Heretics' almanac

Pix of killing in Iran in 1979

Probably one of the best papers on news reporting, the Wall Street Journal recently found and published the identity of the photographer of a Pulitzer Prize-winning shot of an execution in Iran. Eleven men, condemned by a show trial with no evidence, were lined up at an airport. What looks like irregular soldiers armed with G-3s crouched in front of them. And then they're shot, apparently in the chest, falling backward and collapsing behind the spot they were standing. The series of photographs shows one of the executioners putting a bullet in their heads afterwards.

Very disturbing images. One of those executed is apparently already in bad shape, and he's lying down when they shoot him. Dust flies up as the men collapse. They're standing there blindfolded, probably knowing what's about to occur but resigned to doing nothing but wait for it to happen.

Three civil wars

Jordan's King Abdullah warns that there may soon be three civil wars in the Middle East, unless somebody steps in and does something (if we only knew what that something was). The potential wars are:

• In Iraq, between Shi'a and Sunni (and I suppose with the Kurds thrown in for good measure)
• In Lebanon, between Hizballah and the anti-Syrian groups
• In the Palestinian territories, between Fatah and Hamas

The core, Abdullah predictably says, is Israel. It isn't clear to me why the warlords in Iraq will get any less belligerent if Israel did anything differently; and I'm hard pressed to see the causal connection between Israel and the other conflicts, either, but let's let that go.

The issue is, what are the right policy choices for the US, Europe, and other wealthy democracies?

What drove Sister Theophister?

It was a news item that didn't get that much attention, but a Rwandan Gacaca court last week sentended Theophister Mukakibibi to 30 years' imprisonment for her complicity in the genocide in Rwanda. Mukakibibi is a Catholic nun who apparently aided Hutu murderers slaughter hundreds of Tutsis who were hiding in her hospital. She is not the first nun to be convicted, but the two others (so far) were convicted in a Belgian court.

Critics are pointing their fingers at the Vatican, asking whether the church is willing to consider the possibility that it played some kind of institutional role in the genocide.

I'm not sure how many of us could claim to understand the dynamics and mass psychology that led to the Rwandan genocide, and that may be one of the reasons why the western world does such a shitty job of ascertaining and stopping these kinds of atrocities.

Nothing but ugliness ahead in Korea

So Kim Jong-Il has thousands of long-range artillery pieces aimed at Seoul; long-range missile capabilities that could threaten Japan with conventional payloads; and now possibly some kind of nuclear capability. At least to make a dirty bomb. Although their claim to have detonated a nuclear bomb is met with quite a bit of skepticism, Bolton and the US administration is taking them at their word and threatening them with... well, what?

Economic sanctions probably won't make much of an impression on Kim Jong-Il, since all he cares about is himself. It will starve to death some more Koreans, though; so arguably that would be an anti-humanitarian thing to do.

Other things come to mind, but anything that would really hurt Kim Jong-Il might provoke an entirely irrational, destructive response.

Horror and wisdom in Amish country

In a state founded by Quakers and in a school for the Amish, yesterday's massacre ranks pretty high on an awfulness scale that finds way too frequent use these days.

It seems useless to ask why this happened. There are no good reasons. I'd like to offer some comfort to this community but can't come up with anything: "Rachel, weeping for her children, and refusing to be comforted, for they were no more."

I suppose one thing to do is to honor their memory by emulating their community a bit more. According to CNN, Amish funerals are simple events - boarded caskets, spoken but not sung hymnals, respect for but no praise of the dead. No flowers. The Amish, I'm sure, are probably romanticized in popular culture, but as fundamentalists go, they have a noteworthy civilization. Above all, they do nothing to attract anger or hostility.

It seems to me that the Amish believe that no amount of injustice warrants the commission of injustice. As sad and grief-stricken as they undoubtedly are, I'm hard pressed to see how this event will change their convictions.

How many more years?

I tend to accept the premise that more (or any) free and democratic countries in the Middle East can only serve to stabilize the area and increase the probability of durable peace among its many groups. And I tend to reject the premise - so often held by left-wingers - that people in this region are more or less incapable of embracing freedom and democracy.

This is the cornerstone for the so-called "neocon" point of view: let there be more freedom and democracy, and let's do whatever it takes to make it happen.

As we go into our fourth year of US forces in Iraq, there are three questions that should be considered:

1. Is the basis for going to war consistent with what the war accomplished?
2. Is there still reason to believe that more freedom and democracy is a valid strategy for the Middle East?
3. Was the Iraq strategy the right one, and has it been executed well?

Let's see here:

Was Cheney just a little too enthusiastic about bagging a quail?

Surrounded by Secret Service agents, Dick Cheney mistook his hunting compatriot for a bird and shot him over the weekend. Apparently, both the vice president and the agents rushed to help the poor guy immediately after it happened.

I don't know if Cheney is a member of the National Rifle Association - I'm guessing he is - but the one completely valid cause the NRA has committed itself to, is gun safety. It seems to me that if you take all the necessary precautions, these accidents shouldn't happen.

The problem apparently was that Harry Whittington caught up with the hunting party "unannounced" after he had lagged behind to pick up a quail he had shot. Cheney was "ready to fire" and put 28-gauge pellets in Whittington's head and chest.

Is an ironic twist ahead?

There is increasing violence and noise over the so-called Muhammed cartoons, and more and more world leaders are asking people to calm down.

What needs to happen, is this: Political leaders in Muslim countries need to explain this to their citizens, that in Denmark, Norway, France, and all other countries that have published this cartoons, there is freedom of speech. Which is to say - what gets published in newspapers can not be assumed to reflect the government's policy. And it would be helpful if pulpit imams explained the same thing.

Which will inevitably raise an interesting but uncomfortable question: if there is free and independent press in Europe, why isn't the press free in Muslim countries also free?

Did W read my blog?

Let's see, it was January 31st, 2006. It was 1603 days since September 11th, 2001, and 11,794 days since the OPEC oil embargo started. It took this long for Bush to realize something that was self-evident even to me:

Keeping America competitive requires affordable energy. Here we have a serious problem: America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world.

Further:

The best way to break this addiction is through technology. Since 2001, we have spent nearly $10 billion to develop cleaner, cheaper, more reliable alternative energy sources -- and we are on the threshold of incredible advances.

We have, I should point out, spent at least $200 billion on the war in Iraq, and heaven knows how much on other, incremental expenses for purposes of national security. So, as a fraction of the total expenditures to protect ourselves, we have spent less than 5% on things that would eliminate funding for terrorism forever.

Persuading theocratic nuts

Fred Kaplan is one of the smarter regular contributors to Slate, and today he gives his readers a challenge: What to do about Iran? As he points out:

If diplomacy is the only rational solution to this problem yet the Iranians just want nukes—in other words, if there is no deal (or at least no deal that the United States would realistically offer) that would compel them to give up their dream—what's the next step?

As he points out, a lot is at stake here - the oil supply to countries that are scared of Iran, the overt threat against Israel's existence, and I suppose, limited American military flexibility given the quagmire occupation situation in Iraq.