dat Paul Bremer de afgelopen dagen flink zal hebben overlegd met al-Sistani over fikse 'zekerheidsstellingen' aan de Shi'ieten na de overdracht van soevereiniteit. Details daarover horen we vast niet meteen - maar zullen in de weken na beëindiging van de huidige gevechten naar buiten komen.
Al-Sadr kan nu twee dingen doen: schikken met al-Sistani, formeel zijn baas al is hij volgens de eerder genoemde Iraakse tandarts Zeyad loyaal aan ayatollah Kadhim Al-Ha'eri, of doorvechten tegen de Amerikanen en hopen dat 'ie wint. In het laatste geval wordt het een bloedig Pasen.
Condi Rice voor de 9-11-commissie: het was mooie televisie, of zoals The Command Post zegt: 'Celibrity death match with politicians'. Lees zelf maar. (Wie liever plaatjes kijkt: hiero.) En ja, ik ben stilletjes verliefd op Condi. So sue me.
Fransman doet waar 'ie goed is: hard weghollen (uit Rwanda)
Echt nieuws is het natuurlijk niet dat de Franse overheid beschuldigd wordt van het spelen van een dubieuze rol bij de massaslachtingen in Rwanda. Toch is het een fijn begin van de dag om te lezen dat de Franse onderminister van buitenlandse zaken Rwanda hollend als een zich overgevende Franse soldaat heeft verlaten, omdat de Rwandese president Paul Kagane nog eens flink uitpakte over de beschuldigingen.
(Het is ook allemaal niet waar, natuurlijk, zoals de Fransen zelf al hebben laten weten, hielpen ze de moordende Hutu's niet, maar probeerden ze juist de strijdende partijen een beetje begrip en liefde voor elkaar te laten opbrengen. Want wat werkte met de nazi's en Pol Pot, is goed genoeg voor de Hutu's en Al Qaeda. Het wachten is op de eerste 'Knuffel een fundamentalistische terrorist'-love-in.)
Timmy de schildpad, die succesvol de Tweede Wereldoorlog doorkwam: 'Timothy showed a keen instinct for survival, even digging his own air raid shelter under a set of terrace steps during World War II after feeling the vibrations of bombs in Exeter.'
Met een verwijzing naar de tv-serie Babylon 5 in de titel geeft weblogger Laughing Wolf een niet-zo-humoristische analyse van de gebeurtenissen in Irak. Niet lezen met de hierboven gelinkte Babylon 5-MP3 op de achtergrond, dan lijkt de huidige situatie helemaal op een oorlogsfilm.
(En dit is geen film.)
Wat moet een advocatenbureau op mijn site?
Het antwoord is eenvoudig: helemaal niets.
Hierboven ziet u een gedeelte van de bezoekersstatistieken van dit weblog. Het is de bedoeling dat in deze lijst websites staan vanwaar verkeer naar Zacht Ei is gekomen.
Helaas heeft minder fris marketingtuig (ik ben nog steeds voor de Douglas Adams-aanpak van die lui) gemeend om sites te gaan promoten door net te doen alsof van bepaalde sites verkeer wordt gegenereerd. Het gevolg: websitebeheerders zien in hun statistieken een tot nu toe onbekende site staan, en gaan die bezoeken om te kijken hoe het kan dat, pak 'm beet, zo'n advocatenbureau ineens zoveel belangstelling voor ze heeft.
Misleidend, to say the least.
Verderop in de Zacht Ei-statistieken komen nog andere illustere sites voor waarop filmpjes van rondneukend blondje Paris Hilton te zien zijn.
Die links stuur ik belangstellenden graag toe (uw persoonsgegevens kunnen worden gebruikt voor het register op de nog op te richten site www.thegenepoolcouldusealittlechlorine.com).
De hele avond heb ik de NASA-webcast aan laten staan, van het opstijgen van de B-52 tot aan het lanceren van de Hyper-X, maar het was het wachten waard. Voor het eerst heeft een vliegtuig een snelheid bereikt van meer dan Mach 7 - ofewel zo'n 8.600 kilometer per uur. Ooit - ik schat binnen twintig jaar - zal deze technologie het mogelijk maken om binnen 3 uur vanaf hier naar het andere einde van de aarde te vliegen.
Als het Westen zichzelf al iets moet verwijten na de aanslagen in Madrid, dan zijn het primair de anti-oorlogslanden in Europa, en niet Amerika, die zichzelf wat moeten gaan afvragen. Dat is een boude en harde stelling die toelichting vereist, en die volgt dan ook. Waarschuwing: totale lengte bijna 2.500 woorden.
Wie biedt? 'Eerst vallen ze aan mijn voeten, en daarna rennen ze altijd weg. Zou het komen door mijn narcisme? Nee... mijn kleptomanische gedrag dan? Nee... Mijn verschillende persoonlijkheden waaronder die van een 8-jarig meisje en een homoseksuele twintiger? Hm, zou kunnen.'
Meer satirische bijschriften bij bekende modellenfoto's op Supermodel Personals.
"We and you are cordially loathed for freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, open economies, equal - or almost equal - treatment of women, and so on. It is not what we have done wrong that is creating the problem; it is what we do right.
If that is true, then this is not a war that will end with an Al Qaeda Gorbachev; it will not end with an arms control agreement. It is a war to the death, like the war with the Nazis, and we should understand that it will have to be fought that way."
Aldus James Woolsey, alweer bijna een jaar geleden in the Guardian. Ik weet dat niet duidelijk is of Al Qaeda betrokken is bij de aanslagen in Madrid gisteren. Maar ik ga er eerlijk gezegd wel vanuit: 2,5 jaar na 11 september 2001, een aanslag met meer doden dan welke ETA-aanval ooit, terwijl de voornaamste ETA-krant de aanslag heeft veroordeeld - iets wat de ETA bij haar eerdere aanslagen nooit heeft gedaan - en Aznar's politieke concurrenten in besprekingen met ETA waren. Wat heeft de ETA in zo'n situatie te winnen met een massamoord, behalve dan Aznar's Partido Popular (fel anti-ETA) een vrijwel zekere overwinning te bezorgen tijdens de verkiezingen van komende zondag, en de laatste het perfecte excuus te geven voor een massale klopjacht op wat er nog rest van de Baskische verzetsbeweging?
Toegegeven, er is één andere serieuze mogelijkheid. Juist die vredesbesprekingen kunnen radicale ETA-elementen hebben aangezet tot deze misselijke daad. Iets dergelijks gebeurde ook in Noord-Ierland met de Omagh-aanslag, gepleegd door ex-IRA-leden die het niet eens waren met de koers van Sinn Féin. Hoe vreselijk ook, ik hoop dat dit iets soortgelijks is. Want God/Allah/JHWH helpe ons als Al Qaeda de oorlog via Indonesië, Saudi-Arabië en Istanbul dan uiteindelijk toch in een Europees land heeft gebracht.
Voor wie het wil weten: het is mooi weer in San Jose, en nee, ik ben niet morose.
De levende muur verkeert nog in de conceptfase, maar als hij ooit gebouwd wordt, zal het een videofoon in megalomaan overtreffende trap zijn. Ook te gebruiken voor niet-megalomane doeleinden. Toen ik Eli vroeg of het niet een idee was om zo'n ding ter vergroting van de vrede in Oost-Jeruzalem te plaatsen, begon hij te lachen en liet me deze tekening zien. (Excuus voor de slechte beeldkwaliteit, ik heb geen scanner bij me en het was donker.)
Dat zegt genoeg niet? Zoals Fish al zong: 'Where are the prophets, where are the visionaries, where are the poets, to breach the dawn of the sentimental mercenary?'
Silicon Valley, en de wereld for that matter, kan wel weer eens een visionaire mafkees gebruiken (met alle respect, Eli).
(Zo, dat trekt in elk geval de aandacht van al die onbevooroordeelde Europeanen.)
Ik bedoel natuurlijk arrogantie ten opzichte van de Amerikanen. Om te beginnen is het eigenaardig dat 9 van de 10 mensen die ik naar hun mening over de Verenigde Staten vraag, gelijk klaarstaan met het oordeel 'arrogant'. Het lijkt mij persoonlijk juist wat arrogant om alle 290 miljoen inwoners van een land bij voorbaat arrogant te vinden, zeker als je er (wat meestal het geval is) nog nooit bent geweest (of als je er bent geweest, je niet verder hebt gekeken dan de proleten die Disneyland bevolken. Lijkt me net zo vreemd als je oordeel over Nederland baseren op een bezoek aan een coffeeshop).
Nu is deze Europese arrogantie weer actueel geworden. Want het gejuich voor John Forbes Kerry in de Europese pers overschrijdt zelfs de schijn van objectiviteit. Goed, dat het NOS Journaal, verdediger van alles Wat Zielig Is In Deze Wereld, de tot dusver keurige, bijna truttige campagne van Bush wil wegzetten als een verwerpelijke vorm van politiek bedrijven, is te begrijpen. Dat klereprogramma drukt tenslotte ook het Terra College in de verdediging omdat het drie enthousiaste leden van de Club ter Vergroting van het Begrip voor Moordenaars van school heeft gestuurd. En dus is het logisch dat de veel agressievere campagne van Kerry een dergelijke hyperkritische blik bespaard blijft. Ook is het niet zo vreemd dat de NOS een peiling waaruit blijkt dat Bush nu weer een voorsprong heeft op Kerry (was niet zo), niet aankondigt als 'Bush haalt Kerry in', maar als 'Bush en Kerry gaan gelijk op' (wat domweg een leugen is).
Maar de pro-JFK-hype beperkt zich niet tot de NOS. Der Spiegel, de BBC, Le Monde, the Guardian: veel Europese media maar ook burgers weten nu al wie er in november zou moeten winnen. Nogal (inderdaad) arrogant, want het impliceert dat zij beter dan de Amerikanen weten wie tot president moet worden gekozen, en dubbel zo arrogant als je bedenkt dat veel Europeanen die zo goed weten hoe het met Amerika verder moet, er tegelijkertijd zelf niet willen wonen.
Ik ben geen fan van Bush. Hoewel ik per definitie voor het verdrijven van dictators ben - om wat voor reden dan ook - heeft Bush de vrije wereldhandel dusdanig tegengewerkt dat ik hem niet liberaal genoeg vind. Bovendien, wie de Constitution wil aanpassen om het homohuwelijk te verbieden, is wat mij betreft on-Amerikaans bezig. Vrijheid is iets dat niet in de Grondwet beperkt zou moeten worden. Als dorpen, steden of zelfs staten er zelf voor willen kiezen om geen homohuwelijken toe te staan: fine. Zo is Amerika groot geworden: door plekken te creëren waar gelijkgestemden kunnen leven zoals het ze goeddunkt. Daarom is ook nu al San Francisco de homohoofdstad van de States, terwijl je in Maine maar beter niet hand in hand met je partner van dezelfde sekse over straat kunt gaan. Eenheid in verscheidenheid. Vergelijk Amsterdam en Staphorst: door elkaar de ruimte te geven er andere sociale codes op na te houden, hou je een land met veel verschillende groeperingen bij elkaar. Een algeheel verbod op het homohuwelijk gaat echter tegen zoveel Amerikaanse principes in (om niet te zeggen: wetten, want het is domweg strijdig met bijvoorbeeld het Negende Amendement) dat ik Bush het liefste terug zie gaan naar Crawford.
Maar JFK is geen haar beter. Hij laat zich omkopen op een schaal waar Bush zich voor zou schamen, is dan weer voor, dan weer tegen een oorlog in Irak, en bezondigt zich in het algemeen aan populisme zonder inhoud. Ook Bush appeleert regelmatig aan het gesundes Volksempfinden, maar dan tenminste nog met een duidelijke agenda. Op het laatste heb ik Kerry nog niet kunnen betrappen. Ik vrees dat Irak onder JFK de puinhoop wordt die Kerry nu voorspelt, waarna de Democraten uiteraard de schuld aan Bush zullen geven.
Om nu al zo duidelijk een voorkeur te hebben voor Kerry, getuigt wat mij betreft van dom linksig Europees populisme, die meer geïnspireerd is door een oppervlakkige afkeer van een nasaal pratende bijbelliefhebber, dan door daadwerkelijke verdieping in de Amerikaanse politiek.
Nooit gedacht dat ik nog eens zou lachen om het conflict tussen Israel en de Palestijnen, maar The Holy Land, een satirisch boek van Robert Zubrin, krijgt het voor elkaar. De plot draait om een ras van buitenaardse wezens, de Minerviërs, die overal in het heelal werden vervolgd. Door het West-Galactische rijk, dat eigenlijk ook een hekel heeft aan de Minerviërs, krijgen ze een plek toegewezen in de Verenigde Staten. De Minerviërs vestigen zich in het dorpje Kennewick en kopen de plaatselijke bewoners uit, brengen het dorre land tot bloei en leveren een grote bijdrage aan de ingezakte wetenschap, gezondheidszorg en economie in de Verenigde Staten. De Amerikaanse overheid is desondanks niet blij met de nieuwkomers, want de Minerviërs zijn niet christelijk. Daarop beginnen de Amerikanen onmiddellijk een oorlog tegen de 'heidense indringers'. In de eerste aanval sneuvelen 40.000 Amerikanen tegenover 400 Minerviërs, waarna de Amerikanen het over een andere boeg gooien. Ze dwingen om alle oorspronkelijke bewoners van Kennewick, die inmiddels grotendeels een bestaan hebben gevonden in de grote Amerikaanse steden, terug te keren naar vluchtelingenkampen net buiten Kennewick, met als doel om de Galactische publieke opinie tegen de Minerviërs op te zetten. Hulporganisaties worden op een afstand gehouden van de Amerikanen in de vluchtelingenkampen, want de Amerikaanse overheid wil zo dramatisch mogelijke tv-beelden. Ook die strategie mislukt, waarna de Amerikaanse regering zelfmoordenaars gaat inzetten tegen planeten van het West-Galactische rijk. Daarbij worden sterrenschepen van het West-Galactische rijk gekaapt en gebruikt om planeten van datzelfde rijk op te blazen... enfin, de parallelen met de echte wereld zijn duidelijk. Aanbevolen.
Google News verdacht van censuur over Kerry-affaire
Voor wie het nog niet weet: roddelkoning Matt Drudge beschuldigt de Democratische presidentskandidaat John Forbes Kerry (who by the way served in Vietnam) van overspel. Nu is dat zo'n beetje traditie bij Democratische presidenten - Kerry's grote voorbeeld John Fitzgerald Kennedy leed zelfs aan een geslachtsziekte, en dankzij Bill Clinton werd uw weblogger ooit eens argwanend bekeken in de stomerij toen hij daar een jurkje van zijn vriendin met een kaarsvetvlek kwam afleveren. En ja, het was echt kaarsvet, ik kan mikken. Maar dat terzijde.
Muckraking hoort bij Amerikaanse verkiezingscampagnes, terzelfdertijd wordt George Walker Bush beschuldigd van lanterfanten tijdens zijn diensttijd. Op zichzelf is het bericht over het vermeende overspel dus niet zo interessant. Maar dit bericht van MensNewsDaily (MND) intrigeert. En wel vanwege de terechte constatering van de journalist dat de Amerikaanse media tot dusver nogal terughoudend berichten over de kwestie. Iets wat op zichzelf te billijken valt, al vraag je je af of Bush net zo'n coulante behandeling zou krijgen. Maar als het nuvolgende waar is, zou het wel eens Google, en niet Kerry, kunnen zijn die de ergste klappen oploopt. MND beschuldigt Google namelijk van censuur binnen Google News, een geautomatiseerde nieuwsdienst die het mogelijk maakt om te zoeken binnen vele duizenden Engelstalige nieuwsbronnen: 'Yesterday, MensNewsDaily.com (MND) posted a brief story on the Kerry sex scandal, but the story was never indexed by Google News. The last time Google News failed to index an MND news item was when MND published the name of Kobe Bryant's accuser.'
Ja, het zijn culturele jongens, die fundamentalisten. Zo citeert de New York Times uit een brief waarin de vermoedelijke Al Qaeda-topman Abu Musab al-Zarqawi zijn ideeën uiteenzet om Irak in een burgeroorlog tussen Sunnieten en Sjiieten te storten.
Maar daar houden de talenten van onze vrienden niet op: behalve geletterd zijn ze ook nog muzikaal! Zingt u even mee? 'Dirty Kuffar wherever you are; From Kandahar to Ramallah; OBL (Osama bin Laden) Crew be like a shining star; like the way we destroy them two tower ha ha.'
Of, in gewoon Nederlands: Lang leve Osama bin Laden, en dat we in zijn naam nog maar veel westerlingen mogen doden.
Ik dacht eerst dat het een grap was, maar het doorgaans betrouwbare persbureau Reuters neemt dit liedje bloedserieus.
Overigens, voor wie geschokt is door de beelden aan het begin van de video: uit de originele transcriptie van CNN blijkt overduidelijk dat de doodgeschoten 'Iraakse burger' even daarvoor zijn AK-47 op de Amerikaanse mariniers heeft gericht. ('U.S. Marines, Sergeant Riddle's team, searching an industrial area near Baghdad. Along the road they encounter Iraqis who point their AK-47s at the Marines.')
Want ook de Amerikaanse CIA heeft volgens onderzoek van ondermeer het Congres de informatie over Irak niet aangedikt. Erg verbazingwekkend hoeft dat niet te zijn, want zelfs Chirac was voor de oorlog ervan overtuigd dat Saddam massavernietigingswapens zou hebben.
Bovendien, de Franse geheime dienst DGSE voelde zich niet verheven boven het opblazen van de Rainbow Warrior, maar zou wel scrupules hebben gehad om de Amerikanen voor gek te zetten als ze hadden kunnen aantonen dat de Amerikanen maar wat verzonnen? Onwaarschijnlijk, en daarnaast is het geen geheim dat sommige CIA-informatie over Irak juist via de DGSE is verkregen, wellicht omdat de Fransen goede contacten hebben in de Arabische wereld.
En om aan te geven hoe goed die contacten tussen Frankrijk en Irak wel niet waren, is dit bericht illustratief: Saddam zou volgens de nieuwe Iraakse overgangsregering hoge Franse functionarissen hebben omgekocht met olie. Toegegeven, dit bericht hoeft niet waar te zijn. Het is mogelijk dat de overgangsregering Frankrijk gewoon spuugzat is na de obstructie van het duo Chirac/Villepin. Als het aan Die Twee had gelegen, dan stond de ene helft van Irak nu immers nog massagraven te delven om de andere helft in te flikkeren. Maar toch.
Op de lijst van omgekochte niet-Irakezen staat overigens weinig verrassend ook het voormalige Britse parlementslid George Galloway, ook al zo'n principiële oorlogstegenstander. En om de lijst af te maken: ook de Russische regering plus anti-oorlogslobbyisten in heel Europa en Noord-Amerika (waaronder twee Amerikaanse anti-oorlogslobbyisten) krijgen een vermelding.
Toen Lord Hutton door premier Blair werd aangewezen om het onderzoek naar de dood van dr. David Kelly te gaan leiden, was de pers in meerderheid blij. Hutton, een ijzervretende rechter die voor het ergste Noord-Ierse tuig niet bang was, zou Blair wel even alle hoeken van Groot-Brittannië laten zien.
Niet dus. Het Hutton-rapport geeft de BBC er ongenadig van langs. Journalist Andrew Gilligan heeft zich niet aan de feiten gehouden en de organisatie zelf oefent onvoldoende inhoudelijke controle uit op de juistheid van de berichtgeving door haar werknemers, concludeert Hutton. Die terecht stelt dat gesjoemel met feiten iets is waar journalisten zich niet aan schuldig mogen maken.
Des te eigenaardiger is de berichtgeving van de Nederlandse publieke omroep over deze kwestie. Een correspondente van Radio 1 noemde het Hutton-rapport 'eenzijdig'. Al dan niet bewust verwarde deze journaliste eenzijdigheid, dat 'ongenuanceerd' en 'blind voor de andere kant' betekent, met de term 'eenduidig': helder, duidelijk en niet mis te verstaan.
Als er maar één partij schuld heeft, valt alle kritiek die partij ook toe. Dat je om een afgewogen oordeel te verkrijgen, naar alle kanten moet luisteren, wil nog niet zeggen dat het oordeel onafgewogen is als niet alle kanten een beetje hun zin hebben gekregen. Geen journalist die bij een echtscheidingszaak de rechter eenzijdigheid zal verwijten omdat de moeder de voogdij heeft gekregen. Geen journalist ook die Hutton eenzijdigheid zou hebben verweten wanneer juist Blair onderuit de zak had gekregen.
Eenzijdigheid suggereren waar een onafhankelijke derde partij naar het verhaal van beide kanten heeft geluisterd, is geen journalistiek, maar politiek. Dit soort manipulatief taalgebruik is de Nederlandse journalistiek onwaardig.
U kent hem als de CIA-man die zogenaamd maar niet heus George W. Bush zou hebben afgevallen. Dat beeld klopt niet. Blijkt bijvoorbeeld uit deze uitspraak van Kay, godbetere op de (linkse) zender NPR:
Liane Hansen: Knowing what you know now, though, did Iraq pose an imminent threat?
Kay: Liane, I think this is one of the questions the American public and politicians are going to have to grapple with. "Imminent" depends -- it's a risk assessment. How risky are you to run? And in the shadowing effect of 9/11, it seems to me that you recalculate what risk based on the intelligence that existed. I think it was reasonable to reach the conclusion that Iraq posed an imminent threat. Now that you know reality on the ground, as opposed to what you estimated before, you may reach a different conclusion -- although I must say I actually think Iraq, what we learned during the inspection, made Iraq a more dangerous place potentially than, in fact, we thought it was even before the war." (Accentuering van A.D.)
En in de LA Times:
'Kay said there was "a constant stream of trucks, cars, rail traffic" moving from Iraq to Syria.(Accentuering van A.D.) "We simply don't know what was moved," he said, adding, "The Syrian government has shown absolutely no interest in helping us resolve this issue."'
De BBC koopt, vooroplopend op de publicatie van het Hutton-rapport, maar vast alle Google-trefwoorden op die met het onderwerp te maken hebben. Zelfs the Guardian, een linkse krant die traditioneel op de hand is van de BBC, heeft er zijn twijfels bij: "No other news broadcaster or any newspaper has paid Google for this facility, leaving the corporation's move even more conspicuous." Indeed.
(Via Tim Blair.)
• Gisteren de hele dag op zowel Radio 1 als in de NOS Journaals: de bewering van David Kay dat er in Irak vermoedelijk geen grote hoeveelheden massavernietigingswapens (WMD's) zullen worden gevonden. Om het uur werd (ten onrechte) geconstateerd dat die uitspraak van Kay de State of the Union van George W. Bush zou tegenspreken. Bush zou juist hebben gezegd dat er wel WMD's waren gevonden. In werkelijkheid had Bush het over WMD-programma's, iets waar David Kay inderdaad over heeft geraporteerd. Sterker nog, letterlijk heeft Kay in het najaar tegen het Amerikaanse Congres gezegd: 'We have discovered dozens of WMD-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during the inspections that began in late 2002.' Magoed, correct citeren of je stukken lezen boeit blijkbaar niet.
• Vandaag uiteraard niet op de publieke zenders: een bewering van diezelfde David Kay dat Saddam's WMD's mogelijk naar Syrië zijn gebracht. (Het is maar de vraag waar hij dat op baseert, maar dat geldt natuurlijk ook voor zijn speculatieve uitspraak die gisteren nieuws was.) Wat mij boeit, is dat ik dit van RTL Text moet halen, en op Teletekst niet tegenkom.
Ik vind dit een hoogst eigenaardige selectiviteit. Een en dezelfde bron (Kay) is de ene dag groot nieuws, en de andere dag opeens niet meer. Over de reden waarom het ene wel, en het andere niet, gerapporteerd wordt, kan ik speculeren maar dan zou ik me schuldig maken aan dezelfde op te weinig feiten gebaseerde journalistiek als zij.
Daarom een algemene overdenking. Voor of tegen de oorlog/de Amerikanen/het homohuwelijk/de toepassing van plantaardige vetten in chocola/rechten voor dwergchimpansees: het moet niet uitmaken. Rapporteer gewoon wat er gebeurt in de wereld en hou je aan alle feiten, niet aan een subset die je toevallig goed uitkomt. Of ga anders fijn bij een actiegroep werken. Tenzij Hilversum het verschil tussen journalistiek en propaganda niet meer ziet.
Zo ongeveer zal de mediahysterie klinken als een bemande Mars-missie echt serieus in zicht komt. Want om zo'n reis mogelijk te maken, is het heel wel mogelijk dat we motoren moeten gebruiken die op een of andere manier door nucleaire energie worden aangedreven. Dat zit zo.
Cruciaal bij ruimtereizen is de hoeveelheid beschikbare delta-V. Dat is Nerds voor de hoeveelheid snelheid die een ruimteschip zichzelf kan geven of juist afnemen. Wie heeft opgelet bij natuurkunde - ok, niemand dus - weet dat iets dat eenmaal in beweging is, alleen maar stopt als het door iets wordt afgeremd. Op aarde is dat de wrijving met de lucht en (bij voertuigen) de wrijving van de banden met de grond, maar een raket heeft van die twee zaken geen last en zou dus vrolijk doorhobbelen, tenzij hij zichzelf afremt.
Dat maakt ruimtereizen lastig. Want je moet niet alleen brandstof meesjouwen om jezelf een schop in de goede richting te geven, maar ook om jezelf tijdig weer af te remmen. Nog erger: die rembrandstof weegt zelf natuurlijk ook wat en daardoor heeft de raket al vanaf het begin extra brandstof nodig om de rembrandstof mee te sjouwen. Minder brandstof kan, maar betekent een lagere reissnelheid, en je wilt je astronauten graag wel voor hun pensionering weer thuis hebben.
(Nu weet u waarom Amerikanen 'rocket science' als het summum van wetenschap beschouwen.)
Voor een reis naar Mars zou een enorme pleut conventionele raketbrandstof nodig zijn. Daarom wordt er naar andere oplossingen gezocht. Een methode is nucleaire voortstuwing, omdat een kilo nucleaire brandstof veel meer energie oplevert dan een kilo 'normale' raketbrandstof als hydrazine. Nadeeltje: je wilt niet dat de raket explodeert terwijl 'ie nog niet in de ruimte is, want uranium in de atmosfeer = minder fijn. Weliswaar gaan er al sinds jaar en dag satellieten de ruimte in die worden aangedreven door een vorm van kernenergie, maar die zijn van een variant die pas echt radioactief wordt wanneer de satelliet veilig en wel in de ruimte is. Daarom wordt er gestudeerd op mogelijkheden om deze relatief veilige energiebronnen een zogeheten ionenmotor aan te laten drijven: een motor die met een minimum aan brandstof eindeloos door blijft buffelen. Nadeeltje: een ionenmotor heeft het uithoudingsvermogen van een paard, maar de versnelling van een cavia met twee gebroken pootjes. Uiteindelijk gaat een door een ionenmotor aangedreven raket hard - maar paradoxaal genoeg duurt het een eeuwigheid voor het zover is.
Een andere mogelijkheid is er ook. Schiet een raket richting Mars en laat hem afremmen op de atmosfeer (van Mars dus). Dat heet 'aerobraking' en het is niet fijn voor de bemanning, maar wel efficiënt. Het bespaart je de al genoemde rembrandstof, plus de brandstof die nodig is om de rembrandstof überhaupt bij Mars te krijgen. Je hebt nog altijd brandstof nodig om terug te komen op aarde, maar die kun je op Mars met een minimum aan van de aarde meegebrachte ingrediënten gelukkig zelf produceren. Deze twee componenten - aerobraking en zelf brandstof brouwen - zijn essentieel voor het Mars Direct-plan van dr. Robert Zubrin, van wiens vereniging ik lid ben.
Overigens, over een bemande Marsreis: deze posting van logger Jay Manifold is zeer lezenswaard. Al was het alleen maar vanwege zijn suggestie om zo'n trip goedkoop te houden.
Gisteren stond het spoorwegpersoneel veel te dure Gauloises te verdampen, en nu dreigen werknemers in de gezondheidszorg weer om te gaan staken . Mocht Bush regime change in de Vijfde Republiek willen, dan hoeft ie daar vermoedelijk weinig meer voor te doen dan te wachten tot de Franse natie door economische ledigheid vanzelf implodeert. Ook een mogelijkheid: de hele populatie blijkt straks te zijn uitgeroeid door een gemeen virus dat zich tijdens de gezondheidsstaking ongehinderd kon verspreiden via vieze telefoonhoorns.
Ooit studeerde ik een blauwe maandag psychologie (in deeltijd, ik ben verre van een eeuwige student). Daar ben ik mee opgehouden toen de studie wat mij betreft meer politiek werd dan wetenschap. Sociale psychologie zou het gedrag van groepen mensen en mensen in groepen moeten bestuderen, maar was vaker directief dan beschrijvend. En bij ontwikkelingspsychologie ging het vooral om de vraag hoe een mens zich eigenlijk zou moeten ontwikkelen, en niet om de vraag hoe hij zich ontwikkelt. Met maakbaarheidsidealen heb ik geen problemen, zolang ze worden geventileerd waar ze thuishoren: in de kroeg, de kerk of de Tweede Kamer, maar niet in een tempel van de wetenschap.
Vandaag moest ik daar weer aan denken, toen ik dit artikel las bij de BBC. De Ierse professor Michael Fitzgerald meent dat sommige grote genieën leiden aan het syndroom van Asperger, een op autisme lijkende stoornis. Over Asperger bestaan veel misverstanden. Het heet wel 'hoogfunctionerend autisme', maar in de media wordt dat vaak uitgelegd als 'hoogbegaafd autisme' - een mooi stempeltje voor de wereldvreemdheid van kamergeleerden. Feit is dat Asperger, vaker dan 'traditioneel' autisme, samengaat met een gemiddelde tot hogere intelligentie. Dat is uiteraard iets anders dan dat iedere Asperger-patiënt de wortel van 304422 uit zijn hoofd kan berekenen. Niet iedere Asperger-patiënt is Rain Man. Feit is ook dat Asperger zeer zeldzaam is, en zeker niet kan voorkomen in de enorme concentraties die tegenwoordig worden gemeld.
Hoe dan ook, Fitzgerald schreef een boek over het onderwerp. Hij stelt dat Asperger kan samengaan met vaardigheden die van groot belang zijn voor de maatschappij. Dat ben ik met hem eens. Hij pleit ook voor meer tolerantie, en daarvan kun je ook al nooit genoeg hebben (behalve dan tolerantie jegens intolerantie, maar da's een ander verhaal). Toch is dat tolerantie-pleidooi vreemd. Want Fitzgerald stelt niet de meest voor de hand liggende vraag: als Asperger zo vaak samengaat met talent, is het dan wel een ziekte, of een karakteristiek? Anders gezegd: verwacht je van iemand met extra lange benen echt dat ie in alle opzichten in de pas loopt, en daar dan ook nog goed bij kan functioneren? Of, nog weer anders gezegd, is een genie alleen verteerbaar als hij ook over voetbal kan ouwehoeren?
Ik vrees met grote vreze dat de autisme-hype van dit moment (jammer, want de legitieme, echte slachtoffers van deze aandoening worden straks niet meer geloofd, net als ooit gebeurde met dyslectici) ervoor zal zorgen dat we nog meer mensen (vooral jongens) zullen dwingen te voldoen aan een ideaaltypisch plaatje van 'sociaal zijn', iets wat ze nooit zo goed zal lukken als de -gogen en -logen willen. Mijn voorspelling: daar gaat nooit iemand gelukkig van worden. Want kinderen die hun tijd moeten besteden aan het doorlopend aanhoren hoe 'abnormaal' of, iets politiek correcter, 'afwijkend' hun gedrag wel niet is, zullen niet snel genegen zijn hun intellectuele talenten verder te ontwikkelen: die hangen immers teveel samen met datgene wat ze 'apart' maakt. Niet alleen kweek je daarmee gefrustreerde kinderen, het is bovendien een verlies voor de samenleving. Wat heb je liever, de ontdekker van het geneesmiddel tegen kanker die nogal op zichzelf is, of een middelmatige laborant die heel goed kan afpilsen op zaterdagnacht?
Voor zover iemand geen gevaar voor zichzelf of zijn omgeving vormt, en voor zover iemand door zijn excentriciteit of 'afwijking' niet ongelukkig wordt, maar misschien zelfs het tegenovergestelde: zullen we hem dan gewoon met rust laten, en geen maatschappelijk gewenste mensbeelden gebruiken als voorwendsel om eigen onbegrip of angst op de ander te projecteren? Wie daar niet mee kan leven, kan ook op een vriendelijke manier zijn emoties bezweren door bijvoorbeeld een bezoekdienst voor wereldvreemde professoren op te zetten. Die is er hier in Amsterdam al voor eenzame 65-plussers. Drink ter kalmering van het gemoed wekelijks een Beerenburg met de natuurkundige op de hoek, waarna die weer kan doorgaan met het ontwikkelen van 's werelds eerste schone brandstof. Daar wordt iedereen heel gelukkig van, dunkt me.
Met een collega-freelancer sloot ik in september vorig jaar een weddenschap: uiterlijk op 31 december 2020 om 23.59 moet de eerste bemande missie naar Mars zijn vertrokken, of ik ben een fles whiskey kwijt. Nu lijken de kansen iets groter te worden dat ik er juist eentje krijg. Want het persbureau UPI heeft de scoop dat George W. Bush van plan is om een basis op de maan te bouwen, en uiteindelijk ook mensen op Mars neer te zetten. (Het bericht is door zowel BBC, CNN als Fox inmiddels overgenomen, en aangezien al die organisaties goede banden hebben met NASA en ESA, begin ik daarom langzaam te geloven dat het bericht wel eens waar zou kunnen zijn. Het feit dat de perssecretaris van het Witte Huis niet zozeer lekt, alswel druppelt, draagt daar eveneens aan bij.)
Geheel onverwacht komt de aankondiging niet. Nu commerciële instanties zich steeds meer richten op het brengen van mensen in een lage baan om de aarde (ook wel LEO, Low Earth Orbit genoemd), is het waarschijnlijk dat je binnen 5 jaar zelf een korte trip (van ongeveer een half uur) naar de ruimte kunt maken. In een dergelijke omgeving hebben organisaties als NASA en ESA niets te zoeken: ze zijn opgericht om grenzen te verkennen en te verbreden, niet om (op een veel duurdere manier, de space shuttle is een geldverslindend onding) hetzelfde te doen als hobbyende rijkaards.
De plannen van Bush zijn natuurlijk niet morgen realiteit. Toch, een trip naar Mars - en zelfs het bouwen van een kolonie daar - is minder duur en moeilijk dan het lijkt. Het Mars Direct-plan van dr. Robert Zubrin bijvoorbeeld, blinkt uit door houtje-touwtje-pragmatisme. Dat dit plan zelfs onder ruimtevaartliefhebbers niet al te bekend is, blijkt wel uit de reacties op het weblog van ruimtevaartkenner Rand Simberg. Daar wordt stevig gehakketakt over de zin en onzin van het plan van Bush. En er wordt, in afwachting van de officiële aankondiging, flink gespeculeerd. Eén enthousiasteling meent zelfs dat Bush een ruimtelift wil gaan bouwen, een apparaat waarmee je goederen (en uiteindelijk mensen) veel goedkoper dan nu in een baan om de aarde kunt takelen. Tot die tijd: plaatjes kijken bij National Geographic.
Waarom lees ik het goede nieuws uit Irak niet in de Volkskrant?
Ok, misschien een nogal ongelukkig voorbeeld - van Greenpeace verwacht je ook geen lofzang op Shell - maar toch. In geen enkele Nederlandse krant (NRC Handelsblad af en toe uitgezonderd) kom ik dit soort berichtgeving tegen:
'Still, lawmakers say that the situation on the ground is more positive than press reports had led them to believe: Schools are functioning, new construction projects are starting up at a rate of 100 a day, and troop morale is better than they had expected. While they also see problems, they're coming back on the side of doing what it takes to make it work.'
Journalistiek betekent kritisch zijn, en dat is iets heel anders dan cynisch-negatief. (Einde verzuchting van opa.) Lees hier het volledige artikel uit de (toch niet bijzonder rechtse) Christian Science Monitor.
Nee, die Gaaikema-grap was niet echt nodig. Toch hebben we (de sympathisanten van de Mars Society, een club die zo snel mogelijk de kolonisatie van Mars op gang wil brengen) gisteren even geproost op de landing van Spirit, de geologische robotverkenner van NASA. Op de foto ziet u Artemis Westenberg, verantwoordelijk voor de voorlichting bij de Mars Society Nederland en dus in theorie mijn grootste natuurlijke vijand als journalist. Maar heus, ze valt best mee. (Ja kom zeg, ik moet nog langer mee als donateur van die club...)
Dat Syrië en Noord-Korea in het geniep wapens aan Irak leverden, is niet zo verrassend. Maar wat dachten Polen en Zuid-Korea in vredesnaam te bereiken door de betreffende VN-embargo's te omzeilen? Degelijk journalistiek handwerk van de (centrumlinkse) Los Angeles Times compromiteert beide landen, die notabene troepen in Irak hebben gestationeerd. Overigens blijkt uit het onderzoek van de LA Times dat er in Irak ook apparatuur van een Amerikaans bedrijf is aangetroffen - dat daar niets van wist. Een Canadese student had de betreffende (ook legaal te gebruiken) apparatuur besteld en vervolgens doorgesluist via (jawel) Syrië (dat niet voor niets net als het vroegere Irak een Baath-regime heeft). Hoe ging dat South Park-liedje ook weer? (Songtekst hiero.) Oh, en voordat iemand weer begint over die zogenaamde massale Amerikaanse wapenleveranties in de tijd dat de hele wereld nog met Saddam heulde (net als Chamberlain, Stalin en FDR dat ooit deden met Hitler): die zijn een fabeltje. De VS bungelt ergens onderaan de lijst met leveranciers, zelfs nog onder Denemarken, dat op zijn beurt Libië, Rusland, Duitsland en Frankrijk boven zich vindt. Mijn boycot van Franse wijn en andere Gaullistische tinnef blijft voorlopig van kracht, totdat Bush-II medio 2006 overgaat tot regime change in Parijs (en Euro Disney).
Een paar keer per jaar geef ik les aan een groep Arabische en Israëlische journalisten. Die komen dan naar Hilversum en worden door de stichting JourNetwork bijgeschoold in praktische journalistieke vaardigheden. In sommige landen in die regio is het wat minder goed gesteld met de persvrijheid, wat op zijn beurt journalisten niet aanmoedigt om hun kwaliteiten aan te scherpen. Bonus is bovendien dat Arabieren en joden op deze manier met 'de vijand' in aanraking komen, met (dat hoop je dan althans) verbroedering of in elk geval meer begrip tot gevolg. Collega-journalist Brian Whitaker van the Guardian en ik waren zondag, de dag dat Saddam Hoessein werd opgepakt, allebei aanwezig bij zo'n ploeg journalisten uit het Midden-Oosten. En zowel hij als ik werden erg vrolijk van de samenwerking die we zagen. Vooral de discussies over het Genève-akkoord getuigden van wederzijds respect en begrip. Maar na het lezen van het artikel dat Brian vervolgens schreef, begon ik me af te vragen of ik wel cynisch genoeg ben voor dit vak. Even los van je eventuele hekel aan de Yanks: hoe kun je nu toenadering tussen Arabieren en Israëli's gebruiken als argument om je voorspelling van sektarisch geweld in Irak te rechtvaardigen?
Leukste scene in Finding Nemo: Amerikanen die de spot drijven met het feit dat zo'n beetje alles aan onheil immer de schuld is van de Amerikanen (ongeveer zoals je als grote broer, en ik spreek hier uit ervaring, ook altijd de lulhannes bent. Nee, ik word er niet voor behandeld). Voor wie de film niet heeft gezien (foei!) hier wat uitleg: het visje Nemo wordt ontvoerd door een duiker op het Great Barrier Reef (waar ik ooit nog mijn PADI's heb gehaald, maar dat terzijde). Vader Marlin, die de achtervolging inzet en onderweg het trieste verhaal vertelt aan drie vegetarische haaien, krijgt als reacties: 'Humans, they think they own everything' en 'Probably Americans!'. Uiteraard (we hebben het over een Amsterdams en dus, ahem, kosmopolitisch publiek) leidde dat tot een lachende zaal. Alleen jammer dat de dader een nogal botte Australische tandarts blijkt te zijn. Vraag me af wie die ironie doorhad. the Guardian in elk geval niet, waarmee die krant voor de zoveelste maal laat zien nog geen half procent te bezitten van de zelfrelativering die het meent bij de Amerikanen zo node te missen. (Ja, ik weet 't, het is maar een tekenfilm...)
Het ziet er niet naar uit, maar dit plaatje komt uit de remake van Battlestar Galactica. Die liefst 3 uur lang duurt en voorlopig nog niet op de Nederlandse televisie komt. (Gelukkig is daar de Usenet-nieuwsgroep alt.binaries.scifi.) Opvallend: de apocalyptische dreiging komt veel sterker over dan in het origineel. Wellicht heeft dat te maken met die andere ondenkbaar geachte gebeurtenis, die geen sciencefiction bleek. Minder opvallend: gezwicht voor politieke correctheid. Zo is womanizer Starbuck nu zelf een vrouw (die nog wel sigaren rookt). Verder blijkt de president een ex-schooljuf die drie uur lang een humorloze leider uithangt, met een gebrek aan zelfrelativering waar zelfs de meest arrogante mannelijke filmheld zich voor zou schamen. Nee, dat kunnen andere sciencefiction-makers toch beter. (Overigens, een zinnige discussie over Galactica 2003 op Slashdot.)
"I believe in life. I believe in treasuring it as a mystery that will never be fully understood, as a sanctity that should never be destroyed, as an invitation to experience now what can only be remembered tomorrow. (...)
I believe in liberty. I believe that within every soul lies the capacity to reach for its own good, that within every physical body there endures an unalienable right to be free from coercion. (...)
I believe in the pursuit of happiness. Not its attainment, nor its final definition, but its pursuit. I believe in the journey, not the arrival; in conversation, not monologues; in multiple questions rather than any single answer." Andrew Sullivan
