Saturday, September 26, 2009
You decide
Here's the New York Times article on rape and torture of protesters (please click through to read the entire chilling and disquieting article):
Top U.S. Commander Says Taliban Winning Communication Initiative
McChrystal's longing for authoritative religious figures to mediate the ideal of reconciliation was a design and achievement of the IRFWP 2o years ago. The US military has little access, understanding, or credibility in this community that is indispensable to the larger work of dissolving the unique challenges in Afghanistand and Pakistan.
Holbrooke has repeatedly complained that the Taliban has communicated more effectively than the United States. In June, he told a House subcommittee there was a need to refine the coalition's message and use new ways to reach Afghans, suggesting cell phones, radio and other means, the Post reported.
McChrystal said one way to accomplish this is to "disrupt and degrade" the insurgent networks. He suggests getting authoritative figures, such as religious leaders, to deliver messages "so they are credible," the Post reported.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
A good argument for the obvious
A brighter side of the deeper parts of human nature
Monday, September 7, 2009
The Ahmadinejad Problem- New thinking is needed

Is President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a bad guy?
By all accounts the answer seems to be a clear yes, especially if we are to believe reports of the demonic way he treated his own people in the wake of Iran's recent, so-called elections.
It's one thing to be branded a villain in the context of international relations, but the litmus test of a leaders' status that seems to carry universal opprobrium is tyranny, brutalizing the helpless under your reign.
This morning's headlines see world leaders with their hands thrown up over Ahmadinejad's obstinate refusal to cooperate with regard to his nuclear program.
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Monday Iran will neither halt uranium enrichment nor negotiate over its nuclear rights but is ready to sit and talk with world powers over "global challenges."
Ahmadinejad also said Iran will present a package of proposals for talks to the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council plus Germany but rejected any deadline for such talks.
President Barack Obama and European allies have given Iran until the end of September to take up an offer of nuclear talks with six world powers and trade incentives should it suspend uranium enrichment activities. If not, Iran could face harsher punitive sanctions.
Who are these wonderful conversation partners (five plus one) waiting in the wings to discuss the problems of arms with the evil President Ahmadinejad?
The five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council — the United States, France, Britain, Russia and China — plus Germany offered Iran a modified package of economic incentives June last year in return for suspending its uranium enrichment activities or face harsher sanctions.
Why is Germany not on the security council of the UN? Because the UN was formed largely in response to Hitler's efforts to take over the world.
But now Germany's OK. Let's take look at these lovely five plus one defined so nobly by their stature at the the UN from a different angle?
Oh, by the way, Post-Mussolini's Italy wasn't too popular during the founding of the United Nations either.
Those old arms numbers were shattered by a spike of 33% growth of US arms sales in the last year as reported in yesterday's NYTimes.
CONCLUSION
Ahmadinejad may be bad, but (sadly) he's not stupid (a phrase that could apply to countless politicians).
Is a nuclear armed Iran bad? Should it be prevented?
Of course, and by all means.
Can it be stopped by a process void of a genuine moral center. Sadly not.
This and a great many current global problems must be met in a system grounded in the radical change that will be put forth in upcoming articles on this site.
Sunday, September 6, 2009
The Muslims Who Saved The Jews
Concept of heritage opens positive interfaith horizons
The opening passage shows the reflexive hate for Jews in the region, but the article goes on to explain the history of Jews in the country, and the devotion to preserve this contribution in the name of Egypt's heritage.
