question everything
 

~ublog     

about

Ubaid Dhiyan's Facebook profile

Support Wikipedia
Kiva - loans that change lives
Get Firefox
Anti-Anna
I'm falling in love again...err with tennis.

maria sharapova - tall, russian, blonde, and in the quarter finals at Wimbledon


The Graduation Stole as a Heckler's Tool
Al-Muhajabah points to this excellent commentary by Juan Cole of Informed Comment on the recent graduation stole controversy at UCI.


Most Ridiculous Item of the Day
Christiane Amanpour is one of the best, and most memorable journalists on television I've ever seen, right from the days when CNN was covering the Gulf War in 1991 to her current coverage of the situation in Iraq. Bill O'Reilly on The O'Reilly Factor today suggested she should perhaps cover "movies or something" since her spouse, Jamie Rubin, is deeply involved with the Kerry campaign. This is an incredible suggestion, Amanpour has had a stellar reporting career in which she's covered not only the Gulf War and Iraq, but also did substantial work in Bosnia, Rwanda and Pakistan besides interviewing a range of world leaders. Here's a look at the awards she's received,
For her reporting from the Balkans, Amanpour received a News and Documentary Emmy, two George Foster Peabody Awards, two George Polk Awards, a Courage in Journalism Award, a Worldfest-Houston International Film Festival Gold Award and the Livingston Award for Young Journalists. She also was named 1994 Woman of the Year by the New York Chapter of Women in Cable and Telecommunications, and she helped the network win a duPont Award for its coverage of Bosnia and a Golden CableACE for its Gulf War coverage.

Amanpour has been awarded a number of other prizes, including a further Emmy for her documentary 'Struggle for Islam'; the 2002 Edward R. Murrow Award for Distinguished Achievement in Broadcast Journalism; the Sigma Chi Award (SDX) for her reports from Goma, Zaire; two George Polk Awards for her coverage of Bosnia in 1994 and for her work on the CNN International special Battle for Afghanistan in 1997 to name but a few.

Amanpour's 1991 Gulf War reporting also received the Breakthrough Award from Women, Men and Media. Her contribution to the 1985 four-week series, Iran: In the Name of God, helped CNN earn its first duPont award.


Now Mr. O'Reilly wants her to give up political journalism, that, to borrow a line from The Factor, is the most ridiculous suggestion I've heard today. It's funny how full of himself Bill O'Reilly really is, he hawks "Boycott France" bumper stickers, threatens Canadian guests of boycotting their country or cutting off US trade with them, casts aspersions on the Justices of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco and repeatedly calls people unpatriotic, he were, as if, the sole guardian and arbiter of what patriotism is.

I find it more than a little rankling to hear talk of an individual's or a group's patriosm being questioned based on their belief system. Back home, in India, for example, I was once asked by a friend in all seriousness, who my loyalties lay with, Pakistan or India, during the Kargil conflict. The implication of being a closet supporter of a country merely because I followed the same religion as they did, was absurd in the extreme for me, I don't identify with Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan or Pakistan, atleast not with any sense of allegiance, my identification with the peoples of those countries is the same as it would be with the people of any other nation, in a basic humanist sense.


If you gaze long enough...
Israel daily Haaretz reported last Friday of an exhibition going on in Tel Aviv right now showcasing the excesses the IDF habitually commits in the occupied territories near Hebron,
Yehuda Shaul still can't put his finger on the exact moment in which "it all clicked" for him. Maybe it was the day when some settler girls were sitting and playing a few meters away from his post, in Gross Square in the heart of Hebron. An elderly Palestinian woman passed by, loaded down with baskets, and the girls "picked up rocks and started stoning her. When I asked them, `What are you doing?,' they said, `How do you know what she did in 1929?'"
[...]
"It's a situation that screws up everyone. Everyone goes through the same process there of the erosion of red lines and a sinking into numbness. People start out at different points and end up at different points, but everyone goes through this process. No one returns from the territories without it leaving a deep imprint, messing up his head."
[...]
"There were times when we got up in the middle of the night in some house that we'd seized - this was in the eastern casbah, we took over some guy's house - and there were really nights when we'd wake up at two in the morning, go out, put on lots and lots of grenades - this kind of grenade that you put on your weapon and that makes a lot of noise, and we'd walk among the houses and shoot and yell and make terrible noises - all just to frighten our enemies ... and that's it. I don't know if we really just made some kids cry in the middle of the night or if it really had some psychological effect on someone who wanted to hurt us." (G., a fighter in the Nahal brigade who served in Hebron and was discharged seven months ago).
[...]
Sometimes they shoot something like four bullets and the IDF, in response, goes at it for four hours."

Always in response to Palestinian gunfire?

"A lot of times, we told ourselves, they'll surely start shooting when it gets dark, at six, so why shouldn't we start shooting at 5:30, to deter them? Or they go up with the armored personnel carriers into Abu Sneina and start to spray the iturim, the selected buildings, from close up. To make a show of presence."


A sampling of the images at the exhibition here.


Losing the fight
The New York Times reports on a soon to be published book, Imperial Hubris, by a senior (and current) CIA officer,
"U.S. leaders refuse to accept the obvious," the officer writes. "We are fighting a worldwide Islamic insurgency — not criminality or terrorism — and our policy and procedures have failed to make more than a modest dent in enemy forces."

The author says the threat is rooted in opposition not to American values, but to policies and actions, particularly in the Islamic world.
[...]
In warning that the United States is losing the war on terrorism, Anonymous writes: "In the period since 11 September, the United States has dealt lethal blows to Al Qaeda's leadership and — if official claims are true — have captured three thousand Al Qaeda foot soldiers." At the same time, he adds, "we have waged two failed half-wars and, in doing so, left Afghanistan and Iraq seething with anti-U.S. sentiment, fertile grounds for the expansion of Al Qaeda and kindred groups."


I agree with the thrust of this analysis and the book is probably rather incisive in this regard. However, a review of a previous book by the same author raises some questions. Purportedly, that book, Through Our Enemies' Eyes has some bizarre analogies comparing Osama bin Laden with Thomas Jefferson and Tom Paine,
[B]in Laden’s character, religious certainty, moral absolutism, military ferocity, integrity, and all-or-nothing goals are not much different from those of individuals whom we in the United States have long identified and honored as religious, political, or military heroes, men such as John Brown, John Bunyan, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and Thomas Paine.


The review does credit the author for his perspicacity in the overall sense though,
UPDATE: I’ve gone back and revisited the remainder of TOEE—the part which details the historical evolution of bin Ladin and his network—and would commend that portion to you. It’s easily the best one-volume treatment that I’ve seen on that account and does a superb job of crystalizing the nature of the threat we face, in a way that is still not grasped by most analysts even two years later. While Anonymous’ cutesy historical analogies and word games early in the book are annoying, he gets the threat analysis right.

I would also qualify the last sentence of my original post in that light as well. Anonymous’ goal is to convey the message that we’re not up against mere terrorists such as Hezbollah but rather against a global insurgency. He leaves unsaid in this volume how to defeat bin Laden, other than to basically say that we can’t do it within the constraints of political correctness and our desire to fight a war with minimal casualties—on either side. He makes allusions to Sherman’s “hard hand of war” approach, says that we’ve got to do what it takes. What this means, however, is left unsaid. Perhaps Imperial Hubris expands on this theme.

UPDATE 2: Despite the tone of the early chapters of the book and of the excerpts highlighted in the Guardian piece, Anonymous is equally bitter about the Clinton team’s handling of al Qaeda. His main theme is that THEY JUST DON‘T GET IT. Nothing I know about Kerry’s foreign policy indicates that Anonymous will be any happier with his handling of the war than Bush’s.


The review is highly recommended, as is this interview of the author on Talking Points Memo by Spencer Ackerman.


Spade
An article in today's Guardian by Martin Jacques takes a critical look at democracy and it's fallibility in a global context,

[...]
The boast about democracy is largely a product of the last half-century, following the defeat of fascism. Before that, a large slice of Europe remained mired in dictatorship, often of an extremely brutal and distasteful kind. The idea of democracy as a western virtue was blooded during the cold-war struggle against communism, though its use remained highly selective: those many dictatorships that sided with the west were happily awarded membership of the "free world"; "freedom" took precedence over democracy, regimes as inimical to democracy as apartheid South Africa, Diem's South Vietnam and Franco's Spain were welcomed into the fold. Following the collapse of communism, however, "free markets and democracy" became for the first time - at least in principle - the universal prescription for each and every country.
[...]
The west is the traditional home of democracy. The fact that western countries share various, usually unspoken characteristics, however, is often ignored. They were the first to industrialise. They colonised a majority of the world, invariably denying their colonies democracy. They were overwhelmingly ethnically homogeneous. Developing countries, for the most part, have faced the opposite circumstances: takeoff in the context of an economically dominant west; the absence, in the context of colonial rule, of indigenous democratic soil; and far greater ethnic diversity.

The west remains oblivious to the profound difficulties presented by ethnic diversity. As Amy Chua points out in World on Fire, democracy is far from a sufficient condition for benign governance in the kind of multiracial societies that are common in Africa and Asia. Democracy, the politics of the majority, allows the majority ethnic group to govern, potentially without constraint. Multi-ethnic societies, like Malaysia or Nigeria, require, for their stability, a racial consensus: democracy, resting on majorities and minorities, is deaf to this problem.

Moreover, democracy works very differently in different cultures. In Japan, the Liberal Democrats have formed every government, apart from a brief interruption, since democracy was introduced more than 50 years ago. The political arguments that count take place between unelected factions of the governing party rather than between elected parties. The Japanese model of democracy - or the Korean or Taiwanese - may have the same trappings as western democracy, but there the similarities largely end.
[...]


Hat tip to illruminations.


Computational Origami
Open your eyes and believe. Haha, truly fascinating.


pic via nytimes.com

Meanwhile somewhere above the Mojave desert, freshly, and uniquely crowned private astronaut and veteran test pilot Mike Melvill had what he described as almost a religious experience. He said it felt like touching the face of God, a reference to the poem High Flight by Pilot Officer John Gillespie Magee, Jr,

High Flight

Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of earth
And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings;
Sunward I've climbed, and joined the tumbling mirth
Of sun-split clouds - and done a hundred things
You have not dreamed of - wheeled and soared and swung
High in the sunlit silence. Hov'ring there,
I've chased the shouting wind along, and flung
My eager craft through footless halls of air.
Up, up the long, delirious, burning blue
I've topped the wind-swept heights with easy grace
Where never lark, or even eagle flew -
And, while with silent lifting mind I've trod
The high untrespassed sanctity of space,
Put out my hand and touched the face of God.



I particularly liked this report.


New Fox
Time to upgrade people!


Midnight's Children - Tribute
When reading the historical novels of James Michener, I'd always lament the fact he'd never bothered to write about my Bombay and my India, it was an aching loss, something I wanted to fix in good time, when I indulged in the fantasies of my own prowess as a spinner of tales. What I never really realized was that such a book had been written, only a few years following my birth, and it was a book I'd read too, but never grasped, not in the least. That book I've just finished reading, a second time, and the import of Salman Rushdie's Midnight's Children, is heavy and obvious. Undoubtedly one of the great books of our generation, a brilliant work, acute and impeccable, it is an enthralling bit of literature, written with deep feeling and by an uncommon talent. The narration of the first thirty years or so of India's independence, the hopes that freedom and democracy brought, and the hopelessness that invariably accompanies those ideals are captured with a magical and apocryphal look at historical events, through the eyes of an observer who sees in him reflected his country's birth, adolscence and gawky jump into adulthood. Much water has flowed under the bridge since the novel was first published, the generation hinted at by Saleem Sinai, born of the late seventies and the early eighties, is today's yuppie, the generation of IT services and economic booms that don't reach the masses, the generation of a billion people, an immense teeming mass that is as yet uncertain about what which way to go, of changing city names and dreams of lunar travel, my generation. I've jumped ship, so to speak, and write while sitting in a city a full twelve hours behind the city of my birth, but the ties remain, strong as ever. I've said this before, and say it again, it is pitiful that such an important writer, important both to Indian as well as world literature, a man who has held up the mirrors we gaze our images in, has been treated like a pariah by the country of his birth and that of his fecund fantasy.


A Mole
A mole on the face of the sun. No but it was too evanescent, so perhaps, an adolescent's pimple?


Irreverent
At the risk of sounding irreverent, could we have please please have some real news on the networks instead of an interminable series of final goodbyes? Back in 1994, when India's ex president Giani Zail Singh died in a car accident, Door Darshan, the state run TV station, and, at that time the only programming on the Indian air waves, ran nothing but really bad, mournful music for seven long days. Though this is not evem close to that sorry experience, I'm watching more of Bravo, USA and TNT than CNN, FoxNews and MSNBC, and I'm not happy.


Quote
To have doubted one's own first principles is the mark of a civilized man.

-- Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.


Obituary
Dom Moraes, columnist, poet, translator, died in Bombay today at age 65. RIP.



eXTReMe Tracker