Interesting article on Iran's elections:

Anyone but Ahmadinejad
The unlikely candidacy of Mir Hossein Mousavi.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/199150/page/1

Posted by: Anthony | May 24 2009 7:28 utc | 1

Must read Mavercon: Obushma-Biney in the Home of the Frightened

The right and legal thing to do would be to take all the prisoners to the US, charge those who can be charged and release those who cannot be charged. Those who can be sent back to their countries of origin without endangering their safety can be sent back. The rest should be allowed to stay in the US (the principle in question is: ‘you break it, you own it’). Those charged then should be tried in a proper US court, not one of the kangaroo quasi-military tribunals created by Bush and Cheney. If convicted, they should serve their time, or pay with their lives, as the case may be. If acquitted they should be released. That is the rule of law. It is also the right and moral thing to do.

With Bush and Cheney, one often had the sense that they did not know what was wrong and what was right. Obama clearly knows the difference, but knowingly chooses the wrong option: video meliora proboque, deteriora sequor. The physical safety and security of the American people should not be the first and overriding concern of the US president. Preserving our freedom, as set out in the Bill of Rights, is. Hundreds of thousands have died to preserve that liberty. During World War II alone more than 400,000 Americans gave their lives in the cause of freedom.

To Patrick Henry is attributed the famous saying: “Give me Liberty, or give me Death”. The moral midgets and yellow-bellies in the US Senate and White House today would have said instead: “Give me security and comfort or I will curl up in a ball and refuse to vote for you again”.

Posted by: b | May 24 2009 7:54 utc | 2

Dear b,
I really really appreciate this new "links of the day" post you began a while ago. Browsing quickly through it with the short comment to highlight stuff I always find an interesting read I would not have found by myself.
Thanks for this great effort!
Viele danke.
f

Posted by: f | May 24 2009 9:19 utc | 3

More on Iran

Quarks and the Koran
Iran's very Islamic embrace of science
http://www.newsweek.com/id/199119
The Laughing Radical
A blockbuster director taps into Iran's pop-culture melting pot.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/199099
Anyone but Ahmadinejad
The unlikely candidacy of Mir Hossein Mousavi.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/199150
Tehran or Bust
A journey through the heart of Iran.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/199144

Posted by: Anthony | May 24 2009 9:25 utc | 4

According to the German weekly "Der Spiegel", quoting findings of the Hariri tribunal, it's all Hezbollah's fault. I'm not joking, I swear.

Posted by: andrew | May 24 2009 10:21 utc | 5

b, I had already posted this on the OT thread but since you provided the link here I'm repeating my comments:

Great NYT Op-Ed by Flynt and Hillary Leverett:

Today's New York Times Op-Ed carries a damning indictment of Obama's Iran Policy and validates the skepticism voiced by many of us horrified to see Neocon-Zionists leaders like Iraqi invasion cheerleader Hillary Clinton and AIPAC co-founder Dennis Ross reborn in the role of 'honest brokers'. If the U.S. really believes "it takes extremists to control extremists" it's a wonder the Allies didn't elect Goebbels to assist in the rebuilding of Germany after WWII.

The U.S. will feign horror when hardliner Ahmadinejad is re-elected, but judging by its own actions this is clearly what the U.S., egged on by Israel, really wants. Iran's election of a 'Pragmatist' would be a major 'game-changer': The U.S. would face enormous pressure to compromise on the nuclear issue and lift sanctions, while Israel's colossal investment in Ahmadinejad as the Mad-Muslim-Existential-Threat would disappear overnight.

The U.S.A., Israel and Ahmadinejad need each other for maintenance of the status quo. Each depends for its survival and maintenance of hardline policies on the alleged threat posed by the other. It's not hard to see why Ahmadinejad has the smug look of a Persian Cat.

Excerpts from the Op-Ed:

"Clinton has told a number of allies in Europe and the Persian Gulf that she is skeptical that diplomacy with Iran will prove fruitful and testified to Congress that negotiations are primarily useful to garner support for “crippling” multilateral sanctions against Iran."

"Iranian officials are fully aware of Mr. Ross’s views — and are increasingly suspicious that he is determined that the Obama administration make, as one senior Iranian diplomat said to us, “an offer we can’t accept,” simply to gain international support for coercive action."

"(Obama) ... also endorsed the creation of a high-level Israeli-American working group to identify more coercive options if Iran does not meet American conditions for limiting its nuclear activities."

"Why has President Obama put himself in a position from which he cannot deliver on his own professed interest in improving relations with the Islamic Republic?"

Posted by: Parviz | May 24 2009 11:37 utc | 6

"Must read in full, A Deeply Unfair Cast of Mind," I'm sorry, everyone should know, but I can't read it all. After about half way I'm sick and more would just make me sicker, sick is good enough, I got the picture, people who would order this stuff or supervise it need a special place behind bars - permanently. Surely there is another country I can belong to that doesn't countenance this demented bull shit.

Posted by: knowdoubtr | May 24 2009 12:29 utc | 7

It's gonna wreck your day but the punchline is worth it. We are so fucked.

Posted by: ...---... | May 24 2009 12:50 utc | 8

Ladies and gentlemen, satire is dead:

Addressing the allegations by German magazine Der Spiegel that the Hezbollah organization was behind the assassination of Hariri, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said that "an international arrest warrant should be issued against (Sayyed Hasan) Nasrallah, and he should be prosecuted. Otherwise, he should be arrested forcibly."

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Sunday morning that he "hopes Lebanon's citizens will draw the required conclusions" ahead of the upcoming parliament elections.

According to Barak, "the international tribunal's decision to apparently view Hezbollah as responsible for the murder of the former Lebanese prime minister testifies once against to the character and role of Hezbollah, not only in the battle against us but also in the battle against Lebanon's normalcy."

Posted by: andrew | May 24 2009 14:22 utc | 9

Parviz, you just don't get it, do you? In order for the imminnent attack on Iran to take place, the United States of America and Israel need a witting, or unwitting dupes/foils in charge of Iran. He's the perfect Boogeyman....like Sadaam, and as such, a much easier sell for action to those on the fence about nuking Iran. It's not about democracy, Parviz. It never was. It's about controlling the Middle East, Geostrategically. If the USAI doesn't control it, some other country, or alliance will. I hate to say it, but this one's pretty much written. It's just a matter of when. Of course, without your vaunted Capitalism, it could never have been considered. In order to rationalize such a daunting defense industry, and secure such a precious resource as oil, you have to use what it produces, and that requires that you defend yourself against fabricated enemies. There's still time for you to renounce your support of the mechanism that will make possible the destruction of your country, and your people.

Posted by: Obamageddon | May 24 2009 15:12 utc | 10

@f - thanks :-)

Posted by: b | May 24 2009 16:24 utc | 11

From mavercon, quoted by b at 2:

“The physical safety and security of the American people should not be the first and overriding concern of the US president. Preserving our freedom, as set out in the Bill of Rights, is. ”

(put the original italics back in)

Quotes like this show to me how illogical, cynical, and propagandist even the ‘good’ commentators have become.

On the face of it, there is nothing to object to, nothing to quarrel about. (From the assumed perspective of the kind of ppl who post or read here.)

However, there is so much wrong, it is tough to boil it down, but here goes:

-the statement "safety and security of American ppl should not be the first concern of the prez" (shortened)

implies:

It *is* the first concern. That is patently untrue. See for ex. Katrina, anthrax attacks, or any number of horrendous US deaths, from all kinds of causes, from local murderers to traffic accidents including war and its residue. Obama is not protecting Americans, just as Bush did not.



Second, the idea that ‘crackdown’ does serve to save American lives is assumed. Again, many would contest that. Torturing some impoverished Muslims and generally flaunting gangsterism and strong-arming other nations generally does not promote security, etc.

Then, the argument seems to move forward, even if these tactics protect Americans, there are bigger, more overriding principles that must be adhered to, our *freedoms* must be protected.

We must abandon aggression, or deviation from the rule of law of ‘democratic’ countries, even if it means loss of American lives, because of, well err.. argh err, principle, tradition, or even honor. Sure fire way to get the principles thrown out the back door.

So pragmatics is made to stand in opposition of vague principles - never the twain shall meet. No wonder Americans are completely confused and drawn into senseless argument.

Lastly, mavercon does not mention that the Obiman clearly stated, or at least intimated, laid out clearly for attentive listeners - he is hard to pin down - that he will legalise preventative detention - unlimited in time - for anyone, anywhere, any time. Bush gave Americans pre-emptive war, B.O. gives the Americans Gulag with preventative detention.

Posted by: Tangerine | May 24 2009 16:48 utc | 12

test?? I can't post. tried 5 times...please carry on!

Posted by: Tangerine | May 24 2009 16:51 utc | 13

very astute Tangerine. I found myself agreeing with the premise that liberty is more important than safety and did not parse it any further.

Posted by: dan of steele | May 24 2009 16:52 utc | 14

From mavercon, quoted by b at 2:

“The physical safety and security of the American people should not be the first and overriding concern of the US president. Preserving our freedom, as set out in the Bill of Rights, is. ”

Quotes like this show to me how illogical, cynical, and propagandist even the ‘good’ commentators have become.
On the face of it, there is nothing to object to, nothing to quarrel about. (From the assumed perspective of the kind of ppl who post or read here.)

However, there is so much wrong, it is tough to boil it down, but here goes:

-- the statement safety and security of American ppl should not be the first concern of the prez (shortened)
implies:

It *is* the first concern. That is patently untrue. See for ex. Katrina, anthrax attacks, or any number of horrendous US deaths, from all kinds of causes, including war and its residue. Obama is not protecting Americans, just as Bush did not. 

Second, the idea that ‘crackdown’ does serve to save American lives is assumed. Again, many would contest that. Torturing some Muslims and generally flaunting gangsterism and strong-arming other nations generally does not promote security, etc.

Then, the argument continues, even if these tactics protect Americans, there are wider, more overriding principles that must be adhered to, our *freedoms* must be protected. We must abandon aggression, or deviation from the rule of law of ‘democratic’ countries, even if it means loss of American lives, because of, well err.. ha err, principle, tradition, or even honor. Sure fire way to get the principles thrown out the back door.

So pragmatics is made to stand in opposition of vague principles - never the twain shall meet. No wonder Americans are completely confused and drawn into senseless argument.

Lastly, mavercon does not mention that the Obiman clearly stated, or at least intimated, laid out clearly for attentive listeners, he is hard to pin down, that he will legalise preventative detention - unlimited in time - for anyone, anywhere, any time. Bush gave Americans pre-emptive war, B.O. gives the Americans Gulag with preventative detention.

Posted by: Tangerine | May 24 2009 16:52 utc | 15

apologies for the double post, etc. but I get no feedback, just 'we cant accept this content'...

Posted by: Tangerine | May 24 2009 16:55 utc | 16

@Tangerine

I've all but given up on posting here on any regular basis, w/typepad and it's continuing glitches, maybe if enough of us stop posting b will have to address it. I'm not holding my breath though...

Posted by: Uncle $cam | May 24 2009 17:10 utc | 17

Obamageddon (#10), you have descended below even your own low standards by writing such drivel.

Firstly, you didn't read what I wrote, which was:

"The U.S.A., Israel and Ahmadinejad need each other for maintenance of the status quo. Each depends for its survival and maintenance of hardline policies on the alleged threat posed by the other."

This means that each is equally as evil as the other. Duh!

Secondly, you haven't the faintest clue what Iranians face today, including arbitrary arrest, torture, round-the-clock media brainwashing, internet censorship of even the words 'bath' and 'shower' (!?!), religious fanaticism and unprecedented corruption. It is only possible for such a horrendous man as Ahmadinejad to remain in power because he has the excuse of the horrendous U.S.A. with which to intimidate and suppress his people "in the name of national security".

If you don't get it, you never will.

I actually praised the Leverett article that blamed the U.S.A. for the current mess, so instead of throwing tantrums and making false accusations like an overgrown baby you might wish to actually "read" the stuff you criticize.

Finally, tell me what's wrong with my "vaunted capitalism" which follows the German and French models. Did I ever praise the U.S. model? If so, prove it, copy/paste even one line I allegedly wrote, and stop throwing your toys out of the cot.

Posted by: Parviz | May 24 2009 17:33 utc | 18

Hey Uncle I for one will deeply regret you not posting anymore. A suggestion: clear all your internet cache, close your browser and load the site clean before posting. Works for me.

Posted by: Sam | May 24 2009 17:35 utc | 19

Maybe Terence Tao, one of the sharpest mathematicians living on the planet today, is right in saying that you don't have to be a genius to do math, but he'd be certainly right to say that being a genius at math doesn't amount to a hill of beans if you can't make it jibe with the real world. It's true that being armed and dangerous with math does give you the power to create military robotics capable of killing civilians and militants alike, all in one fell swoop, while you're sitting behind a computer screen in the comfort and safety of your own home. But it's equally true that being able to use math to create financial instruments will get you nowhere but deep in debt. So one thing is for sure: It doesn't take a Euler or Gauss to know that the world of finance is proof positive that the Mathematical Universe isn't all what it's cracked up to be!

Posted by: Cynthia | May 24 2009 18:21 utc | 20

Cynthia-

I'm in a bit of a cynic today and probably feeling like more of a smart-ass than I should :) but that said I'd take exception to your assessment

So one thing is for sure: It doesn't take a Euler or Gauss to know that the world of finance is proof positive that the Mathematical Universe isn't all what it's cracked up to be!

I'd argue that the powers that be did some figuring and they figured they could own more of what we small fry had if they turned us upside down and shook a bit... I think the only problem with figures they have is counting all their new wealth.

Posted by: DavidS | May 24 2009 19:25 utc | 21

Firstly, you didn't read what I wrote, which was:

You're right, I didn't read it all the way through, and for that I apologize. We seem to be in agreement that Ahmadinejad, the USA and Israel have a mutually beneficial relationship. They all need and use each other to push their prospective agendas and protect their positions. So, it's not a matter of me not getting it. I get it just fine.

Now that I've put my ego aside and admitted that you and I have agreement, why don't you put your ego aside and quit being an apologist for Obama when it comes to the economy. Why don't you admit, as I have, that Obama is nothing more than a glorified whore. Why don't you admit that he's a hypocritical pitchman for Big Business, i.e. Capitalism...U.S. style.

If you have the time, or even if you don't, please review this Bill Moyers' segment on the healthcare debate currently playing out here in the USA. It's not getting much press because Capital owns the press and they don't want The Masses getting behind Single Payer. Notice Obama's comments back in 2003 when he vociferously supported a Single Payer System. Gee, what happened, Parviz, did he get practical, just as he's gotten practical on Iran and Israel? You can take your apology for this scumbag and your practicality and shove it where the sun doesn't shine. Your stance is one of enabling, and we've no time for such futility. So, put your ego aside and find common ground, or continue to take the side of the enemy of all humanity.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05222009/watch.html

At the end, Max Bacchus' comment about sums it up. When confonted as to why Single Payer advocates don't have a seat, or a voice at the debate table his response was:

We can't waste Capital on something that's just impossible.

That's priceless....for everything else, there's your vaunted Mastercard.

I urge everyone, whether you like me, or not, to watch what's at that link. The MSM is largely ignoring this ever so important debate.

Posted by: Obamageddon | May 24 2009 20:17 utc | 22

Obamageddon

That is a slick piece about health care... I watched it when it first came out, I'm surprised it hasn't gotten more attention on the internet... sigh, people still prefer pornography and silly pet videos to anything informative. Can't be thinking too much, now can we?

And I agree about the asshole in chief; the guy is a slick turd compared to the nutty chunks passing through the public's bowls during the previous turd in chief... but a turd is a turd; whether silky smooth or full of hemorrhoid causing nut chunks, and regardless, both stink!

Posted by: DavidS | May 24 2009 20:49 utc | 23

R.I.P. Dr. Leonard Shlain

Dr. Leonard Shlain, a Renaissance man whose final book is about the original Renaissance man, died Monday at his home in Mill Valley. He was 71.

Family members said the cause was brain cancer.

Surgeon, inventor, author, artist, student and teacher, Dr. Shlain defied easy categorization. He discouraged confined thinking, and studied, wrote and lectured about topics ranging from anthropology to linguistics to religion

I greatly admired Shlain's _The Alphabet Versus the Goddess_. More basically, RAW seemed to think people whose orientation towards knowledge like Shlain's were the most fascinating of thinkers. Read very widely and make thine own syntheses.

"I'm a synthesizer..."- Leonard Shlain, quoted in above obit. Here's the video interview where he said it, one of his last public talks.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | May 24 2009 22:05 utc | 24

U$-

Have you ever read The Throwing Madonna by William Calvin?

Here are outlines for the first three chapters... there are 17 total and it's all interesting. I'd bet Dr Shlain and Dr Calvin conversed at some point.

1. The Throwing Madonna

Tracing right-handedness back through the centuries from the invention of writing to how mothers carry babies on the left side. With a brief digression on pacifying babies, as practiced by pediatric neurologists, and how the left-sided sound of the maternal heartbeat quiets infants. Did right-handedness all start with a mother with pacified infant, throwing stones with her right hand to hunt rabbits?

2 The Lovable Cat: Mimicry Strikes Again

As T S. Eliot intoned, "A CAT IS NOT A DOG.'As it is hardly a working animal, whatever caused the domestication of the cat? Perhaps it learned to mimic human babies, even though not looking anything like a baby? This chapter illustrates the 'instinct' level of brain organization, what Konrad Lorenz called innate action patterns and the stimuli which trigger them. A tale of evolution, nonpoisonous snakes impersonating poisonous ones, and what prompts people to respond to a cuddly baby. The reader is prompted to perform a similar ethological analysis of the dog's success in pleasing people.

3 Woman the Toolmaker?

The usual presumption is that the first human tool-users were male, but it certainly isn't turning out that way as ethologists study primates in their natural habitats: the starring roles usually seem to be played by females. Chimpanzees crack open nuts using rock hammers-- and with considerable foresight and sophistication. But the males only engage in the simplest kinds of shell cracking, with females practicing the two more sophisticated techniques and flaking stones in the process. And even termite fishing, that classic example of chimpanzee toolmaking, turns out to be largely a female preoccupation.

I think he'd be right up your alley.

Posted by: DavidS | May 24 2009 23:20 utc | 25

Sibel Edmonds has a great post @ her blog titled Two Sides of the Same Coin...Heads-Heads where she effectively summarizes the despicable (and predictable) track record of the new administration (same as the old one).

Despite all the promises Mr. Obama made during his campaign, especially on those issues that were absolutely central to those whose support he garnered, so far the President of Change has followed in the footsteps of his predecessor. Not only that, his administration has made it clear that they intend to continue this trend. Some call it a major betrayal. Can we go so far as to call it a 'swindling of the voters'?

yes. yes we can.

Posted by: Lizard | May 25 2009 4:26 utc | 26

knowdoubtr -- if you didn't read until the end, you won't know that one of the army 'investigators' early on -- who pretty much let Grainer off the hook -- now works in the office of a US Representative from Alabama.

It's probably a good thing I live far from DC, otherwise I would take a day off and go track the guy down and question him. I would hand him a copy of his investigation on Grainer and ask if he had any regrets about not uncovering all that torture and doing something about it. I certainly would ask if he considered himself a Christian, and let him know he is certainly NOT one.

Posted by: Susan | May 25 2009 6:55 utc | 27

Obamageddon: ".....whether you like me, or not ....."

O.K., let's make peace. I very much appreciated your post #22, as it takes a big person to admit he/she was wrong, and you’ve risen in my esteem for doing so. You've now realized we were both saying the same thing.

Thanks for the healthcare (or lack of) video. I couldn't believe it, 14,000 employees PER DAY losing healthcare benefits owing to layoffs. This is criminal.

But this is also why I have asked everyone repeatedly to explain to me that when they say "Capitalism is bad" are they referring to Germany, France and Scandinavia as well or only to the U.S.A.. So far not one poster has given me a reply.

Posted by: Parviz | May 25 2009 9:36 utc | 28

Parviz,

Capitalism has its place in most areas of our economy, especially the ones that are more or less nonessential to our overall health and well-being. But the dog-eat-dog world of capitalism has little to no place in our healthcare system. And given that the US is the last remaining member of the developed world to have not cut dog-eat-dog healthcare to the bone, this should be reason enough for the US to do it, ASAP.

Be mindful, having, say, single-payer healthcare doesn't necessarily mean that it's totally devoid of capitalism. In fact, there's no reason in the world that single payer can't be designed so that the administrative/financial side of healthcare is managed by big government, while the delivery side of healthcare is handled by the private sector.

What makes single payer so appealing is that it cuts the fat out of healthcare without sacrificing the quality of care for all of its citizens, rich and poor alike. But as long as the US cares more about killing others in battles beyond its borders than it does about taking care of its own people here at home, single payer doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of ever happening in the US!

Posted by: Cynthia | May 25 2009 15:02 utc | 29

One Mullen Unit = Next Sri Lanka?

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/provinces/04-Missing-in-Balochistan-qs-02

Posted by: Baloch Barnie | May 25 2009 17:02 utc | 30

Lizard 26) Yeah, we all owe a deep apology to Malooga about Obama's true nature, wherever s(he) is now, had Obama and C'hillary nailed even before the elections.

Wait until July when the 2Q corporate returns and 2009 Fed tax revenues release!
http://img.skitch.com/20090206-fgai8xcg6yurh1h8rsbiu59s13.render.png

Can you say, 'auger in'?

Posted by: Carrot Stick | May 25 2009 18:19 utc | 31

Lizard 26) Yeah, we all owe a deep apology to Malooga about Obama's true nature, wherever s(he) is now, had Obama and C'hillary nailed even before the elections.

Not me. I was of the same opinion as Malooga all along, and even said so at the time. So, it should read "some of us."

Posted by: Obamageddon | May 25 2009 22:23 utc | 32

it was hard to move against the hope train as it chugged along, but some of us did.

i hope Malooga is just on temporary leave.

Posted by: Lizard | May 25 2009 22:33 utc | 33

I hope Malooga is enjoying a moment on a quiet beach under a warm sun holding a cold drink...

Does it really matter who was right about the kookmander in chief? Doesn't change much, and empire continues to march happily along regardless of how "right" or "wrong" we were/are...

Now we can argue about which the the assholes we should had voted for because maybe, just maybe, his(her) shit would stink less. It as if everyone is hoping that the feces coming from a different asshole will somehow smell sweeter and taste better... Ha Ha Ha, the only thing you can expect out of assholes is shit!

Posted by: DavidS | May 25 2009 23:30 utc | 34

I hope Malooga is enjoying a moment on a quiet beach under a warm sun holding a cold drink...

I doubt it. Malooga's a warrior. He is no doubt fighting empire one bloody fraction of an inch at a time, as he's always done. Like the scorpion who can't help but sting its prey, it's in his nature.

Posted by: Obamageddon | May 26 2009 12:49 utc | 35