Welcome to the 21st century. The Cold War, WWII, and WWI are over. The 19th and 20th centuries' class conflicts and colonial issues are behind us. "Oppressed proletariat" and "European expansionism" are no longer relevant. Religious fanatics want their beliefs to rule the world. Free people want to stay that way. Here's my view of the 21st century's great conflict -
On a related topic, Americans have a presidential election coming up this November. I plan to vote. This time around, I think it's particularly important: because apparently the lunatics are running this particular asylum.
An Apparent Attack, and Disarming Those Big, Rough, Marines
The good news is that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is okay. The bad news is that, if an apparent attack had been a little better planned - some obliging soul had seen to it that all the big, rough, dangerous United States Marines in Mr. Panetta's vicinity - - - had been disarmed.
"A military source tells Fox News the strange incident on the tarmac Wednesday at Camp Bastion that occurred moments before Defense Secretary Leon Panetta arrived via C-17 was an attempted attack.
"This official could not say whether the local Afghan involved knew Panetta was about to arrive, but he could say it certainly wasn't any type of accident.
"Fox News has learned the attacker was an Afghan interpreter who was carrying gasoline and a lighter with him in the pickup truck, which he managed to steal from a British service member. The coalition service member was injured during the incident, possibly run over by the truck...."
That article is about the apparent attack.
This is why I think Mr. Panetta was very, very lucky:
"US soldiers were asked to disarm during a speech by Leon Panetta, the American defence secretary, in a sign of grown concern over spates of seemingly random violence in Afghanistan.
"Less than a week after a US staff sergeant allegedly massacred 16 civilians in Kandahar, American soldiers were banned from bringing guns into a talk by Mr Panetta at a base in Helmand province.
"Around 200 troops who had gathered in a tent at Camp Leatherneck were told 'something had come to light' and asked abruptly to file outside and lay down their automatic rifles and 9mm pistols.
" 'Somebody got itchy, that's all I've got to say. Somebody got itchy - we just adjust,' said the sergeant who was told to clear the hall of weapons.
"Major General Mark Gurganus later said he gave the order because Afghan troops attending the talk were unarmed and he wanted the policy to be consistent for all....."
I don't blame General Gurganus. Like anyone else in the United States Armed forces, the hierarchy he's in has a civilian at the top. There may even have been a rational motive for 'consistently' disarming everybody around Mr. Panetta.
With the possible exception of anyone who might want to hurt the American official: and wasn't as dedicated to following the rules as Marines are.
Someone really ought to tell the lot that's running America just now: We're NOT AT WAR WITH THE UNITED STATES MARINES. The American military is not, except in the minds of some politically-correct diehards from the '60s, the enemy.
A tip of the hat to @darsen003, on Twitter, for the heads-up on the Telegraph article.
BBC reports have been stressing the NATO aspects of an offensive against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Understandably, since it's a British institution, and much closer geographically to Europe's NATO than to the country that grew out of those 13 colonies.
Nato, Diplomacy: and Marines
One of today's BBC articles on the developing situation in Afghanistan makes the military operation sound - well, military.
"Thousands of US, British and Afghan troops have launched the biggest offensive in Afghanistan since the overthrow of the Taliban in 2001.
"Helicopter-borne forces are attacking the Taliban-held districts of Marjah and Nad Ali in Helmand province in a bid to re-establish government control.
"Nato says Marjah is home to the biggest community under insurgent control in the south and 400 to 1,000 militants.
"Many residents fled ahead of Operation Moshtarak - meaning 'together' in Dari.
"Nato had distributed leaflets in the Marjah area warning of the planned offensive in a bid to limit civilian casualties. Villagers said they warned Taliban fighters to leave the area or be killed...."
"...Operation Moshtarak is being led by the US Marine Corps, but a total of 4,000 British troops are involved on the ground and in support, supported by Danes and Estonians.
"The initial offensive in Marjah, in Nad Ali district, began early on Saturday.
"More than 4,000 US marines, 1,500 Afghan soldiers and 300 US soldiers moved in by helicopter under cover of night...."
What's a bit less obvious in leading news from Afghanistan is the sort of diplomacy that's going on before - and, quite possibly, during - the strictly military aspects of the operation.
I'd like to live in a world where outfits like the Taliban - particularly their leaders - would have a change of heart, decide that it's okay for women to drive cars, apologize for killing people they didn't approve of, and start being nice.
I think it's likely enough that some people who supported the Taliban out of fear or inadequate knowledge will be willing to abandon terrorism. But dedicated islamic terrorists? No, I think the odds are strongly against their deciding to be nice.
"...But if there was a conversation before the operation between the Afghans and village leaders, he said, 'we often find the Afghans don't fight - but they will welcome you'.
"He pointed to an operation run in a similar way by Canadian forces to the west of Kandahar 'where not a shot was fired'.
"And in an operation by the Grenadier Guards in central Helmand province 'the same effect was created', he said....'
I'm reminded strongly of what the American-led coalition did in Iraq. (And, no, Bush wasn't "going it alone" - although admittedly a little under one in eight of Earth's 265 nations and other administrative units were in the coalition. (August 9, 2007))
Many Iraqis simply didn't know about foreigners, western or otherwise. As they discovered that these foreigners, when they weren't fighting Al Qaeda or Hussein holdouts, repaired and restocked hospitals, fixed sewer systems, and made themselves helpful in other ways - Al Qaeda propaganda started to be questioned.
Al Qaeda's efforts to win support by cutting off people's heads probably didn't help their popularity, either.
I doubt we'll hear much about the Anbar Awakening and related grass-roots movements in Iraq: That was, after all, Al Qaeda in Iraq, not the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Besides, America has a new administration now - but perhaps I'm being unfair.
The article's headline caught my eye: "Hansel and Gretel vs. Roadside Bombs." That was intriguing enough to look up, and what I found was an article on United States Marines in Afghanistan.
The Marines' Combat Logistics Battalion 3, based out of Camp Leatherneck in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, had a problem. They'd been driving off-road, to avoid bombs planted by the Taliban. They'd been taking different routes, too, but the Taliban always seemed to know where the trucks would be.
It took quite a few GPS units, maps, and analysis, but they found out that they'd been driving different routes: that tended to converge on a few spots. It wasn't so much careless behavior, as a matter of the terrain. Those were natural bottlenecks, sort of like fords in rivers or the solid ground between marsh and swamp you'll find in parts of Northern Minnesota.
The solution this time was pretty straightforward: take a careful look for bombs already planted, and set up sniper teams to discourage "militants" from planting more.
In this case the problem and the solution are perfectly clear - with 20-20 hindsight. Before someone started tracking the exact routes, I'm not so sure that the convergence on spots in remote areas of Helmand Province was all that obvious.
I've made the point before: The American military makes mistakes, and learns from them. (June 30, 2008)
I doubt that they'll be called "Space Marines," but there's a good chance that sometime around 2040, something like this will happen (all times are UTC):
13:35. A truck bomb explodes at the American embassy's gate in [redacted]. There are unconfirmed reports of gunfire inside the embassy complex.
14:05. An unidentified person, calling from the American embassy in [redacted] claims that it has been liberated by [redacted], that the embassy staff will continue to be safe, provided that specified demands are met.
14:20. An aid to the American ambassador at the embassy is killed.
16:25. Several spacecraft enter the airspace of [redacted] and land near the American embassy. Marines, armed with stun guns and gooey nets, pour out.
This isn't Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, or Star Wars stuff.
Gooey nets are available today. Products like Sticky Net are an effective way of restraining people without killing them, and anathema to the more hoplophobic bloggers.
Stun guns are a still in the research-and-development stage. The way I see it, though, the biggest obstacles to their use will be
A 'we've never done that before' attitude by some older officers in the military and police forces
Legal challenges by people and organizations horrified by the thought that big, rough, men in uniforms won't have options other than lethal force
Those space ships are a little further off, but they're being developed.
2002: Birth of the Space Marines
In 2002, the United States Marines' deputy commandant for Plans, Policies and Operations, now-retired Lieutenant General Emil R. Bedard signed a Universal Needs Statement calling for "Small Unit Space Transport and Insertion (SUSTAIN) capability".
The prototype is called "Hot Eagle." It doesn't exist yet, but the Pentagon wants to see test flights in 11 years.
What's being discussed sounds a lot like the Dyna Soar project (1958-1963). Almost a quarter century would pass before some of the Dyna Soar technology was used in the Shuttle. Now, fifty years later, I think "Hot Eagle" has a very good chance of making it off the drawing board and into the inventory of the United States military.
Spaceplanes like the Dyna Soar aren't the only option for the Space Marines. The McDonnell Douglas Delta Clipper represents a type of vertical takeoff and landing spaceship that could land in a smaller area than a glider.
McDonnel Douglas' Delta Clipper lost out to the more excitingly innovative technologies of Lockheed Martin's X33, with its linear aerospike engine.
Unlike the X33, which had to be scrapped around the turn of the century, the Delta Clipper actually flew in the late nineties. It's not hard to imagine that engineers could take data from the Delta Clipper tests and begin work on a new vertical takeoff and landing single-stage-to-orbit spaceship.
Marines in Spaceships? Yes, it Makes Sense
Production models of "Hot Eagle" would 'fly' more than 50 miles up: above what most countries claim as their airspace. That would make it possible to 'send in the Marines' without getting the permission of every country along the route: and probably tipping off the enemy in the process.
The psychological impact of having Marines landing in spaceships, hours after an incident, might be almost as effective as the next-generation non-lethal weapons that some find so scary. Although a few shiploads of Marines might not be able to deal with all aspects of a mission, I think they would at the least be able to buy time until slower military units caught up.
I may not live to see Space Marines, but I'm glad to read that some of America's leaders are planning ahead. Slightly-related post in another blog:
"The American military is planning a 'spaceplane' designed to fly a crack squad of heavily armed marines to trouble spots anywhere in the world within two hours.
"At a recent secret meeting at the Pentagon, engineers working on the craft, codenamed Hot Eagle, were told to draw up blueprints for a prototype which generals want to have in the air within 11 years.
"The American military is planning a 'spaceplane' designed to fly a crack squad of heavily armed marines to trouble spots anywhere in the world within four hours.
"At a recent secret meeting at the Pentagon, engineers working on the craft, codenamed Hot Eagle, were told to draw up blueprints for a prototype which generals want to have in the air within 11 years."
"Future Launch" A few visionary Marines would take expeditionary warfare to new heights Navy League of the United States (undated)
"Think back to the Iranian hostage crisis of the late 1970s. For 444 days, the United States was rendered impotent after a mob of Iranians overran the Marine Guard and took the U.S. Embassy staff hostage.
"President Jimmy Carter, who had promised during his election campaign to reverse the country's 'crisis of confidence' and 'national malaise,' looked powerless during the long hostage crisis as Americans were reminded nightly that their countrymen were being held against their will, and there was nothing the United States could do about it."
"During its brief existence, the nation's first space plane fostered research and technology that influenced space efforts for years to come.
"When NASA announced in the spring of 2003 that its next major project would be the design and launch of an orbital space plane, many in the space community sensed that the nation's space program had come full circle. An Air Force program to develop a similar orbiting space plane, the Dyna-Soar, was the first in the nation's history to result in the manufacture of hardware. The Dyna-Soar program was truly a pioneering effort, and although it was canceled in December 1963 without achieving flight, it fostered research that was later applied to the development of the space shuttle and other U.S. space systems."
Don't tell anybody, but it looks like the "Surge" worked. Marines are moving out of Fallujah.
It's not like the fall of Saigon, or this withdrawal would have gotten more coverage. Vietnam: now that was a war! Best of all, from one point of view, there was that dramatic climax in Saigon, showing the futility and human cost of American imperialistic militarism. Or Militaristic, imperialistic, Americanism. Or imperialistic American militarism. Or whatever.
There's been so little violence around Fallujah and elsewhere in the Anbar province, that Marine Major General John Kelly decided it was time to go. Now that the local and regional authorities can handle the situation, the Marines are quietly leaving. Mission accomplished. For now, at any rate.
Odds are pretty good that you haven't read about this in the news. It isn't anywhere near as important, from some points of view, as the trial of a Marine. He's accused of murdering someone. Now, that's news!
Suppressing Surge Success: Some Kind of Plot?
I do not believe that news organizations around the world are engaged in some conspiracy to keep us from knowing The Truth. If I did, I'd probably assume that CNN and the BBC were part of the 'vast right-wing conspiracy,' for their 'cover-up' of the 'real' "Joe the Plumber" story.
I do think that reporters, and particularly editors, see what they believe is true, based on their culture and preferences about how the world should work. Which makes the case of the murderous Marine a whole lot more important than a troop surge resulting in an outbreak of comparative peace.
Besides, it's so much more dramatic when America is failing.
No, not really. But it looks like we'll be hearing that they're to blame.
Few things are simple, and Saturday's attack on the Islamabad Marriott hotel is no exception.
Just the Facts: And Innuendo
You've probably heard that the Marriott in Islamabad burned after a truck bomb attack last Saturday.
You may even have heard that it's America's fault. More specifically, it's the fault of the Marines.
Sure, the Anjuman Fidayeen-e-Islam, or The Fedayeen of Islam, a bunch that nobody seems to have heard of before, say they did it. But it was the fault of the Marines. Or America.
That seems to be the implication of an article in Prensa Latina, published today.
They could be right. I don't doubt the facts, as stated:
"...The case emerged when Representative Mumtaz Alam Gilani denounced a mysterious and secret movement last Wednesday night by US Marines who supposedly were introducing iron boxes without being checked by security personnel of the hotel
"This happened after the Chief of US Troops, Admiral Mike Fullen, had a meeting in Islamabad with the country's main military chiefs.
"In a statement, the US embassy insists today that it was a support team that usually precedes or accompanies American authorities.
"The News reports, however, that the government already had information that various rooms on the fourth floor of the Marriott were permanently occupied by US authorities and had equipment and other material used for espionage...."
Marines "supposedly" carried boxes into the Marriott without having the house detectives look inside
An unusually anonymous source in "the government" says that there's a nest of foreign (American, in this case) spies in the hotel
Some time after the Marines took the boxes into the hotel, a truck blew up at the gate
Then the hotel burned down
My hat's off to Prensa Latina, for the way they wrote the article. Specifying that the containers were iron boxes conjured visions of Fu Manchu-style intrigue, Humphrey Bogart movies, even secret pirate treasure.
It could be pure coincidence that the mailing address for Prensa Latina gives is "Calle 23 esq. N Vedado, La Habana - Cuba," but I think that Prensa Latina might have a well-defined editorial slant regarding America.
Good Guys, Bad Guys, and Everyone In Between
Secret agents and mysterious iron boxes aside, there's quite a great deal of uncertainty about Saturday's explosion.
One of the few things that are known is that it was a big explosion, a big fire, and that a lot of people got killed. Over four dozen, at least. One Pakistani official called it the biggest attack in seven years.
At best, I think it'll be years before we know who actually sent some suicide driver in that truck. The modus operandi suggests Taliban and/or Al Qaeda: both of which have reasonably secure bases in the tribal regions of Pakistan. But methods can be copied, so it's anyone's guess who is responsible.
According to CNN, Al-Arabiya TV reported that it, Al-Arabiya, got an audio recording from some groups calling itself "The Fedayeen of Islam," but noted that it, Al-Arabiya, couldn't tell if the recording was the real McCoy, or if the name of the group was for real.
Assuming that CNN's coverage of Al-Arabiya's reporting of a previously-unknown group's audio recording is accurate:
The Fedayeen of Islam say that 250 U.S. Marines and other U.S. and NATO officials were inside the hotel when it burned
The Fedayeen of Islam 'regretted the attack,' but that it was necessary - They've got demands
American-Pakistani joint efforts must end
All military operations in Pakistan's tribal regions must end
There's more, but CNN didn't go into that
"Mujahadeen" prisoners in American prisons must be released
So far, we've got mysterious iron boxes, a claim of responsibility from an unknown organization that demands the release of prisoners that nobody else seems to know about. All the story needs now is the possibility that high-level Pakistani officials knew about the attack before it happened.
Dinner Plans, or No Dinner Plans: That is the Question
One of the questions, anyway.
Pakistan's Interior Ministry head, Rehman Malik, said that Pakistan's president, prime minister and other leaders had planned to dine at the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad on Saturday night. Then, President Asif Ali Zardari asked to move the event to the prime minister's compound.
Which was a good thing for President Zardari. If he'd been at the Marriott, he'd most likely be as dead as the Czech Ambassador, Ivo Zdarek.
The hotel management, on the other hand, insists that there were no dinner plans, changed or otherwise, for the Pakistani officials at the Marriott. And Pakistani Senator Javed Ashraf Qazi said he was invited to the dinner but it was always scheduled to be at the prime minister's office. Which could be true.
Even the professional and cautious CNN wrote that the lack of fit between the stories of the Pakistani Interior Ministry chief, a Pakistani senator, and the Marriott management "raised questions as to how much the government knew about the planned attack...."
Since the person who said 'plans were changed' was named, and since Rehman Malik is Pakistan's Interior Ministry head, I think there's a chance that plans were changed: possibly for innocent reasons. Innocent or not, if Senator Javed Ashraf Qazi's assertion isn't accurate, there's a whacking great coincidence here, at the very least.
Like Yemen, Pakistan is an ally of America. With Al Qaeda and Taliban bases operating within its borders.
Pakistan either can't or won't remove those bases.
And, Pakistan's government doesn't want any help. Last week, we heard that a Pakistani leader gave Pakistan's troops orders to shoot America soldiers if they tried to deal with Al Qaeda or Taliban forces inside Pakistan.
On the other hand, maybe they didn't. Some Pakistani officials said it wasn't so.
Now, the Associated Press is saying that two American intelligence officials reported Pakistani troops and tribesmen shooting at American helicopters inside Pakistan. And, that the Pentagon said it wasn't so.
Good guys? Bad guys? It isn't that simple. We've got a situation where
National leaders in the Middle East are dealing with people living within their territory who don't like the idea of nations - and have the firepower to be more than annoying
Terrorists (or activists, or whatever you want to call them) are as hard to keep track of as mercury that's been hit with a hammer - They
Aren't tied to one territory, as nations are
May have the support of people who think that Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and similar groups
Are defending Islam
Deserve support, based on tribal loyalties
May dissolve and re-form under new names
Conflicting accounts are broadcast around the world before bureaucracies get facts through 'regular channels' and decide what to say
News organizations, from The New York Times and Prensa Latina to CNN, are dealing with a world that doesn't fit their Cold War templates
And that's just scratching the surface.
Oh the other hand, although there probably aren't (purely) good guys and (purely) bad guys, I think there are (fairly) good sides and (decidedly) bad sides.
Al Qaeda, the Taliban, the Iranian regime, and other like-minded organizations, do seem to have a clear idea of what they want: a world that's run much more tidily, and according to their rules.
The burqa-yes, trouser-no dress code alone would hard for westerners to live with. Never mind what would happen to the status of women, and anyone who didn't see eye-to-eye with the local imam.
Americans, and quite a few other people, have gotten used to living with a degree of personal freedom that doesn't seem to be part of Al Qaeda's dream.
We won't find perfectly good guys in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Indonesia, or America. But I think there are people who are willing to keep followers of Osama bin Laden and Iran's ayatollahs from replacing the bikini with the burqa, and turning the clock back to the good old days, when the local despot had life-and-death control over his subjects.
Freedom on speech is a great thing. As well as enlivening public debate and helping to hold our leaders accountable, it occasionally provides entertainment for civilians stateside, and target practice for our troops.
The Real Truth About Iraq: Inquiring Minds Want to Know?
"U.S. troops serving in Iraq may be getting more letters during mail call, but they won't be care packages — one group is sending them letters and DVDs claiming 9/11 was an 'inside job' and that they should rethink why they're fighting...."
" 'People want the facts. The Marines are hungry for the truth — what got them there [in Iraq], why are they risking their lives — and we're going to help them understand that,' "
(Mark Dice, founder of The Resistance, presenting his concerns to Fox News"Group Plans to Send Letters to Troops in Iraq on How U.S. Government Planned 9/11," FoxNews.com (June 10, 2008))
The Resistance says it's a media watchdog, which might explain why "Dice plans to send letters and declassified government documents that he says can prove the government’s responsibility for the terrorist attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people...."
America is a free country, and Mr. Dice has a right to send mail. Although I've got to think that he wishes he'd done this before the postal rates went up. Say, maybe that's part of the government conspiracy to silence the truth!
To his credit, Mr. Dice has altruistic motives:
"Dice told FOX News that he's trying to help troops by giving a voice to people 'afraid to speak up out of fear of punishment' from their superiors.
" 'We're trying to create a climate that's safe for these people to ask real questions . . . so we can get our boys back as soon as possible, safe and sound,' he said." 1
Meanwhile, Back in Our World
" 'These letters will end up in the toilet or on the firing range,' said Capt. Pete Hegseth, executive director of Vets for Freedom and a veteran of the Iraq War. 'They just laugh off this kind of stuff.'
"Hegseth told FOX News that American troops don’t need help from Dice to figure out why they’re in Iraq.
" 'The fact of the matter is most soldiers and Marines understand why they’re fighting,' Hegseth said. 'These are volunteers who believe in their service - they believe in the mission they’ve been sent to do.' "
(Mark Dice, founder of The Resistance, presenting his concerns to Fox News"Group Plans to Send Letters to Troops in Iraq on How U.S. Government Planned 9/11," FoxNews.com (June 10, 2008))
Volunteers, yes, but doesn't 'everybody know' that the American armed forces are made up of ignorant, poor, minorities who have been duped and abused by an oppressive system?
I'll get back to that later.
What America Needs are Better Conspiracy Theories
One thing that troubles me about conspiracy theories in general, and those involving 9/11 in particular, is a sort of failure of vision.
Starting with an attack of epic proportions - thousands of people dying as a pair of great skyscrapers fall; heroic passengers and crew of an airliner dying as they stop terrorists from wreaking havoc at some still-unknown target; and yet another airliner plowing into the Pentagon - conspiracy theorists seem content to trot out those old standbys, the CIA and the FBI, or some shadowy generic 'government conspiracy.'
Where's the excitement in that?
Let's see some imagination: take the events of 9/11, mix in the Illuminati, space aliens, and Elvis. Yes, Elvis. Why not say that he's one of Them? (And not as old by now as you'd think - he's been in cryogenic stasis, and has been for several years before his supposed death. What everyone was seeing was a double, hired for the part. The double finally gained so much weight that he had to be killed.)
To give Mark Dice his due, he does seem to be one of the more gifted conspiracy theorists. He "believes that Freemasons worship Satan and that 'the United States military has built enormous underground cities for the political elite.' " 2
Now, something a bit more serious.
Everybody Knows that America's Poor and Minorities are Fighting America's Wars, Right?
"Everybody knowing" that something's so doesn't make it true.
If anything, the military is victimizing moderately well-educated middle class people from rural areas: particularly the south (remember, not everybody in the south is a 'minority').
I did a little digging around, and came up with some interesting facts, like
"the Department of Defense reported that the mean reading level of 2004 recruits is a full grade level higher than that of the comparable youth population"
A study found more high school grads in the military than on the street, noting "the significant difference between the national recruit high school graduation rate of 98 percent and the national youth graduation rate of 75 percent"
I'm surprised we haven't heard about this: one racial group is very over-represented in America's military, although "minority representation varies between being moderately proportional to extremely disproportional. The most overrepresented group is Native Hawaiian/ Other Pacific Islander, with a ratio of 7.49 in 2005, or an overrepresentation of 649 percent. The Asian category is the most underrepresented group, with a ratio of 0.69 in 2005."
But, the military-industrial complex is victimizing the poor, who have nowhere else to turn, right? Not really: "The estimate for mean household income of recruits increased every year from 2003 through 2005. The poorest areas continue to be underrepresented, while middle-class areas are overrepresented. Although the richest income brackets are underrepresented, the difference between the recruit and population proportions for these brackets is less than 0.25 percent. Overall, the distribution for recruit household incomes is very similar to that of the youth population."
("Who Are the Recruits? The Demographic Characteristics of U.S. Military Enlistment, 2003–2005" (The Heritage Foundation (October 27, 2006)) And yes, I know: that's a conservative group, "committed to building an America where freedom, opportunity, prosperity and civil society flourish." (Talk about radicals!) That was the most recent, readable, and well-documented discussion of the topic I could find. 1 "Our boys?" Mr. Dice may not be aware of the Women's Armed Services Integration Act of 1948, the fighter squadrons in the U.S. Air Force and Navy whose commanders are women, or soldiers like Sergeant Hester, who led her team out of an ambush in Iraq, killing three insurgents in the process. 2 UPDATE (June 11, 2008)
As with many conspiracy theories, there's an element of truth to the "enormous underground cities for the political elite" belief. The Greenbrier Bunker, built under a luxury resort in the West Virginia mountains, was built during the cold war. The idea was that, if a nuclear attack was imminent the House of Representatives and the Senate could be evacuated there, and keep the American government running.
I suppose you could call it "enormous," if your standards are low enough. The facility has two floors and dozens of rooms.
PBS has a pretty good overview of The Greenbrier Bunker, "Tour The Greenbrier Bunker." The Greenbrier bunker is no secret now. "Compromised by an investigative reporter in 1993, the bunker is now open to the public." PBS tells a little about "...thirty-five years of deception and intrigue deep in the mountains of West Virginia...", and gives some familiar information about what would happen if a fission or fusion bomb went off in your general area.
Obviously, though, if you're into conspiracy theories, you'll believe that The Greenbrier bunker is just a ploy to dupe the gullible: and that the real underground city is somewhere else.
"...since he was a Marine and didn't have any money he didn't deserve to live...."
An interesting attitude, to say the least.
Marine Lance Corporal Robert Crutchfield was home on leave, at a bus stop, with his girlfriend, when thugs shot him. He died months later, from an infection.
His death is a loss to his family, and to America.
"Who's to blame?" I can imagine some fairly stock responses:
The Bush administration, for deceiving America and invading Iraq through a culture of deception (this practically makes sense, since Corporal Crutchfield probably wouldn't have been standing on that corner if it weren't for American military actions in Iraq)
America's military-industrial complex, because the dead Marine had been following his (military) commander's advice when he was killed
Liberal media, for whipping anti-America feelings up to a fever pitch
And of course, an oldie but goodie: Crutchfield was a victim of victims of society.
There isn't enough data in the news reports to make a sensible choice, but I'm inclined to think that whoever pulled the trigger is personally responsible for making a decision to kill someone else out of pique. It's likely that the killer was disappointed because the corporal didn't have much money.
Here's an excerpt from the news, about this Marine. I suggest that you read the whole article: he sounds like a fine young man, and I'm sure that his friends and family miss him.
"On leave from the violence he had survived in the war in Iraq, a young Marine was so wary of crime on the streets of his own home town that he carried only $8 to avoid becoming a robbery target.
"Despite his caution, Lance Cpl. Robert Crutchfield, 21, was shot point-blank in the neck during a robbery at a bus stop...."
"Crutchfield was attacked on January 5 while he and his girlfriend were waiting for a bus. He had heeded the warnings of commanders that a Marine on leave might be seen as a prime robbery target with a pocketful of money, so he only carried $8, his military ID card and a bank card.
" 'They took it, turned his pockets inside out, took what he had and told him since he was a Marine and didn't have any money he didn't deserve to live. They put the gun to his neck and shot him,' Holt Crutchfield's aunt] told The Associated Press...."
"... Connie LaNasa, who works in the school office, said Crutchfield was a well-behaved student and went about his school work with little notice.
" 'He lived out what he wanted to do and that is to be a Marine,' LaNasa said.
"Faculty members remembered Crutchfield as a top student in the computer design program, an office assistant and participant in the prom fashion show."
Now, about America's involvement in Ohio: Of course, I don't think America should pull out. Appealing as the idea is, I don't think that any American state or city should be abandoned, just because it's a dangerous place to live. The people who live there deserve better.
Although the circumstances are very different, I think that American involvements in other parts of the world are important. I also think that America has a responsibility, as one of the few countries or organizations which care about freedom - and can do something about that concern.
This must be a frustrating time for Berkeleyites and other anti-American atavisms.
Yearning for My Lai?
Back in the Golden Age of the sixties, the "My Lai massacre" was so well-known, and so many Americans had been properly conditioned, that "My Lai" generated an intense, visceral response almost everywhere. And maybe a sit-in, or even a protest march. Those were the days!
Four years ago, Abu Ghraib showed real promise. In the first months of 2004, people around the world were being disgusted by more and more photos of disgusting things that were being done in a prison in Iraq. I got the impression that the Al Jazeera version, that "US commander 'allowed prison abuse' " was the default attitude. To be fair, Aljazeera did write that there was a US army inquiry into the mess.
In fact, American military officials realized that something was wrong, and had been investigating Abu Ghraib since August 11, 2003.
What Went So Wrong?!
Possibly because news today isn't controlled by the tight little quartet of The New York Times, ABC, CBS, and NBC, with PBS riding point, Americans just don't seem to be as well managed these days. Four years later, Abu Ghraib just doesn't have the traction of My Lai: and Abu Ghraib was a real scandal1.
Back to Reality: A Marine, a Puppy(?), and a Video
Recently, someone put a video on YouTube. It showed someone in what looks like a Marine lance corporal's uniform, throwing what looks like a puppy (the puppy doesn't move) over a cliff. There's even an off-camera yelp.
Shocking! Deplorable!
Well, yes: it is. At least, the Marines think so.
"'The video is shocking and deplorable and is contrary to the high standards we expect of every Marine,' Major Chris Perrine, the public affairs director at the Marine Corps base in Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii, said in a statement.
" 'This video came to our attention this morning, and we have initiated an investigation,' he said. 'We do not tolerate this type of behavior and will take appropriate action.' "
Posts I found in the blogosphere about this latest evidence of American atrocities was surprisingly low-key:
That last blog ("Marine Tosses Puppy ....") observed that the video was of low quality to begin with, and that YouTube compression hadn't done it any favors. Also that the yelp didn't seem to exhibit a doppler effect (what happens with sound and motion that makes a passing truck sound like it's going "wheeee-oooo.")
I'd like to believe that the video is a fake, but it's possible that there is a Marine out there who threw a puppy down a cliff, and someone who videotaped the animal abuse. If that's so, I'm sincerely glad that I'm not that Marine.
This Isn't the Sixties
As for whether the puppy-pitching perpetrator will become a center of anti-American feelings in the tradition of My Lai, I doubt it. This isn't the sixties any more:
A few news editors on the coasts don't decide what Americans hear and read. A fragmented assortment of news outlets, and hordes of bloggers, ensure that facts get out, no matter who doesn't like them
American society isn't focused on an angst-filled generation, whose parents had followed 'expert' advice while chasing a dream of material success
Remember those
'I Was a Teenage...' movies
Teen-on-the-street interviews, where reporters asked teens for opinions about socioeconomic aspects of contemporary political issues?
1The "My Lai massacre" doesn't seem to be quite the monstrous atrocity that Americans were led to believe. An alternative to the standard anti-American story:
The My Lai attack took place in a free fire zone (by definition occupied only by Viet Cong)
My Lai was be a supply depot for Viet Cong food and munitions
After questioning My Lai villagers turned out to be Viet Cong and/or VC sympathizers
My Lai villagers refused to expose spider/fighting holes, but U.S. soldiers found them anyway
The U.S. soldiers were battle weary, and believed that the villagers were the same enemy which had recently engaged them with sniper fire a booby traps: which wasn't too far from the truth
This fairly routine, if violent, act of war became an example of how heartless, cruel, and barbaric the American military was, back in the sixties. As I said before, it must be frustrating that "Abu Ghraib," representing a real set of atrocities, failed to become a rallying cry.
Gunnery Sergeant William "Spanky" Gibson lost most of his left leg in May, 2006. He was on foot patrol in Ramadi, Iraq.
He could have gotten a desk job, back in America. But he didn't. Sergeant Gibson is back in Iraq, his second tour, on active duty with his fellow-Marines.
Getting back on his feet, with an assortment of artificial legs for different functions, took work and determination.
"I realized, well, it ain't growing back, so let's start recovering," Sergeant Gibson said. "Initially, I didn't allow it to affect me to the point of despair ... Now, I roll over and look at my wife and say, this kind of sucks. But you get over it quickly."
Two months after he was shot, Gunnery Sergeant Gibson was back at Camp Lejeune. While training there, he decided that he needed to go back to Iraq. "It's in part to show appreciation to my fallen Marines and also to tell the people of this country that ... I'm back to help you in any way I can, again."
Today's Iraq isn't the country he left, almost two years ago.
"The country itself, it's changed tremendously," he said. "I don't know if I ever thought I'd see it, but I hoped that our actions here ... would allow that change to happen, and now seeing it, it's amazing."
He looks at what's happening in Iraq as the rebirth of a country. "This is where we were 232 years ago as a new nation," he said. "Now they're starting a new nation, and that's one of my big reasons for coming back here. It wasn't for other Marines to look at me and say, 'Oh wow, you're a tough guy.' "
Hats off to Gunnery Sergeant Gibson, and all the other soldiers and technicians who are helping Iraqis put their country back together after decades of a tyrant's mismanagement: And helping keep America safe. Quotes from "Iraq War Marine With Amputated Leg Back in Active Duty" FOXNews (February 28, 2008)
"Desert dogs" are pretty common around Iraq's border towns. The dogs eat scraps from the towns, getting a steady source of food, Major Dennis wrote in an email. "The Iraqis get an incredible early warning system; these dogs hear anything approaching from miles away and go nuts and scramble to defend their territory."
Dennis is a fighter pilot, but was on the ground in Iraq, near the Syrian border. He'd volunteered to be part of the military team that's building infrastructure and training Iraqi forces to take over there.
He was on patrol when he saw a gray and white dog: most likely a German shepherd-border collie mix. Major Dennis named the dog Nubs after he learned that someone had cut the dog's ears off: apparently under the impression that it would make the dog more alert and aggressive.
The Marines did what you'd expect Americans to do to a crop-eared, half-wild dog1: they fed it.
Nubs started following the Dennis and the patrol on their rounds, and the Marines started looking for the dog. It wasn't an easy life for Nubs at that point. He'd lost a tooth and gotten bitten in the neck.
Then, in December of 2007, with temperatures near freezing, somebody stuck a screwdriver into Nubs.
Major Dennis found Nubs, put antibiotic on the wound, and slept with the dog to keep him warm. The Marine wrote, "I really expected when I woke up for watch he would be dead."
Nubs lived.
Days later, Major Dennis and the outfit he was with moved to the command post, about 65 miles away. He thought he'd seen the last of Nubs.
Wrong again.
Two days after the move, while working on a Humvee, Dennis looked up. Nubs was there, staring at him.
That was the good news.
The bad news is that the rules said 'no pets on the base.' Major Dennis was given two options: put the dog off the base, or kill him. He was given four days to make his decision, and act.
The decision was simple, implementing was anything but.
Major Brian Dennis and his Iraqi interpreter got to work. They found a Jordanian veterinarian to take care of Nubs and fill out the necessary paperwork. Major Dennis got to work on red tape on his end, and his family and close friends collected the $3,500 it would take to move Nubs from Amman, Jordan, to San Diego, California.
At this point, Nubs is safe in San Diego, in the care of Captain Eric Sjoberg, a colleague of Major Dennis. Captain Sjoberg is teaching Nubs to "just be a dog."
Major Dennis and Nubs should be together next month, when the Marine gets back to America. 1 Students and faculty of American colleges and universities, residents of Berkeley, and people who never got over the sixties notwithstanding.
Toledo's Mayor Finkbeiner wouldn't let Marines get off a bus in his city earlier this month.
The Marines had planned to conduct a three-day urban patrol exercise downtown, as they had about two years ago. The Marines would have been working out of the Madison Building. Toledo owns the building, and it's mostly vacant.
A city employee, acting on instructions from Mayor Finkbeiner, told them they couldn't get off the buses.
I suppose that the mayor might have let the Marines know they weren't wanted earlier, but he says he was taken by surprise. Although some of Toledo's police officials had known about the Marines' plans for weeks, the mayor apparently didn't know about the exercise until he read about it in the "Toledo Blade."
That's plausible: the police wear uniforms, like soldiers do, and have a paramilitary organization. That could make them very hard for some people to communicate with. Graduates of the sixties who remember their lessons know that only squares hang with the fuzz.
Now Toledo businesses are paying for the mayor's decision. Organizations and businesses outside Toledo are having second thoughts about deals they had been considering.
Mayor Finkbeiner - Defender of Toledo's Feelings
Mayor Finkbeiner explained his reasons for refusing to let about 200 Marines practice urban warfare in Toledo.
Essentially, he seems to be afraid of soldiers, and assumes that everyone in Toledo is, too.
Mayor Finkbeiner told the "Toledo Blade:" "No matter how much I respect, love, and appreciate the military, there are better places to conduct military planning and staging sessions than the central business district," establishing a reasonable and conciliatory tone. "I think the military brass would understand and appreciate that."
Then, we get to Mayor Finkbeiner's reason for ordering the Marines out of town. He didn't want what the "Blade" called "a repeat of the last time the Marines' battalion trained downtown in May, 2006."
"I saw the military with guns drawn emulating warfare, and I observed the expressions of citizens who happened to just be coming down the sidewalk that particular Saturday noon in wonderment, asking, 'What have I found myself in the middle of?' " Mayor Finkenbeiner said. "There was a look of wonderment on some people's faces, and there was a look of fear on other people's faces."
Guns + uniforms = fear.
I understand that reaction all to well: I remember the sixties.
Fearful Feelings and Marines in Camouflage
Not everyone in the Toledo area share their mayor's feelings, though. According to the "Toledo Blade," A 55-year-old man from West Toledo, Douglas Finch, Sr., couldn't believe the mayors "concerns."
Mr. Finch was there, in May of 2006, when the Marines were downtown with their camouflage and rifles. The sight was grabbed his attention, but it wasn't scary. "We have enough empty buildings here, so why not let them train in one?" Mr. Finch said.
Good question.
I think the answer is that the Mayor of Toledo is one of a not-inconsiderable number of Americans who
Don't like war (a reasonable attitude, shared by quite a number of soldiers, I've read)
Think war is unnecessary (a much more debatable belief)
Are frightened of soldiers - any soldiers (a regrettable and somewhat pathetic response)
There are some people - like the late U.S. Representative Tom Lantos, who survived the Holocaust, who might understandably be afraid of uniforms.
Most people, who grew up in America, have no practical reason for fearing the American military.
It's too bad that several generations have now grown up with a conditioned fear of the warriors who defend them. Particularly since these days, there are people out there that Americans really should be afraid of. More:
News "Finkbeiner taking flak over Marines - Mayor defends his decision to cancel urban war games" "Toledo Blade" (February 10, 2008) (The source for the quotes and most facts in this post.)
Op Ed "Don't Blame Us For Berkeley/Toledo Attacks Against Marines Say Businesses" "NewsBusters" (February 16, 2008) (The writer argues that Toledo businesses deserve to lose business, since Toledoans elected their gun-shy mayor. Unless Finkbeiner was elected by a landslide, there's a problem with the idea - but that's a topic for someone else's blog.)
In which we learn that "neutral" in Berkeleyish means "I'll let protesters block the entrance to this Marine recruitment center, but I won't let you in."
"The Berkeley City Council voted early Wednesday to rescind a previous vote that said Marine recruiters are "not welcome in this city," but held tight to its anti-war stance."
"An American flag was set aflame outside the City Council chambers, damaging a pair of bicycles, police said."
"Inside, members of the anti-war group Code Pink lined up at the podium to speak. Their salmon-colored signs read, "Berkeley says No to War" and "City Council - We have your back.""
"Protesters with Code Pink have been camped outside the Marine recruiting office on Shattuck Avenue for the last four months, singing peace songs and chanting slogans for an end to the Iraq war."
Code Pink has a special status in Berkeley. That anti-war group, whose members seem to date from the wild and wacky Sixties, have their own special parking spot, right in front of the USMC recruiting office: provided by the city of Berkeley. Sweet!
The little matter of a taxpayer-supported protest parking place doesn't seem to show up in the national news: but the "San Francisco Chronicle's" SFGate.com reported it: "The [Berkeley] council voted late Tuesday to give Code Pink a designated parking space directly in front of the recruiting station, as well as a sound permit for once-a-week protests." "SFGate.com" (February 1, 2008)
Now that's what I call free speech, Berkeley style! A group on one side of a debate getting its very own designated parking space, courtesy of a city government. Somehow, though, I rather doubt that Berkeley will provide a group like the VFW with the same level of service and deference: unless the VFW has the correct opinion, of course. I wrote about Berkeley and the Marines earlier: "What a Country! Flower Children vs. the U.S. Marines" (February 1, 2008).
The photo shows two Marines holding the United States Marine Corps flag against a wall. Under the flag are the words, "some gave all so others may live - USMC," and four names: Strain, Lucente, Stokes, and Krissof.
Those four were the war dead of Nevada County, California. "The Union" of Grass Valley, CA, shared information about Marine Lance Corporal Adam Strain, Marine Lance Corporal John Lucente, Marine 1st Lieutenant Nathan Krissoff, and Corporal Sean Stokes.
One of them, Marine 1st Lieutenant Nathan Krissoff, died on December 9, 2006, after a roadside bombing a roadside bombing in Anbar Province. Coping with his death wasn't easy for his brother, Marine 2nd Lieutenant Austin Krissoff, or his parents.Christine and Dr. Bill Krissoff.
"We are proud of him," Dr. Krisoff said in "The Union." "He believed in fighting terrorism. It was important to him. He was deeply affected by 9/11."
Marine 1st Lieutenant Nathan Krissoff's father thought for several months, about how he could best honor his son. On consideration, he decided that his best course was to join the United States Navy as a combat surgeon.
There was a problem: at 61, he needed an age waiver to join the service. His application's paperwork was moving slowly, at best, until August. That's when President Bush met with several families who had lost people in Iraq. Dr. Krisoff was there.
The president went around the room, asking if there was anything he could do. Dr. Krissoff remembers that when Bush got to him, "I said, 'Yah, there is one thing. I want to join the Navy medical corps and I gotta get some help here.' "
Three days later, the Navy called Dr. Krissoff. The paperwork was taken care of, and his waver was granted.
Bill Krissoff is a lieutenant commander, attached to the 4th Medical Battalion. He hopes to join a combat surgical team and serve in Iraq.
That may not be heroism, but I think it'll do until something better comes along.
Back in September 27, 2007, over two hundred soldiers and United States Marines were ordered to get out of their chartered airplane, North American Airlines Flight 1777, and told to wait on the grass, near the baggage trailers.
One Marine sent an email to Congress, expressing dissatisfaction with the incident.
The email, and more-or-less-accurate copies, started making the rounds on the Internet.
Some people said that the incident hadn't happened, and that the email was a fake. After all, there were several versions floating around: so none of them could be real?
Members of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee sent a letter, with the [real] email attached, to the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Oakland International Airport admitted that they kept the soldiers and Marines 400 yards away from the Terminal: and the restrooms.
Oakland International blamed TSA rules and the charter company.
The TSA denied that their regulations were involved.
It emerged that the Oakland bureaucrats probably didn't receive, lost, or ignored the flight's paperwork.
That brings us up to this week.
Around Wednesday, Oakland International apologized to the Marines. Sort of.
"We apologize, I apologize to any members of the military that were on this flight and may have experienced some discomfort or perception of disrespect," was what Omar Benjamin said. He's executive director of the Port of Oakland, the outfit that operates the airport.
"There was no disrespect intended," he added.
Even with that "may have experienced ... perceptive of disrespect," I think it's as close to an apology that's likely to come from the Oakland transportation services. The "may have ... perception" business is most likely what an administrator faced with anachronistic, seventies-style, behavior by part of his outfit has to do: Try to put the best face possible on what happened, while not admitting enough to invite lawsuits.
How news services handled this was more interesting.
"Marines Miffed At Airport Mistreatment" is how MSNBC put it, displaying an article from KITV-TV, of Honolulu, HI. I like alliteration, but "Miffed" as a description of "Marines" is not something I'm likely to write. The American Heritage Dictionary defines "miffed" as " 1. A petulant, bad-tempered mood; a huff. 2. A petty quarrel or argument; a tiff."
Petulant? Huff? Tiff? Marines?! I'm inclined to see MSNBC's take on the incident as not entirely sympathetic with the Marines. In a way, I can see the news service's point of view. After all, the Marines were allowed to stand or sit on grass. They'd been in a war zone, so a strip of grass between an active runway and a taxi ramp in Oakland might be considered quite a treat.
Or not.
Here's how I see the way that anti-war/anti-military people and organizations have handled the way American soldiers were treated at Oakland International:
Ignore the incident.
Deny the incident, claim that the emailed report is a fake.
Admit the incident, but blame someone else.
Trivialize the incident.
Unfair? Maybe. But: Miffed Marines?! It's hard not to regard that as a deprecatory statement.
There's a little matter of over 200 U.S. soldiers and Marines ordered off their plane, 400 yards from the Oakland International Airport terminal last week.
Now that it's fairly obvious that over 200 soldiers and Marines were left outside for two hours for no practical reason, the Oakland fellows are saying that they didn't have the proper paperwork.
One of the grotesque aspects of the war on terror is that quite a few Americans don't seem to realize who has their interests at heart, and who doesn't. For example:
Last Thursday, September 27, 2007, over two hundred soldiers and United States Marines, bound for Hawaii after a tour of duty in Iraq, landed in New York City. They passed through customs and security screening at JFK International Airport. They had already cleared security once before, in Germany.
Then, they proceeded to Oakland International Airport, a stopover on their way to their base in Honolulu, Hawaii.
The authorities at Oakland, leaning that over two hundred big, rough, people with guns were coming, had the charter plane stop 400 yards short of the terminal. The soldiers and Marines were told to get out of the plane, and stay on the grass between an active runway and a taxi ramp. There the people who have been defending America waited.
Over two hundred U.S. soldiers and Marines, following orders and staying on the grass.
Not allowed to go into the terminal.
Somewhat more to the point, not allowed to use the terminal's restrooms.
For about two hours.
They're U.S. military. They know how to follow orders. But this time, they didn't like it. As one Marine put it, in an email, "If felt like being spit on. Every Marine and soldier felt the message loud and clear. 'YOU ARE NOT WELCOME IN OAKLAND!'"
Now that Oakland International's little oopsie is an understated news item, the Oakland authorities are blaming the TSA and the charter company used by the soldiers and Marines. The TSA, at least, is disputing their claim.
Do the people at Oakland realize that the United States Marines and other branches of the U.S. military are on their side?
Assuming that whoever is running Oakland International thought there was live ammunition on the plane, and that the passengers were hostile, did they honestly believe they could have stopped an armed force which included U.S. Marines, after that force had established a beachhead only 400 yards from the terminal? Granted, there's negligible cover out there, but these are U.S. soldiers and Marines.
I'm inclined to think that the Marine's interpretation of Oakland International's apparently lunatic behavior is correct.
Particularly since this isn't the first time it's happened. Oakland wouldn't let Marines in the terminal, back in 2006.
This could be some sort of honest, if stupid, mix-up. But I doubt it.
Granted, this seems to be a case of the TSA and two hundred soldiers and Marines saying one thing, and whoever runs Oakland International saying another.
However, if forced to choose, I'm less likely to take the word of bureaucrats being important a few miles south of Berkeley: and more likely to take the word of a United States Marine.
(Attention, those of delicate constitution: Please read the following first!)
The United States Marines did not invade New York City recently.
The USMC did not try to invade San Francisco.
The uniformed Marines in New York were filming a recruiting commercial.
A film crew recorded the U.S. Marine Silent Drill Platoon's performance in New York's Times Square: right through a Monday morning rush hour.
The Marines wanted to film a performance in San Francisco, too, on California Street.
San Francisco Film Commission Executive Director Stefanie Coyote said that was impossible. No can do.
Well, not quite. She'd let a film crew on California, providing there none of those big, rough, Marines in the picture. The can-do Marine film crew took pictures of the empty street. The Marines can be added later.
Not everyone in San Francisco is Marineophobic.
Captain Greg Corrales, commander of the traffic bureau handles film crews in San Francisco, for example. "It's insulting, it's demeaning. This woman is going to insult these young heroes by just arbitrarily saying, 'no, you're not going to film any Marines on California Street," he said.
Captain Corrales may be biased. He's a former Marine. On top of that, his son is on his third tour of duty in Iraq.
The captain says Film Commission Executive Director Stefanie Coyote would only allow the Marine's production crew to film on California Street if there were no Marines in the picture. They wound up filming the empty street and will have to superimpose the Marines later.
"Ms. Coyote's politics blinded her to her duty as the director of the Film Commission and as a responsible citizen," said Captain Corrales.
KGO-TV asked Stefanie Coyote why she won't let the Marines to shoot on California Street. She wouldn't give an answer. She was more talkative ot yesterday's Film Commission meeting. "Traffic control was the issue," she explained.
Oddly, one lane of California Street at a time would have been shut down, for a few minutes each. Captain Corrales said that the Film Commission often approves filming during rush hour.
If it weren't for Captain Corrales, I'd say that the reason New York could handle the Marines, and San Francisco couldn't was that NYC had New York's Finest.
As it is, I'd say that the Captain is right. "Ms. Coyote's politics blinded her to her duty as the director of the Film Commission and as a responsible citizen," he said, according to KGO-TV.
So what?
Does it really matter that an official in San Francisco simply can't abide the presence of Marines? Or, maybe, because, just this once, San Francisco can't handle a traffic interruption?
I think so.
For starters, I believe Captain Corrales. I think that this was a political decision. As another Marine, Eric Snyder, said, "The city of San Francisco made a statement saying, 'we don't like the war' by shutting down the troops. I don't think that was the right thing to do."
KGO-TV talked to other Marines. The station said that they "also make the point that the city allows street demonstrations, anti-war protests and other events which snarl traffic, such as Critical Mass. They still don't understand why the Marines got turned away."
I think those Marines were being polite.
This is not how "free speech" works. At least, it shouldn't be.
San Francisco, by allowing traffic-snarling anti-war protests, but banning Marines who can march through Times Square in rush hour, has made something very clear. In San Francisco, all speech may be equal, but some sorts are more equal than others. (Thanks, Orwell.)
Wouldn't it be nice, if this sort of two-tier freedom of expression were something we found "Only in San Francisco.
"Inside Islam: Faith vs. Fanatics:" (October 20, 2007)
"Inside Islam: Faith vs. Fanatics" - This blogger's introduction (last section of "Muslims, Terrorism, Islam, PBS, and 'Inside Islam: Faith vs. Fanatics'")
Why post this list? Up to now, I've put the list at the end of related posts, letting it grow with each new post. Since I set up a list of posts dealing with Tolerance, Bigotry, Racism, Hatred: Real or Imagined today, I thought this would be a good time to do the same with posts on this cluster of topics.
Note! Although I believe that these websites and blogs are useful resources for understanding the War on Terror, I do not necessarily agree with their opinions. 1
Americas Interests.blog
an Australian's perspective
(on January 29, 2009 the author announced the end of new posts, and explained his reasons for doing so. He is, however, keeping the 21 months of accumulated posts on line, because of "the role that it plays in a larger ecosystem of information" - I recommend AI as an archival resource. )
Blog 4 Human Rights: Human Rights in Georgia (the nation)
News, Opinions, Videos and Photos (Why blogroll this? Georgia is about 10% Muslim, very near the Middle East: and human rights is a critical part of the War on Terror.)
The Conservative Hawk
An articulate conservative blog: definitely political, opinionated, informed, and intelligent
Defenders Council of Vermont
"...our mission is to educate the citizens of Vermont about the nature, reality and threat of radical Islam, deepen Vermonters' understanding of America's heritage, honor the men and women of the armed services and their families, and support the efforts of others to help our armed forces work with local populations in foreign lands."
DefenseLink Blogger's Roundtable
provides source material for stories in the blogosphere concerning the Department of Defense (DoD) by bloggers and online journalists.
FactCheck.org "aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics". It's "a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania". From what I've seen, this non-partisan website must be quite annoying to all sides
Foreign Policy Watch
"Diplomatic strategy, international news, and thoughtful political analysis"
www.free-minds.org
Another flavor of True Islam: one more articulate than many
Free Muslims Coalition
"American Muslims and Arabs of all backgrounds who feel that religious violence and terrorism have not been fully rejected by the Muslim community in the post 9-11 era."
GlobalSecurity.org
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.
We try to bring you the facts, to help you form your opinion."
IntelCenter
"Our focus as a company is on studying terrorist groups and other threat actors and disseminating that information in a timely manner to those who can act on it."
Iraq the Model
"New points of view about the future of Iraq."
Islam.com
"...an information portal site on the internet that is pure, clean and 'worthy of its name', InshaAllah."
islamispeace.org.uk
"...invites you to challenge your ideas of Islam and Muslims."
Islamic Circle of North America
"... to seek the pleasure of Allah (SWT) through the struggle of Iqamat-ud-Deen (establishment of the Islamic system of life) as spelled out in the Qur'an and the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)"
Islamic Society of Central Florida (ISCF)
"...an organization which strives to serve the greater Central Florida community by catering to the social, religious, and educational needs of its Muslim inhabitants."
Muir S. Fairchild Research Information Center
A research resource for United States Air Force Air University students, "provided as a public service by Muir S. Fairchild Research Information Center and the Maxwell Support Division."
Muslamics
Affad Shaikh and "A Writing Collaborative"
This American Muslim
Affad Shaikh, a very west-coast Muslim Los Angelano
Muslims Against Sharia An organization of Muslims, presumably dedicated "...to educate non-Muslims about the differences between moderate Muslims and Islamists..." - with a curious way of practicing Peace, Love Light, (words in their website's logo).
National Interest, and as a corollary, Primacy
"These are indeed my personal pontifications on the vicissitudes of International Affairs."
(Be prepared for big words, long sentences: and unexpected insights.)
Why Islam?
"... articles, books etc on Islam and comparative religion. ... initiated by volunteers from ICNA (Islamic Circle of North America). ..."
1 Given a recent misunderstanding of the phrase "useful resources," a clarification: I do not limit my reading to resources which support my views, or even to those which appear to be accurate. Reading opinions contrary to what I believed has been very useful at times: sometimes verifying my previous assumptions, sometimes encouraging me to change them.
Even resources which, in my opinion, are simply inaccurate are sometimes useful: these can give valuable insights into why some people or groups believe what they do.
In short, It is my opinion that some of the resources in this blogroll are neither accurate, nor unbiased. I do, however, believe that they are useful in understanding the War on Terror, the many versions of Islam, terrorism, and related topics.
