Showing posts with label freedom. Show all posts
Showing posts with label freedom. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Hack Attack: Good News, Bad news, Security, and Freedom

First, the good news. This could have been a lot worse:
"Sophisticated cyber-attack hits Energy Department, China possible suspect"
FoxNews.com (February 4, 2013)

"The Energy Department has been hit by a major cyber-attack, which resulted in the personal information of several hundred employees being compromised and could have been aimed at obtaining other sensitive information, The Washington Free Beacon reports.

"FBI agents are investigating the attacks, which happened two weeks ago, at the Washington-based headquarters. Fourteen computer servers and 20 workstations reportedly were penetrated during the attack....
It looks like the Energy Department's hack attack is about as serious matter as what happened to Sony Playstation back in 2011. (Apathetic Lemming of the North (April 26, 2011) Individuals were affected, and the organization had a public relations headache: but that's as far as the trouble went.

Apparently hackers got information about Energy Department employees. That could be serious for the individuals involved, if folks who steal identities for fun and profit get it. Identity theft is a real problem, and a bit off-topic for this blog.

Politics, Editorial Views, and Motive

I'm not familiar with the Washington Free Beacon, but understand that it's editorial stance is "conservative." That might explain why the service was interested in posting this article: but doesn't mean that the hack attack didn't happen.

Another Employer's Personnel Files Hacked: So What?

The Energy Department handles information that's a tad more important than usernames and passwords for online games. They're interested in solar energy, wind farms, nuclear weapons, and other energy-related tech. (More at energy.gov)

I don't share the reflexive revulsion toward nuclear weapons, and unquestioning enthusiasm over solar power, expressed by some of my contemporaries. On the other hand, on the whole I'd rather have some technical details of America's nuclear weapons stay where it's supposed to be.

Back to that article:
"...While no classified information was compromised, the Free Beacon reports there are indications the hackers could have been seeking access to such data. Chinese hackers may be suspects, as the department is a known target of Beijing -- according to the Free Beacon, the sophistication of the attack indicates the involvement of a foreign government.

"The department includes the National Nuclear Security Administration, which maintains nuclear weapons.

" 'It's a continuing story of negligence,' former Energy Department security official Ed McCallum told the Free Beacon, explaining that the department continues to have security problems despite controlling some of the most 'sophisticated military and intelligence technology the country owns.'..."
(FoxNews.com)
Mr. McCallum might simply be an irate ex-employee, out to make trouble for his former boss, he may be an irate ex-employee who's legitimately concerned about a clueless former boss, or maybe there's another explanation for what he said.

Old-School Skills, Information Age Issues

I think it's quite possible that whoever's making decisions at the Energy Department is well-meaning Washington bureaucrat: who is very good at managing paperwork; diligent in pursuing greater intradepartmental communication; and clueless about the Internet. Folks in top leadership positions tend to be a bit on the old side, and less than familiar with information technology:
Clueless management is funny - in the comics.

Dilbert.com

In the real world, having a boss who doesn't understand why keeping a network safe from hackers could be a big problem.

Being 'Protected'

I think it would be nice if everybody could share information about anything, and do so without being concerned about anyone's safety. I also think it would be nice if everybody would be nice: but that's not the way the world is.

Reality being what it is, there is a need for secrets: and weapons, and that's almost another topic. Folks who decided to kill several thousand people on September 11, 2001, were not nice. What's happened since strongly indicates that outfits like Al Qaeda and the Taliban are still determined to behave badly.

Sadly, they're not the only ones who threaten the safety of the rest of us.

China isn't the same country it was a half-century back: but its leadership still seems to be unwilling to accept folks whose ideas don't follow the 'party line.' China isn't alone, of course. It's easy to see disagreement as a threat.


I'm concerned about threats from outside America. I'm also concerned about Americans who want to 'protect' us from ideas they don't like. And that is another topic. (March 9, 2008)

Related posts:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Monday, December 10, 2012

Egypt, America, and 'Preserving Freedom'

I wasn't entirely satisfied with last month's election here in America.

Still, it could be worse.

I could be living in Egypt.1

Morsi? Morsy?

Egypt's President is محمد مرسى عيسى العياط‎, or Mohamed Morsi Isa El-Ayyat. I've seen his name spelled Morsi and Morsy. For now, I'm using "Morsi."

My native language, English, uses the Latin alphabet, and I've discussed transliteration before. (October 22, 2011)

Moving on.

Playing the Class Card

One of the nice things about allowing folks with ability to earn more than average is that, when things get rough, you can blame them.

Someone working for Egypt's president said that "blamed a small but powerful minority for the political upheaval." (CNN)

In my 'good old days,' it was the fault of 'pinko intellectuals' or 'bloated capitalists;' now it's the 'radical religious right,' or the 'liberal elite.' Tomayto, tomahto.

Expedient, Yes: Prudent, No

I acknowledge that when a leader starts facing the consequences of some unusually clueless move, it's easy to blame 'those people over there.' Sometimes passing the buck works: but I don't think it's the best idea. Not in the long run.

I don't doubt that folks in Egypt who are professionals, entrepreneurs, or simply have access to more information than average, are the ones trying to keep their president from taking personal control of their country.

Unlike President Morsi, though: I think they're probably right.

Freedom and Stability

Maybe Egypt's president is right, and the only way to preserve freedom in Egypt is have troops arrest citizens who don't agree with the government. Maybe not.

I'm guessing "not," but I could be wrong.

"Freedom" and "stability" sound good: and can describe worthy ideals.

But "freedom" doesn't mean "free to agree with me," or shouldn't; and "stability" shouldn't mean "keeping things just the way they are," or shouldn't.

Egypt and America

Minutiae of culture and language aside: I don't think folks in Egypt and America, or anywhere else, are all that unlike. Human nature, for good or ill, is - reliable:
"Human nature will not change. In any future great national trial, compared to the men of this, we shall have as weak and as strong, as silly and as wise, as bad and as good."
(Abraham Lincoln, Response to a serenade (November 10, 1864))
That said, all countries are not alike.

Wait a few decades, and one country often won't be 'alike.'

The America I grew up in was a place where someone could still believe that an "American" was someone with a nice English name, who either had English ancestors or who was desperately trying to pass for Anglo.

That changed in the last half-century. I like the new America, for the most part, but it's driving some folks nuts.

While writing this post, I looked up Egypt and America. The countries are similar in one or two ways. Both call the head honcho a "president," and both are republics. On the other hand, nobody's likely to get Egypt and the the United States confused:
  • Egypt
    • Ethnic groups (2006 census)
      • Egyptian 99.6%
      • Other 0.4%
    • Language
      • Arabic (official)
      • English and French widely understood by educated classes
    • Religion
      • Muslim (mostly Sunni) 90%
      • Coptic 9%
      • Other Christian 1%
    • Government
      • Republic
    ("Egypt," World Factbook, CIA (page last updated November 14, 2012))
  • United States
    • Ethnic groups
      • White 79.96%
      • Black 12.85%
      • Asian 4.43%
      • Amerindian and Alaska native 0.97%
      • Native Hawaiian and other Pacific islander 0.18%
      • Two or more races 1.61% (July 2007 estimate)
      • Hispanic
        • Note: a separate listing for Hispanic is not included because the US Census Bureau considers Hispanic to mean persons of Spanish/Hispanic/Latino origin including those of Mexican, Cuban, Puerto Rican, Dominican Republic, Spanish, and Central or South American origin living in the US who may be of any race or ethnic group (white, black, Asian, etc.)
    • Language (2000 census)
      • English 82.1%
      • Spanish 10.7%
      • Other Indo-European 3.8%
      • Asian and Pacific island 2.7%
      • Other 0.7%
      • note: Hawaiian is an official language in the state of Hawaii
    • Religion (2007 est.)
      • Protestant 51.3%
      • Roman Catholic 23.9%
      • Mormon 1.7%
      • Other Christian 1.6%
      • Jewish 1.7%
      • Buddhist 0.7%
      • Muslim 0.6%
      • Other or unspecified 2.5%
      • Unaffiliated 12.1%, none 4%
    • Government
      • Constitution-based federal republic
        • Strong democratic tradition
    ("United States," World Factbook, CIA (page last updated November 28, 2012))
With so many flavors of "American," I think it's getting increasingly difficult to appeal to knee-jerk paranoia in the 'average American." That doesn't keep my country's alleged best and brightest from trying, though: and that's another topic.

Related posts:
In the news
1 From the news:
"Egypt crisis: Morsi gives army arrest powers before vote"
(December ,10 2012)

"Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi has ordered the military to maintain security and protect state institutions in the run-up to a controversial referendum on a new constitution.

"The army has also been given the power to arrest civilians.

"Mr Morsi has tried to calm public anger by annulling a decree giving him huge powers, but rejected a call to scrap the 15 December constitutional vote.

"Opposition leaders called for protests on Tuesday against the referendum.

"The opposition was "not aiming at toppling the president" but wanted a better constitution, former Foreign Minister Amr Moussa told the BBC.

"Islamist groups have said they will hold counter demonstrations, raising fears of further bloody clashes on the streets of the Egyptian capital.

"In another apparent concession, the president suspended a big tax increase on the sale of a variety of goods including soft drinks, cigarettes and beer...."
"Top Morsy aide: Small, powerful minority behind Egypt's political upheaval"
Reza Sayah and Amir Ahmed, CNN (December 10, 2012)

"A top aide to Egyptian President Mohamed Morsy blamed a small but powerful minority for the political upheaval that has plagued the country ahead of a planned constitutional referendum.

"The statements are the latest in a volley of accusations between Morsy's supporters and opponents, and they highlight a political crisis that at times has spilled into the streets, prompting the president to deploy troops and tanks to protect government buildings.

" 'You have the majority of the poor people, the simple, definitely for the president and for the constitution,' Muhammad Rifaa al-Tahtawi, Morsy's chief of staff, told CNN on Sunday.

" 'You have a majority among the elite who are not for this constitution. Businessmen, media people. They are definitely a small minority, but powerful minority.'..."
"Egypt's opposition rejects constitutional referendum"
Reuters (December 9, 2012)

"Egypt's main opposition coalition rejected on Sunday Islamist President Mohamed Mursi's plan for a constitutional referendum this week, saying it risked dragging the country into 'violent confrontation'.

"Mursi's decision on Saturday to retract a decree awarding himself wide powers failed to placate opponents who accused him of plunging Egypt deeper into crisis by refusing to postpone the vote on a constitution shaped by Islamists.

" 'We are against this process from start to finish,' Hussein Abdel Ghani, spokesman of the National Salvation Front, told a news conference, calling for more street protests on Tuesday.

"The Front's main leaders - Nobel peace laureate Mohamed ElBaradei, former Foreign Minister Amr Moussa and leftist Hamdeen Sabahy - did not attend the event...."
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Sunday, December 9, 2012

Business (not) as Usual in Egypt

Egypt hasn't been "stable" since around February of 2011, when quit a few folks in the Middle East decided that they were fed up with stability. I can't say that I blame them:
The new(ish) Egyptian president seems to be trying to return the sort of stability Mubarak enjoyed. Some folks in Egypt may have thought it was a good idea. Quite a few didn't. (November 23, 2012)

So far, several Egyptians have been killed, President Morsi either left his office in a hurry, or he didn't, and Egypt is missing a political party headquarters.

One more thing, President Morsi changed his mind about stability. Sort of. Maybe.

"Safeguarding the Revolution"

"Egypt crisis: President Morsi annuls decree"
BBC News (December 9, 2012)

"Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi has annulled a decree he issued last month that hugely expanded his powers and sparked angry protests, officials say.

"However, a news conference in Cairo was told that a controversial referendum on a draft constitution would still go ahead as planned on 15 December.

"Mr Morsi's critics have accused him of acting like a dictator, but he says he is safeguarding the revolution...."
I take what I read in the news with a grain of salt: or two; or an entire salt lick. When someone's political opponents or "critics" say that an official is acting like a dictator, all I can be sure of is that they don't like what the official is doing.

In Mr. Morsi's case, though, there seemed to be more than 'politics as usual' going on. His new rules:
  • Keep judges from
    • Reviewing Mr. Morsi's decisions
    • Interfering with a committee that Mr. Morsi's party is running
  • Say that only Mr. Morsi can change the rules
Maybe President Morsi really is "safeguarding the revolution." I think it's reasonable, though, to wonder whose revolution is being safeguarded.

"Not Legally Possible?" Maybe

"...'The constitutional decree is annulled from this moment,' said Selim al-Awa, an Islamist politician acting as a spokesman for a meeting Mr Morsi held with political and public figures on Saturday.

"But he said the referendum on a new constitution would go ahead because it was not legally possible for the president to postpone it.

"The meeting had been boycotted by the main opposition leaders who had earlier called for their supporters to step up their protests.

"They want both the decree and the referendum cancelled...."
(BBC News)
My hat's off to the current Egyptian administration, if they're really going ahead with a dubious referendum because Egyptian law says they have to. I think some laws are stupid: but I also think that stupid laws should be changed, not ignored.

In some ways, I'm more concerned about folks who think it's okay for leaders to break the law, than I am about other folks who think it's okay to fly airliners into office buildings. It's not much of a choice: but at least the suicide pilots are generally an external threat.

"Reactionary Figures," Protests, and an Incendiary Statement

"...The president's supporters say the judiciary is made up of reactionary figures from the old regime of strongman Hosni Mubarak.

"But his opponents have mounted almost continuous protests since the decree was passed.

"They are also furious over the drafting of the new constitution because they see the process as being dominated by Mr Morsi's Islamist allies.

"Several people have been killed in the recent spate of anti-government protests, and the presidential palace has come under attack.

"The Cairo headquarters of the Muslim Brotherhood, the movement to which Mr Morsi belongs, were set on fire."
(BBC News)
I don't think the Muslim Brotherhood are 'good guys.' I don't think they're 'bad guys,' either.

I'm dubious about folks who act as if they think God follows their policies and preferences: and folks like that aren't always 'those people over there.'

When I was growing up, some radio preachers seemed to think that Jesus was an American, and that's not quite another topic.

I do think that Egyptians are no more uniform in their views and beliefs, than Americans. Dead Egyptians, arson with a political target, and continued protests seem to back up that view.

As for those "reactionary figures?" Maybe Mubarak's old pals really are behind at least some of the trouble in Egypt. Or maybe not.

Blaming a hated, and comfortably distant, foe is an old trick. America's old establishment had the communist threat, today's lot have vast right-wing conspiracies, and that's yet another topic.

Related posts:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Egypt, Morsi, and Dealing With Change

It looks like at least 100,000 folks in Egypt don't like their new president's recent actions. That's how many showed up at a demonstration in Cairo today.1

One official says that President Morsi left when the crowds outside "grew bigger;" another official, speaking for Mr. Morsi, said that the President's departure was routine.

Whatever Morsi's motives, I'd say that Egypt isn't the 'stable' country it was under Mubarak.

As I've said before, "stability" isn't necessarily a good thing: not when it means that a small group makes decisions for a nation; tells the general public what the leaders think is 'proper;' and criticizing the leaders is punished.

Folks whose position or influence make them part of that small group don't, understandably, like criticism; sometimes don't distinguish between reasonable complaints and treason; and aren't necessarily 'those people over there.'

Related posts, about dealing with:
1 Excerpt from the news:
"Egyptian President Morsi leaves presidential palace as protests turn violent"
Foxnews.com (December 4, 2012)

"Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi left the presidential palace Tuesday as violence erupted between police and at least 100,000 protesters gathered in Cairo.

"In a brief outburst, police fired tear gas to stop protesters approaching the palace in the capital's Heliopolis district. Morsi was in the palace conducting business as usual while the protesters gathered outside. But he left for home through a back door when the crowds 'grew bigger,' according to a presidential official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

"The official said Morsi left on the advice of security officials at the palace and to head off 'possible dangers' and to calm protesters. Morsi's spokesman, however, said the president left the palace at the end of his work schedule through the door he routinely uses...."
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , ,

Friday, November 23, 2012

Egypt, America: Change, Freedom, and Other Threats to the Status Quo

Egypt's president says:
  • He's making Egypt
    • Safe for freedom and democracy
    • Stable
  • Nobody can change the new rules
    • Except him
That's a simplified version of what I found in the news.1

Most of the new Egyptian decree sounds okay: being safe is nice; folks seem to like freedom; and democracy is supposed to be a good idea, too. I think part of the trouble folks have is that the president says that nobody can change the new rules, except him.

I can see their point: but not because President Mursi is an "Islamist."

'Free to Agree With Me?'

Freedom doesn't, or shouldn't, mean "free to agree with the boss," or "free to support 'proper' opinions." Like I've said before, I remember the trailing edge of McCarthyism, and endured political correctness while doing time in American academia.

Although their vocabulary was different, supporters of both said they were defending freedom. I think they believed it; and probably couldn't understand that another person might disagree without being pinko, homophobic, or whatever.

What 'Everybody Knows, That Just Ain't So'

Today's 'real Americans,' and those who graduated from campus activism to successful career tracks, have an odd sort of common belief: Muslims are evil, or at least dupes of Islam. An oversimplification? Yes: but I think it's good enough for a quick sketch of the attitude toward 'those people.'

What sets today's establishment apart is that all religion is supposed to be dangerous, or at least 'intolerant.'

"The establishment" isn't what it used to be, and that's almost another topic:
As the name of that blog suggests, I'm one of 'those religious people.' Worse, I'm a Catholic: which doesn't mean what you may have heard.

By the way, I discuss political issues, but this isn't a "political" post, and there's a reason why it's hard to pigeonhole my views as liberal or conservative:
I'm getting seriously off-topic. Sort of.

'Kill a Commie for Christ,' and Assumptions

Denver News (1921), from The Library of Congress (American Memory Collection), http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/, via wikipedia.org, used w/o permissionLet's say that the more violent iterations of the Ku Klux Klan were the only sort of 'Christianity' a person heard about. Assuming that folks who 'protected' their America from foreigners, blacks, and other 'anti-Christian' influences, were typical Christians wouldn't be hard.

Equally rabid patriots who inspired the 'kill a commie for Christ' slogan didn't help, in my opinion.

My reaction to ranting radio preachers and their secular counterparts eventually led to my becoming a Catholic, and that's definitely another topic.

Beware Rabid 'Defenders'

In a way, I'm not half as concerned about foreign threats, as I am about some of the folks determined to 'protect' my country.

These days, I don't see a 'vast right-wing conspiracy' as a serious threat to America's freedom. Too many folks remember various red scares, or were told about them in the government schools. Yet another topic.2

I am concerned about folks who apparently want to 'protect' America from the supposed dangers of religious belief: any religious belief.

That's another over-simplification. I've written about tolerance, real and imagined, fairly often: and put links under "Tolerance," below.

Egypt and a Changing World

Maybe the Egyptian president really will bring freedom, democracy, and stability, to Egypt: and then let someone else have a say in how his country is managed. I'm dubious about that: but it's possible.

I think it's more likely that Mr. Morsi wants Egypt to be a nice, orderly, "stable" country: like North Korea, Burma/Myanmar; and 20th century Latin American rulers whose title was "president," since American support depended on a show of "democracy." Cynical? Maybe.

I don't mind stability, or freedom. But I think there are different sorts of "stability:"
  • Good news
    • Choosing leaders without bloodshed
    • Citizens living without fear of criminals in the
      • Private sector
      • Government
  • Bad news
    • Protecting folks with power
      • Political
      • Military
      • Economic
    • Silencing criticism
    • Preventing change
I realize that change is unsettling, sometimes painful. But change happens, change can be good, and resisting change can create new problems: and even more unsettling, painful change. My opinion.

Getting a grip about:
In the news:
1From the news:
"Egypt President Mursi defends new powers amid protests"
BBC News (23 November 2012)

"President Mohammed Mursi has appeared before supporters in Cairo to defend a new decree that grants him sweeping powers.

"He told them he was leading Egypt on a path to 'freedom and democracy' and was the guardian of stability.

"He was speaking as thousands of opponents gathered in Cairo's Tahrir Square and offices of the president's party were attacked in several cities.

"The decree says presidential decisions cannot be revoked by any authority...."
"Egypt's President Expands His Own Powers"
Sam Dagher in Cairo and Jay Solomon in Washington, The Wall Street Journal (November 22, 2012)

"Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, coming off a heady week of high-stakes diplomacy that thrust his government onto the international stage, pushed to consolidate his power at home with a set of decrees aimed at sidelining a judiciary that has been one of the last institutions challenging the Islamist government.

"The declarations, which appeared to stun the Obama administration, brought into the open a long-simmering confrontation between Mr. Morsi's Islamist government and a judiciary that is populated with many secular-leaning judges appointed by the former regime of Hosni Mubarak.

"U.S. officials on Thursday said there was no indication that Mr. Morsi was going to make this move when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Cairo Wednesday, and the administration widely praised the Egyptian president for brokering the cease-fire between the militant group Hamas and Israel that also involved the U.S. and a host of regional powers. The agreement ended more than a week of Hamas rocket attacks on Israel and repeated bombardment of Gaza by the Israeli military.

"A senior U.S. State Department official said Mr. Morsi's actions 'have raised some concerns' and that officials are watching the developments closely....

"...The set of decrees exempt the president's decisions from all judicial review and bars the courts from dissolving a constitutional-drafting committee that has increasingly come under the sway of Mr. Morsi's allies in the Muslim Brotherhood.

"Several prominent Egyptian liberal political leaders, including some who ran in this year's presidential election, met in Cairo on Thursday, with most expressing their shock at Mr. Morsi's moves.

" 'Morsi today usurped all state powers and appointed himself Egypt's new pharaoh. A major blow to the revolution that could have dire consequences,' wrote Mohammed ElBaradei, a former candidate and former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, on his official Twitter account.

"The negotiations over Gaza, whose conclusion was announced by Egyptian Foreign Minister Mohammed Kamel Amr with Mrs. Clinton at his side, elicited praise for Egypt's new leader, who came to power this year in the wake of the revolution that overthrew Mr. Mubarak. The Obama administration talked with cautious optimism of teaming up with Mr. Morsi to attempt to make progress on regional issues that have been stalled for decades....

"...U.S. officials have urged Mr. Morsi to pursue changes that include gender and religious rights in Egypt. 'We encourage all parties to work together and we call for Egyptian leaders to resolve these issues through democratic dialogue,' the official said....

"...While the immediate impact of the declarations remains unclear, observers said they could help further strengthen the Muslim Brotherhood's dominance of the constitutional-drafting process and perhaps open the door to retrials of former regime officials and connected businessmen who were found not guilty in corruption trials.

"Mr. Morsi's allies defended the decrees as necessary to prevent former regime influence from derailing an increasingly turbulent transition.

"They insisted that the extraordinary powers bestowed by the decrees will disappear once a new constitution is drafted and goes into effect....

"Yet the declarations also sealed Mr. Morsi's position as the dominant figure over Egypt's transition to a system many hope will be more democratic—and raised new concerns that Mr. Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood are eliminating all checks on their authority...."
2 Some Americans who home school their kids may be intellectually-challenged sociopaths with strong anti-science beliefs. I think that stereotype is seriously flawed, but what would I know? I'm one of those home-schooling parents: and 'everybody knows' what they're like.

I've harangued about education, science, and religion, a bit in another blog:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, November 11, 2012

An American President, Armistice Day, and a Comic Strip Character

The 11th day of November is Armistice Day. Over the decades it's been called National, Poppy, and Rembrance Day. These days, Americans call it Veteran's Day.

Some of the most sensible words I've seen recorded that apply to this holiday come from a comic strip character, and an American president:
"Y'know, it seems to be me this is all backwards....We, Ever'body, ought to keep our big mouths shut all the whole year long so's we'd have time to think of two minutes worth of somethin. to say on the eleventh day of November."
(Porky Pine, in Pogo; Walt Kelly (1953))
"Human nature will not change. In any future great national trial, compared to the men of this, we shall have as weak and as strong, as silly and as wise, as bad and as good."
(Abraham Lincoln, Response to a serenade (November 10, 1864))
Adapted from:
Related posts:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Independence Day, 2012



Related posts:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Thursday, March 22, 2012

Tolerance, Change, America, and the World

An item in Monday's news started me thinking about tolerance, and how it's been practiced here in America. Sometimes tolerance, American style, is the sort you'll find in a dictionary: "willingness to recognize and respect the beliefs or practices of others." (Princeton's WordNet) Sometimes "tolerance" and "freedom" mean "free to agree with me, and do things my way."

I've experienced two flavors of the latter sort of "tolerance," and don't think much of either.

I think the 'dictionary' sort of tolerance is a good idea. Partly because it's part of my system of belief, partly out of a kind of enlightened self-interest. I've been over this in another blog:And, yes: as the name of that blog suggests, I'm a Catholic. Which may not mean what you've been told. I'll get back to that, later in this post.

If you follow that other blog, you may as well skip this post. It's a slightly-edited version of "Religious Freedom In America: It Could be Worse" (March 20, 2012). I decided that most of the original post fit this blog's range of topics:Enough introduction. Here's that post:

Tolerance, Freedom, and America

One reason that I think America is okay is that this country has a fairly good track record for tolerance. Far from perfect, though.

I remember when this country was flushing McCarthyism out it its system, and when "banned in Boston" was taken seriously: sometimes as a sign of End Times; sometimes, I think, as free publicity.

I endured political correctness, when I last did time in American academia. It wasn't, in my opinion, an improvement on McCarthyism: just the same old 'my way or the highway' attitude, with a somewhat different agenda.

Life, Freedom, and Change

But we got over McCarthyism. I think we'll get over political correctness, although the "free to agree with me" attitude packaged as "tolerance" is still very much with us. I've been posting about a current effort by America's national government to control how Americans practice our religions:
By the way, what you may have read in the papers notwithstanding: 'Those Catholics' aren't trying to make you worship our way. The problem we have with the HHS mandate comes from our belief that human beings are people. All human beings.

Anyway, we're not allowed to 'force' anyone to change your mind about faith. It's in the rules:
  • Catholics must support religious freedom
    (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2104-2109)
    • For everybody
      (Catechism, 2106)

It Could be Worse

Like I said, America has a fairly good record of tolerance. Killing folks who don't conform, and bragging about it, isn't a serious problem in today's America.

Folks in some parts of the world have a very different approach to living with differences:
"School that employed American shot in Yemen denies he proselytized Christianity"
Associated Press, via FoxNews.com (March 19, 2012)

"The school employing an American teacher gunned down in Yemen has denied accusations that he was proselytizing Christianity.

"A text message that circulated by mobile phone in Yemen said that 'holy warriors' had killed 'a senior missionary' in the central city of Taiz, shortly after the teacher was shot dead Sunday by two gunmen on a motorcycle...."

"...A statement from the International Training Development Centre in Taiz identified the victim as Joel Shrum, an American development worker living in Yemen with his wife and two children since 2010.

"The school denied that Shrum was proselytizing, saying that he 'highly respected' Islam. It said Muslims and Christians work together on 'human development, skill transfer and community development' projects there and that religious and political debates are not permitted...."
The lesson to learn from that article isn't, I think, that all Yemeni, or Muslims, are bad. Even though whoever killed Joel Shrum may have been a Yemeni, or a Muslim.

Frightened by Change?

I'm inclined to believe the school's claim that he was not guilty of proselytizing. Arguably, though, the entire school is guilty of trying to 'destroy' Yemeni culture. Sort of.

The school's agenda of "human development, skill transfer and community development" sounds like a 'plot' to bring Yemen into the 20th century. Maybe even the 21st.

Change can be scary. Folks sometimes feel threatened by change. I think that Associated Press article shows what can happen when folks get scared: and think that killing someone will solve their problems. Or at least make them feel better.

Judgmental as this may seem: I don't think that's right.
(Catechism, 2258-2287, 2302-2317)

Human Development, Living in the Past, and Being Catholic

I'm a practicing Catholic, so human development is one of my priorities. (" 'To Build a Better Future ... With Confidence Rather Than Resignation' " (February 20, 2012))

For someone living in Yemen, who sees change as intrinsically bad: the International Training Development Centre in Taiz is a very real threat.

I'm not spooked by change. But then, I'm an American.

I grew up in a crucible of change: the country I live in today isn't like the one I grew up in. Which isn't an entirely bad thing. I remember when "she's as smart as a man" was supposed to be a compliment, and that's another topic.

A World Full of 'Foreigners'

I have no problem with international organizations. Not because they span national boundaries, anyway. That's not because I'm a Catholic, though.

I grew up outside the Catholic faith, and spent my teens in the '60s. The United Nations was a disappointment, communist experiments were disasters: but I found no reason to drop the idea that people are people, no matter where they are.

Later, when I became a Catholic, I learned more about why accepting all people is important. (Catechism, 616, 631, 2318, for starters) And that's yet again another topic.

A World Full of Neighbors

I've said it before. We live in a big world. Some of us are what the "Parthians, Medes, and Elamites..." became after two millennia of change.

Some of us are like me: what barbarians living on the far side of Magna Germania became after more than a millennia of contact with the Catholic Church. We changed a lot. We even gave up human sacrifice, and that's yet again another topic.

But we're all the same. We're people. And, like it or not, we're all neighbors.

The Catholic Church tells me that I'm supposed to love God, and love my neighbors. Also that everybody is my neighbor. (Matthew 22:36-40; Matthew 5:43-44; Mark 12:28-31; Luke 10:25-30; Catechism, 1825)

That's a simple set of ideas. Believing them isn't a problem. Embracing them isn't always easy: but I think it's important.

Particularly since some of my neighbors have been through a rough time lately.

Yemen, History, and Getting a Grip

Some places weathered Europe's colonial period, and the Treaty of Versailles, without coming apart at the seams. Other places are still like Yemen. I think there are worse ways of wrapping up a war than the Treaty of Versailles, and that's another topic, for another blog:
I sympathize with folks in Yemen who are trying to pick up the pieces from several centuries of foreign rule.1 But I don't sympathize with those who decided that folks who don't agree with them should die. They're still neighbors: but that sort of thing has to end, for everybody's sake.

Apparently someone in Taiz, Yemen, is at least going through the motions of treating Joel Shrum's death as a crime:
"...Taiz security director Ali al-Saidi said Monday that the investigation is still ongoing...."
(Associated Press)
That's good news, as far as it goes.

Related posts:
1 Yemen was a center of civilization. Two or three millennia back. Change happens, though, and several centuries of foreign rule didn't work out very well for Yemen. My opinion. (More at "History of Yemen," Wikipedia) Yemen since the Versailles debacle, briefly:
"North Yemen became independent of the Ottoman Empire in 1918. The British, ... withdrew in 1967 from what became South Yemen. ... the southern government adopted a Marxist orientation. ... exodus of hundreds of thousands of Yemenis from the south to the north.... formally unified as the Republic of Yemen in 1990. A southern secessionist movement in 1994 was quickly subdued. ... a group seeking a return to traditional Zaydi Islam, began in 2004 and has since resulted in six rounds of fighting ... with a ceasefire that continues to hold. The southern secessionist movement was revitalized ... Public rallies ... inspired by similar demonstrations in Tunisia and Egypt ... fueled by complaints over high unemployment, poor economic conditions, and corruption. ... resulted in violence, and the demonstrations had spread to other major cities. ... hardened its demands and was unifying behind calls for SALIH's immediate ouster. ... and in early June an explosion at the mosque in the presidential compound injured SALIH, who was evacuated to Saudi Arabia for treatment. ... SALIH returned to Sanaa amid heavy shelling and machinegun fire ... SALIH signed the GCC-brokered agreement to step down, to transfer some of his powers to Vice President Abd al-Rabuh Mansur HADI..."
(Yemen, CIA World Factbook (last updated March 6, 2012))
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Thursday, January 5, 2012

Burma: Aung San Suu Kyi Hopeful

I'm not looking forward to America's presidential election in November of this year. I don't like the verbal fewmets flung by candidates and their supporters. Then there's the juridical slapstick that generally follows, as some judge compares lawsuits and decides who should have won the election.

But this isn't a political blog, and - it could be worse.

Take Burma, for example. Or Myanmar, or Myanma. The last I checked, the country's bosses still prefer the 'Myanmar' moniker:
"Suu Kyi: Burma democracy in my lifetime"
Asia, BBC News (January 5, 2011)

"Burma's opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi says she believes Burma will hold democratic elections 'in my lifetime'.

"In an exclusive interview with the BBC, she said she did not know when that would be or whether she would run.

"She said political prisoners must be freed. Officials deny their existence...."
About those political prisoners who don't exist: it's a matter of semantics, rather than the folks being 'non-persons who never existed.' I'll get back to that.
"...She [Suu Kyi] is due to meet William Hague - the first UK foreign secretary to visit since 1955. Several top officials have visited since Burma's first elections in 20 years that ended military rule.

"A nominally civilian government is now in place.

"Ms Suu Kyi, 66, told BBC World News that she foresaw 'a full democratic elections in my lifetime', adding: 'But then of course I don't know how long I'm going to live. But if I live a normal lifespan, yes.'..."
(BBC)
It's nice to see someone expressing hope: particularly in a situation like Aung San Suu Kyi's. I think her hope is somewhat reasonable: particularly considering that she's allowed to have visitors.

Political Prisoners, Common Criminals, and All That

Burma doesn't have "political prisoners." Not according to Burma's bosses. Burma has, however, imprisoned quite a few "criminals" who just happen to have disagreed with Burma's leaders:
"...William Hague said after meeting his counterpart Wunna Maung Lwi in Nay Pyi Taw that 'the foreign minister has reaffirmed commitments that have been made to release political prisoners'.

" 'He said the changes are irreversible and I welcome that way of thinking,' Mr Hague added.

"But in an interview with the BBC Burmese service later, Wunna Maung Lwi said Burma did not acknowledge there were political prisoners.

"They are all criminals, he said, and it was up to the president to decide when prisoners were released - adding that prisoners had already been freed on three recent occasions.

"The government, he said, was focused on the development of the whole country.

"Between 600 and 1,000 journalists, dissidents and monks who led anti-government protests in 2007 are thought to remain behind bars in Burma...."
(BBC)
I think the impulse to define dissent as a criminal act is fairly common. Whether or not an authority who says opponents are criminals is sincere, the effect is the same: debate is stifled; bad policies remain in effect; and peaceful, orderly change becomes more difficult.

"It can't happen here?" I'm not so sure:And that's another topic.

Related posts:In the news:
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , ,

Friday, December 30, 2011

Egypt: NGO Raids, Police, and Office Equipment

I'm still cautiously optimistic about "Arab spring."

What we've seen so far is more about upsetting the apple cart, than building new and better governments. Durable autocracies in Libya, Tunisia, and Egypt, are gone. Syria's boss got dropped from the Arab League. Bahrain's king may be learning that killing his subjects isn't a good idea.

That's cautiously optimistic.

Years, Decades, Generations

There's a chance that at least some of the countries where folks ousted an autocrat will have trouble for years. Maybe decades. Some may even elect a home-grown equivalent of Iran's ayatollahs.

But I think that enough folks in places like Egypt and Libya have gotten a taste of freedom: and liked it. They've also learned how to use the Internet and other Information Age technologies and social structures: and are catching up on what's happened in the last few thousand years. Particularly since the 18th century.

In the long run, generations from now, I think there's a good chance that folks in the Middle East will develop governments that serve the citizens: not just the local gentry.

Meanwhile, it's rough going.

'Because We Can?'

Egypt's old-school autocrat, Mubarak, is out. Right now, Egypt has a military government. That, by itself, isn't bad news: not in my opinion, anyway.

Raids on Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs): that's bad news.1

At least two of the NGOs have been observing Egypt's elections. They "...may have received illegal foreign funding and have been operating without licenses from the Foreign Ministry and local ministries...." (CNN) 'Obviously' they're foreign spies?!

Actually, it's anyone's guess why Egyptian police took stuff from these outfits.

Maybe it's just because they have the power to do so: and like to flex their muscles. Or maybe not.

'Commies,' 'Hate Speech,' and Stolen Office Equipment

An op-ed in the United Kingdom2 said that it's probably because Egypt's current bosses don't like it when folks act on their own volition. He may be right about that.

I remember the 'good old days,' when 'regular Americans' had conniptions when commies and pinkos disagreed with them. More recently, defenders of 'tolerance' have labeled opposing views as "hate speech." Tomayto, tomahto.

A partial list of what got stolen confiscated may suggest another motive:
"...Police took laptops, desktops, video conferencing equipment, cell phones and other electronics, Hughes said. They also took between 15 and 20 boxes of documents...."
(CNN)
Here in America, that's several thousand dollars' worth of merchandise. I don't have too much trouble imaging that an enterprising, and ethically-challenged, enforcer might decide to supplement his income with a little informal taxation.

However, I think the UK op-ed author has a very plausible explanation. I think I can understand why Egypt's current bosses want to control what others say, and how they say it. But that doesn't mean I think it's a good idea.

Related posts:
1 News and views:
"NGOs puzzled by Egyptian raids"
CNN (December 30, 2011)

"A day after Egyptian police raided the offices of 10 nongovernmental organizations across the country, the groups remained in the dark about what the authorities were looking for.

" 'We asked them if there was something specific we could help them find,' Julie Hughes, Egypt country director for the National Democratic Institute (NDI), told CNN Friday. 'They refused to answer.'

"Two other U.S.-based agencies, Freedom House and the International Republican Institute (IRI), were also raided.

"Police took laptops, desktops, video conferencing equipment, cell phones and other electronics, Hughes said. They also took between 15 and 20 boxes of documents.

"The actions were part of an investigation into allegations that groups may have received illegal foreign funding and have been operating without licenses from the Foreign Ministry and local ministries, according to Adel Saeed, spokesman for the general prosecutor's office...."
"Egypt rights groups blast raids on NGO offices"
AP, via CBS News (December 30, 2011)

"Several Egyptian rights groups on Friday accused the country's ruling military council of using 'repressive tools' of the deposed regime in waging an 'unprecedented campaign' against pro-democracy organizations.

"The groups' joint statement came just hours after security forces stormed offices of 10 rights organizations, including several based in the United States. The Interior Ministry said the raids were part of the investigation into foreign funding of rights groups.

"The military, which took over control after a popular uprising toppled longtime President Hosni Mubarak in February, has often accused the groups of promoting protests with the help of funds from abroad...."
2 Op-ed about Egypt's police raids:
"Egypt's raids on NGOs are about control"
Brian Whitaker, guardian.co.uk (December 30, 2011)
"Restricting NGO funding is typical of authoritarian regimes happy to take foreign aid but less happy about human rights

"Imagine you live in Saudi Arabia and want to start a discussion group with some friends. The only way to do it legally is to ask the king's permission.

"Musa al-Qarni dutifully wrote a letter to the king but never got a reply – so he went ahead anyway. A few months later, Qarni was arrested and carted off to jail after secret police commandos stormed the villa in Jeddah where he and several men 'widely known for their advocacy on issues of social and political reform' were meeting.

"In most Arab states any sort of civil society organisation, even something as innocent as a youth group or stamp-collecting club, has to be registered with the authorities, and if the authorities don't like the sound of it they may refuse or simply ignore the request, leaving the applicants in a legal limbo.

"In Bahrain and Oman they can refuse permission on the grounds that the organisation is unnecessary or, in Oman's case, 'for any other reasons' decided upon by the ministry of social affairs. In Qatar, if a society wants to admit non-Qatari members it must ask the prime minister first...."
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Beer, Basketball, the War on Terror, Today's News, and Me

One of the reasons I started this blog, back in July of 2007, was to provide a sort of scrapbook of news items relating to the war on terror. Which, officially, doesn't exist any more. Not as an officially-recognized term, anyway. (March 30, 2009)

Whatever it's called, what I regard as the first major global conflict of the 21st century is still going on. And, in my opinion, will continue for years. Probably decades. Generations, maybe.

It's not that I'm pessimistic: quite the contrary. I believe that, in the end, we will still be able to enjoy beer and basketball - or decide not to; that women will have the option to drive cars; and that wearing trousers will not be a capital offense.

The reason I think this conflict will not be resolved quickly is that it is not only spread across the world: but is complex. What I think may take the most time is enough people deciding that they can live with a world that's changed since the days of Ur and the Chaldeans.

Economics, Religion, and a Burr Under the Saddle

At the risk of being pegged as one of the folks who see everything as a class conflict between bourgeois capitalists and the oppressed proletariat, I think economics is involved in the war on terror.

That's because I think that theocracies like the Ayatollahs' Iran aren't good for business, among other things. I've discussed economics, and thinking straight, before.
Where was I? War on terror. Economics. Religious crazies in charge isn't good for business. Right. Moving on.

I also think that the war on terror exists in large part because we live in a world of individual rights, Barbies, soap operas, bikinis, and Mickey Mouse. That offends folks like the Ayatollahs and Al Qaeda's leaders. They seem to have a burr under their saddle about people not being sufficiently 'Islamic.' Their own particular flavor of "Islam," of course. It's hard to imagine Shia and Sunni chauvinists, for example, getting along.1

I'm not entirely happy with all aspects of contemporary Western culture: but my beliefs include a high respect for tolerance and freedom. And that's another topic, for another blog.
I've discussed 'tolerance,' real and imagined, before: and my take on culture shock as a factor in the war on terror.

News and Views North Africa and the Middle East

I don't think that information technology 'made' folks in places like Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya, get fed up with their autocrats. I do think that Information Age technology and the social structures that are evolving around it lubricated the revolts: in part by letting individuals learn that they weren't the only ones who were ready for change.

I also think that folks like the Libyan colonel and the Saudi royal family aren't the only ones who are having a hard time adjusting to the Information Age. And that is yet another topic. (February 23, 2011, August 14, 2009)

Now, excerpts from news and views about -

Bahrain

"Sectarian clashes erupted at a school in Bahrain on Thursday, fueling fears a planned march on the royal court on Friday could inflame the Gulf island where a majority of citizens is Shi'ite but the ruling family is Sunni...."
(Reuters)

Egypt

"The Army joined with armed thugs yesterday to force protesters out of Cairo's Tahrir Square – one of many incidents lately that make Egyptians blame regime elements for trying to limit the scope of the revolution...."
(Christian Science Monitor)

Libya

"France became the first Western country to recognize Libya's opposition as the country's legitimate representative. The move comes as the European Union agreed to toughen sanctions against the North African country and its leader, Moammar Gadhafi...."
(Voice of America News)
"Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, testifying Thursday before the House Appropriations Committee, said, 'We are suspending our relationships with the existing Libyan embassy, so we expect them to end operating as the embassy of Libya.'..."
(CNN)

Saudi Arabia

"Saudi police opened fire Thursday to disperse a protest in the mainly Shiite, oil-producing east, leaving at least one man injured, as the government struggled to prevent a wave of unrest sweeping the Arab world from reaching the kingdom...."
(msnbc.com)

Yemen

"President Ali Abdullah Saleh on Thursday proposed a new constitution that allows transition of some powers from the executive authority to the parliament, but opposition parties rejected the proposal and said Saleh's initiatives were too late...." (News Yemen)
"National Democratic Front Party (NDFP(announced on Thursday full support to the recent national initiative made by President Ali Abdullah Saleh at the General National Conference to come out of the current crisis witnessed by the national arena...."
(Yemen News Agency (SABA))
Somewhat-related posts:
News and views:
1 "The Search for Al Qaeda: Its Leadership, Ideology, and Future," Bruce Riedel, Brookings Institution, via Intelligence in Recent Public Literature, CIA (2008)
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Unique, innovative candles


Visit us online:
Spiral Light Candle  • Find a Retailer
• Spiral Light Candle Store

Blogroll

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 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.