January 2004 Archives

I got an email today that made me feel really disgusted. And it wasn't the kind that tells me how I can make my peni$ three inches bigger! The message text and my response follow...

---------

The message:

Interesting article written by a Japanese person on the "Palestinians." This letter written by someone with no vested interest in either side really nails it. Please take the time to read it, and if you agree with its importance perhaps you will consider distributing it to your e-mail distribution lists. It is important for people to know the truth....... If you are so sure that Palestine, the country, goes back through most of recorded history I expect you to be able to answer a few basic questions about that country: .

When was it founded and by whom?

·What were its borders?

·What was its capital?

·What were its major cities?

·What constituted the basis of its economy?

·What was its form of government?

·Can you name at least one Palestinian leader before Arafat? ·Was Palestine ever recognized by a country whose existence, at that time or now, leaves no room for interpretation?

·What was the language of the country of Palestine?

·What was the prevalent religion of the country of Palestine? ·What was the name of its currency?

·Choose any date in history and tell what was the approximate exchange rate of the Palestinian monetary unit against the US dollar, German mark, GB pound, Japanese yen, or Chinese Yuan on that date.

·And, finally, since there is no such country today, what caused its demise and when did it occur?

If you are lamenting the low sinking of a once proud nation. Please tell me, when exactly was that nation proud and what was it so proud of?

And here is the least sarcastic question of all: If the people you mistakenly call Palestinians are anything but generic Arabs collected from all over -- or thrown out of -- the Arab world, if they really have a genuine ethnic identity that gives them right for self-determination, why did they never try to become independent until Arabs suffered their devastating defeat in the Six Day War? I hope you avoid the temptation to trace the modern day Palestinians to the Biblical Philistines: substituting etymology for history won't work here. The truth should be obvious to everyone who wants to know it. Arab countries have never abandoned the dream of destroying Israel; they still cherish it today. Having time and again failed to achieve their evil goal with military means, they decided to fight Israel by proxy. For that purpose, they created a terrorist organization, cynically called it the Palestinian people and installed it in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. How else can you explain the refusal by Jordan and Egypt to unconditionally accept back the West Bank and Gaza, respectively? The fact is, Arabs populating Gaza, Judea, and Samaria have much less claim to nationhood than that Indian tribe that successfully emerged in Connecticut and California with the purpose of starting a tax-exempt casino: at least that tribe had a constructive goal that motivated them. The so-called Palestinians have only one motivation: the destruction of Israel, and in my book that is not sufficient to consider them a nation -- or anything else except what they really are: a terrorist organization that will one day be dismantled. In fact, there is only one way to achieve peace in the Middle East. Arab countries must acknowledge and accept their defeat in their war against Israel and, as the losing side, should pay Israel reparations for the more than 50 years of devastation they have visited on it. The most appropriate form of such reparations would be the removal of their terrorist organization from the land of Israel and accepting Israel's ancient sovereignty over Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. That will mark the end of the Palestinian people. What are you saying again, was its beginning? You are absolutely correct in your understanding of the Palestinians murderous motives. I am afraid however that you, along with 99% of the population of this planet, have missed the beginning of WW III (they call it Jihad) quite a few years ago. The siege of the US embassy in Tehran in 1979, an event to which the latest Nobel Peace Prize winner had so miserably failed to respond, can be very well used as the day WW III stepped out of the pages of the Koran and into the current events. I pray the United States and Israel lead the world to victory in this war. Come to think of it, there is no choice, be you a Christian, a Jew, or even, believe it or not, a Muslim.

This letter was written by Yashiko Sagamori on Nov 6, 2002.

My response:

Hoax? Well, I'm sure it is actually somebody's opinion, and they are entitled to their opinions... but to be blunt, I think this is hate-fomenting trash, and I'm frankly really upset that anybody is taking it seriously. A five-minute search on Google for this guy's name made it pretty clear to me that he's not a reliable authority on this issue. Just a few points that leap out:

-- "This letter written by someone with no vested interest in either side" -- that should set off warning bells right there. Besides, the guy is not Japanese -- he uses a pen name, by his own admission. http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/

-- His entire premise is faulty. It's one thing to condemn the attacks on Israel. It's another thing to say that because a group of people don't have their own currency, by definition, their claim to nationality is void. Israelis themselves had no currency of their own until relatively recently in history! -- Nor is language in and of itself a defining feature of nationhood.... if that was the case, there would be no Canada or U.S.; we'd just be part of the U.K. still.

-- The fact that people can't name Arafat's predecessors speaks more to our lack of knowledge of history than of their lack of existence. -- He makes hyperbolic statements without backing them up or giving evidence. For example, here's an excerpt from another article by this guy. "In the face of the Islamic invasion, Westerners remain blissfully ignorant about Islam. Really, what do we know about it besides the fact that it has sponsored most mass murders of the last two decades? Not much. Following September 11, 2001, we've been reminded multiple times that Islam is a religion of love and piece, although the few excerpts from the Koran that have become widely known to the Western public suggest that the love of the Moslems is directed exclusively towards the faithful, while we, the infidels, are dealt with by ways of jihad -- a "holy" war whose goal is to free the world from our vile presence" (http://www.middleeastfacts.com/Articles/Yashiko/Hadith101.htm) This is a blatant distortion of Islam, bordering on hate speech, IMHO.

Remember, not everyone who supports Israel (Tom DeLay comes to mind) has good motives for doing so, and I think writings like this do a lot of harm.

DEAN WILL ENDURE: Most of the day, I thought that Edwards was going to be the un-Kerry from now on. Dean was too damaged after losing both Iowa and New Hampshire. But Edwards' disappointing fourth place showing - behind the nutcase Clark - after such a big win in Iowa has to make his candidacy more suspect. Dean did a little worse than the exit polls suggested. But his concession speech was easily the best of the night. It was authentic, uplifting, and red meat to the Democrats. It actually rang true to me as Dean's real view of the world. It isn't one I entirely share, to say the least, but it is genuine, represents a lot of people in this country and deserves a hearing. He seemed more affable than recently as well. He smiled more. He spoke more calmly but not ineffectively. He's real. Kerry is so fake, in contrast, I cannot believe that Democratic primary voters will continue to support him in such numbers. Dean gave arguments. Kerry spoke in packaged Shrumisms. Dean has a vision. Kerry has ambition. If I were a Democrat, I'd vote for Dean over Kerry in a heartbeat. To my mind, this is a battle between the Democratic party's soul and its fear. The exit polls showed how Kerry won by seeming more electable - thus trashing an old golden rule of American politics. But the more you see of Kerry the less appealing he is. I'm not sure he really is less electable than the dreary Kerry. Maybe Dean needed this early drubbing to make him more tolerable as a candidate. Maybe it's too late and Kerry is way too far ahead to be caught. I don't know. All I know is that what I saw in Dean's speech - and the extraordinary crowd that accompanied it - was more authentic than anything I have ever seen Kerry say or do. That must count for something.

--> andrewsullivan.com/index.php?dish_inc=archives/ 2004_01_25_dish_archive.htm l#107526332891792508

I have written about this blog before, but it's so good it deserves more attention. Riverbend's January 15 post talks about the troubling shift in Iraq towards Shari'a law. As happens in the United States these days, it seems that laws are being drawn up and approved by the back door. As you can imagine, this isn't being taken well by a woman who by her own account had a good tech-related job before the war.

During the sanctions and all the instability, we used to hear fantastic stories about certain Arab countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, and Qatar, to name a few. We heard about their luxurious lifestyles- the high monthly wages, the elegant cars, sprawling homes and malls… and while I always wanted to visit, I never once remember yearning to live there or even feeling envy. When I analyzed my feelings, it always led back to the fact that I cherished the rights I had as an Iraqi Muslim woman. During the hard times, it was always a comfort that I could drive, learn, work for equal pay, dress the way I wanted and practice Islam according to my values and beliefs, without worrying whether I was too devout or not devout enough.

I usually ignore the emails I receive telling me to 'embrace' my new-found freedom and be happy that the circumstances of all Iraqi women are going to 'improve drastically' from what we had before. They quote Bush (which in itself speaks volumes) saying things about how repressed the Iraqi women were and how, now, they are going to be able to live free lives.

The people who write those emails often lob Iraq together with Saudi Arabia, Iran and Afghanistan and I shake my head at their ignorance but think to myself, "Well, they really need to believe their country has the best of intentions- I won't burst their bubble." But I'm telling everyone now- if I get any more emails about how free and liberated the Iraqi women are *now* thanks to America, they can expect a very nasty answer.

What's the Arabic word or phrase for "You tell 'em!"?

Lifted this speech from Howard Dean 2004.

Dean's own words make a better case than anything I could say.

What I want to know . . . is why in the world the Democratic Party leadership is supporting the President's unilateral attack on Iraq?

What I want to know . . . is why are Democratic leaders supporting tax cuts? The question is not how big the tax cut should be -- the question should be: Can we afford a tax cut at all with the largest deficit in the history of the country?

What I want to know . . . is why we're fighting in Congress about the Patient's Bill of Rights when the Democratic Party ought to be standing up for health care for every man, woman and child in this country?

What I want to know . . . is why our folks are voting for the President's No Child Left Behind bill that leaves every child behind, every teacher behind, every school board behind and every property tax payer behind?

I am Howard Dean. And I'm here to represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.

If you want young people to vote in this country, and if you want 50% of the adults that do not vote in today's elections to go to the polls, then we had better stand for something because that is why they're not voting.

Let me tell you what I want to do for America -- and what we've done in Vermont:

I want to balance the budget.

There has not been one Republican president that has balanced the budget in this country in 34 years. And if you want someone who can be responsible with your money, to take care of your tax dollars, then you had better elect a Democrat because Republicans cannot manage money.

In our state, I served long enough so that I had the privilege of serving through two recessions, not one recession. And when all that money was coming in between the recessions -- between the Bush recessions -- when all of that money was coming in during the good times thanks to Bill Clinton, who balanced the budget without a single Republican vote -- we gave some tax cuts, but we also saved money in a Rainy Day Fund and were able to pay back a quarter of our debt.

Today, not only is the budget balanced in these very difficult times, but my successor does not have to cut health care, does not have to cut higher education, and does not have to cut K-12 education.

I'm the only Governor running for President. And I'm the only one that's balanced the budget - including George Bush because in Texas the Lt. Governor balances the budget.

In our state virtually every child under the age of 18 has health insurance. We made Medicaid into a middle class entitlement. If I become President, with your help, the first item of business on the agenda is to do something that Harry Truman put into the Democratic platform in 1948. We're going to bring health care to every man, woman and child in America.

I'm the only Doctor in this race, and I've done it.

I want an environmental policy in this country that respects and preserves public lands against drilling. In our state we've preserved hundreds of thousands of acres, which will always be available for hunting, fishing, trapping, hiking and canoeing, and will never be developed. The Vermont I left as Governor in January will be the same Vermont a hundred years from now because we have been solid stewards of our natural resources. This President would like to drill on our natural resources.

We can do better.

Let me tell you something else I'm going to do. One of the things I thought was terrific about Bill Clinton was that when he became President in 1992, he said that his Cabinet would look like the rest of America -- and he did it. He did it.

I want all of our institutions of higher learning, - our law schools, our medical schools, our best universities - to look like the rest of America. I thought that one of the most despicable moments of this President's Administration was three weeks ago when, on national prime time television, he used the word "quotas" seven times. The University of Michigan does not now have quotas, has never had quotas, and "quota" is a race-loaded word designed to appeal people's fears of losing their jobs.

I intend to talk about race during this election in the South. The Republicans have been talking about it since 1968 in order to divide us, and I'm going to bring us together. Because you know what? White folks in the South who drive pick-up trucks with Confederate flag decals on the back ought to be voting with us because their kids don't have health insurance either, and their kids need better schools too.

We're not done yet.

Most of you know that six months before my last re-election I signed a bill into law that made Vermont the first state in American to guarantee equal rights to every person under the law - EVERY person under the law. That bill was called the Civil Unions bill. And it said that marriage is between a man and a woman, but same-sex couples are entitled to the exact same legal rights as I have - hospital visitation, insurance, and inheritance rights. All Americans are equal under the law in our state.

This bill was at about 40% in the polls when I signed it ? 60% were against it, six months before the election. I never got a chance to ask myself whether signing it was a good idea or not because I knew that if I were willing to sell out the rights of a whole group of human beings because it might be politically inconvenient for a future office I might run for, then I had wasted my time in public service.

I looked in the mirror, and I knew that if my political career were about myself, then I would not have signed that bill. But my political career has never been about getting elected. I didn't even seek the governorship. I became governor because my predecessor died in office twelve years ago.

My political career is about change. And this campaign is about change. What we're going to do here is, we're first going to change this party because this party needs to look in the mirror and ask itself: Is this party about the next election or is it about changing America?

This party needs to be about changing America, because only by changing America will we win back the White House.

I want a party that stands unashamedly for equal rights for all Americans.

I want a party that stands unashamedly for health care for every single American.

I want a party that stands unashamedly for balanced budgets and taking care of poor kids and voting together and healing the divides instead of expressing the divides and exploiting them the way the Republican Party has so shamelessly done since 1968.

I need your help.

We're going to change this party, and then we're going to change this country, and we're going to take back the White House, and we're going to balance the budget, and we're going to have healthcare for everybody, and we're going to have an America with its best institutions - right up to the Capitol - that looks, once again, like America.

We're going to bring hope to America, jobs to America, peace to America.

We're going to bring pride to the Democratic Party.

I need your help. Let's go get it. Let's go do it. Let's win the White House in November 2004.

Quoth Al Sharpton:

"It seems as though you discovered blacks and browns during this campaign," Sharpton said in one of the most contentious moments of the two-hour Brown and Black Forum, the last debate before next week's Iowa presidential caucus.

Right. A guy who asked to be housed with black roommates his freshman year of college and tutored inner-city kids just discovered black people. (I saw his roommate talking about him on a video. It's no small feat to have your college roommate still speak to you after college, much less support your run for the White House!)

"If you want to lecture people on race, you want to have the background and track record in order to do that," added Sharpton, one of the two African Americans seeking the Democratic Party's 2004 presidential nomination.

Oh, really, Al?

Carol Moseley-Braun kicked his butt for that one, thankfully.

Updated to add: So did The Black Commentator

This is from my spam folder:

Re: JB, once that this Re: TRZHC, strokes began rubbing Re: RATB, of the full

Message subject
Re: NNVJOH, and at once
Check this out

Re: KWZSDZAV but lightened their
we can unlock your digital cable decoder - free f
Re: SVLRXQLI, when i remember

Re: SGBMWUBF, then at least

It's got a certain wistful majesty to it, don't you think?

Nah, I don't really think so either.

Quoth the Guardian: "Pullman's books may be a reaction against his bête noire, CS Lewis, but it seems to have escaped his notice that we live in a predominantly secular age."

Erm... I can see that the His Dark Materials trilogy would be tough to adapt as a play or movie. But "we live in a predominantly secular age"?!?!? Tell that to Bush, Osama, Al Qaeda's creepy minions, or, for that matter, any number of far nicer human beings for whom religion is still a major, if not central, part of their lives.

Still... mind if I join you under that rock?

I mean this in a couple of different ways. I don't understand why somebody would want to spend their lives sending out junk mail to people's inboxes. The hatred spewed in spammers' directions, the constantly having to set up new accounts as ISPs cotton on to what you're doing, and the sheer tedium of the work... why would you want to do that?

I also mean... I literally don't understand spam. The subject headings are totally incomprehensible. "No Prescription Necessary for the New Year" is clear enough — pharmaceuticals of some kind. A little more obscure, but some horrible weightloss product is clearly hidden behind door number two: "Fw: Fw: MED1CA1 BRE--AK THRU -- L00SE WE1GHT Wh1LE YOU Slee-->eep ejuo" ("eep ejuo" is probably what the unlucky customer groans while clutching his or her stomach).

But what am I to make of "Re: blackness was quite ofduowco"? What product is on offer with "Re: ROYSAVEB, altogether and drinks"? Why would I want to know, much less buy products as a result of "Re: ZGBKO, ivan grunted somewhat"? And am I getting spam from another planet? "cid cryptanamysis wrr c j" suggests this possibility.

Sometimes it's as if they started to send their message, but got interrupted by the FBI or INTERPOL mid-subject. "Re: DFQREGQX, and the little", "Re: MMFQZ, the chart with", and "Re: JVSXSEFK, my money that" are the unhappy result.
"Re: KWWUMDC, something utterly preposterous" says another message. I quite agree.

Who responds to these things?!?!