HONEST REVIEWS: Earlier this week we had an honest conservative with an honest review of Al Franken's "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right." Becky Miller called Franken's book "amazing." This time around we have an honest review of Alan Dershowitz's "The Case For Israel" by Adam Rubin, assistant professor of Jewish history at Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion in Los Angeles. Look, I'm not into demonizing Israel's hard-core supporters (unless they do something that totally discredits themselves) because it's a) time-consuming b) childish and c) tiring. I'd just like to quote Rubin's review....

...it is the latest in a long tradition of hasbarah, propaganda, that is not unlike the material produced by the Israeli Office of Hasbarah in years past, or pamphlets issues today by various pro-Israel advocacy groups in the United States... In seeking to "make the case for Israel," Dershowitz, a professor of law at Harvard and prominent defense attorney, has abandoned any pretense of balance, nuance or objectivity, all of which are guiding values for professional historians.

[...]

Dershowitz also uses evidence from Morris to argue that the Arab leaders of Haifa encouraged their community to leave. What emerges from Dershowitz’s selective use of Morris’ book is an account of the refugee problem that places responsibility for the problem squarely on the shoulders of the Palestinians themselves.

However, Dershowitz neglects to mention Morris’ conclusion, based on detailed research and stated quite clearly in several of his books (including those cited by Dershowitz), that the majority of Palestinian refugees were in some cases expelled by Jewish forces and in others fled out of fear of expulsion or massacre by those forces. On the very same pages Dershowitz cites to make his argument for Palestinian culpability, Morris writes the following:

"During the second stage, while there was clearly no policy of expulsion, the Haganah’s Plan D clearly resulted in mass flight. Commanders were authorized to clear the populace out of villages and certain urban districts, and to raze the villages if they felt a military need. Many commanders identified with the aim of ending up with a Jewish State with as small an Arab minority as possible. Some generals, such as [Yigal] Allon, clearly acted as if driven by such a goal.... Ben-Gurion clearly wanted as few Arabs as possible to remain in the Jewish State. But there was still no systematic expulsion policy.... Yet Israeli troops ... were far more inclined to expel Palestinians than they had been during the first half of the war. In Operation Yoav, Allon took care to leave almost no Arab communities along his lines of advance."

Clearly, Morris’ argument is considerably more complicated and morally ambiguous than the simplistic version Dershowitz presents. The latter has violated a cardinal rule of historical scholarship: an author is responsible for weighing all evidence at his or her disposal before making a conclusion, even if some of that evidence contradicts one’s own argument or bias.

Norman Finkelstein recently accused Dershowitz of plagarism, saying that he had made extensive use of "From Time Immemorial," which turned out be one great hoax as exposed by Finkelstein.

SAUDI PUPPETS: John Cole is surprised by Mark Steyn's column in which Steyn says the following:

[Joseph Wilson, who's wife's name was leaked by two White House officials] was never an intelligence specialist, he's no longer a "career diplomat," but he is, like so many other retired ambassadors, on the House of Saud's payroll. And the Saudis were vehemently opposed to war with Saddam.

Does it sounds like defamation? Wilson is made out to be a Saudi puppet, because he's an scholar at the Middle East Institute. The Middle East Institute isn't the only one on the Saudi payroll: the Meridian International Center and the Middle East Policy Council are just two more. The interesting things is that all of "institutes", "centers" and "councils" are full of former government officials.

A couple of examples. Walter Cutler served as an ambassador to Saudi Arabia (twice) and now heads the Meridian International Center after having left the Foreign Service. Three other former Foreign Service members--Charles Freeman, Frank Carlucci, and Hermann Eilts--are on the Middle East Policy Council. Wyche Fowler and Ned Walker are the Chairman and President of the Middle East Institute, respectively. Both served as ambassadors to Saudi Arabia. Other members of the Middle East Institute including Defense secretary James Schlesinger and formber FBI and CIA Director William Webster. According to former CIA-operative Robert Baer, the Middle East Institute receives $200,000 of its $1.5 million budget from the House of Sa'ud. (Baer also claims that Colin Powell received $100,000 for a speech at Tufts University that was paid by Prince Sultan and Prince Turki through Issam Fares, the prime minister of Lebanon.)

But it all comes to this: Washington D.C. is dirty. Saudi money is used to curry favor with Washington officials by carefully and generously giving patronage to everything from presidential libraries, university chairs, Middle East study centers and think tanks to American defense contractors, arms makers, plane manufacturers, K Street lobbying firms, oil services, and construction companies such as Bechtel and Halliburton. Oh, and the White House. So why single out Wilson? He's not the only Saudi apologist.

Besides, it has nothing to do with the leaking of his wife's name.

HITCHENS: I have never refrained from bashing Christopher Hitchens, but if you've disagreed with me in the pact, maybe his latest piece will convince you that he's shrill.

Shorther Chris:

I hate religions of all sorts.

BOYKIN WORSHIPS PAGANS: I briefly commented on the General Boykin controversy and since then he has issued a non-apology put together by Pentagon lawyers. In the apology, Boykin argues that his reference to idol worship refers to Somali warlord Osman Ato's "worship of money and power." This, though, contradicts his original statement:

"He went on CNN and he laughed at us, and he said, 'They'll never get me because Allah will protect me. Allah will protect me.' Well, you know what, I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God, and his was an idol."

His apology is (reluctantly) accepted, but since these statements have been publicly noted, it--I suspect--will discourage a lot of patriotic Muslims of enlisting in the army or becoming linguists at the FBI.

In addition to that, Fareed Zakaria puts the smack-down on Boykin and suggests that he should be fired. Pointing to the findings of a commission set up by Bush, he notes that 12 percent of respondents surveyed in Arab and Muslim countries believed that "Americans respect Arab/Islamic values." Tolerating Boykin would definitely send the wrong message.

ARAB-AMERICANS' CHOICE: Even Arab-Americans like Howard Dean more than Joe Lieberman. Personally, I think that Bush has permanently lost the Arab vote, but he's gaining on the Jewish vote.

FRIEDMAN AND DEMOCRACY: I don't know about this guy, but he does sounds less moronic than usual. The first paragraph of his latest column just confuses me:

should have known something was up when a Saudi diplomat recently asked me, "Do you know what kind of woman is most sought after as a wife by Saudi men today?" No, I said, what kind? "A woman with a job."

Okay, admit it: Saudi Arabia would be the last Arab country you'd expect to start the implantation of the Arab Human Development Report. He says that it should implemented from the outside, while the authors of the report themselves think it should be done from the inside. But how is this related to 9/11 and the "cause of terrorism?" The thinking goes that there's something wrong in general in the Arab world which causes this huge resentment against the West and especially the United States. But is it? We can confirm the following: there is no Arab democracy, Arab women are uniformly an oppressed majority, and in science and technology every Arab state is behind the rest of the world. My question: how does this cause and create terrorism and terrorists? Mohammad Atta and 18 other men were cut off from their original countries for years. Atta was radicalized in a mosque in Berlin, not Cairo. After that, he was brainwashed in al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan. Atta went to Berlin to get an engineering degree. To the Fareed Zakarias and Tom Friendmans out there: are the flaws pointed out in the report related to terrorism and if so, how?

And I'm still not sure how one democratic can change the whole region. Is Washington really serious about this whole deal? Brian Ulrich notes the same thing:

A current goal of U.S. foreign policy is to promote democracy in the Arab world. Egypt is one of the largest recipients of U.S. aid. Why is the Bush administration not pressuring Egypt to become more democratic?

Do the neo-cons really want a democratic Arab world or are they out to bring the Middle East crashing down, giving Mecca and Medina to Osama bin Laden and seize the Saudi oil-fields?

LATEST FROM AFGHANISTAN: Rumor is that former King Mohammad Zahir Shah will be moving back to his home in Rome. Almost hitting 90, he isn't the healties Afghan around. I have a question: will the Saudis continue to pay for the monthy cost of his life?

The new Afghan constition is on its way and it's a balancing act between democracy and Islam, but that doesn't mean that they're mutually exclusive. It still remains a balancing act watched closely by the Iraqis. The Loya Jirga, which I have touched upon in length earlier, will be held on December 10th. (And yes, I will have an translation of it as soon as it's released.)

Dissappointing news from Canada: Canadian Prime Minister Chretien said Canda won't be sending additional troops for the ISAF-expansion. I get the feeling that the Canadian military brass thinks otherwise. Germany (part of the irrelevant old Europe), on the other hand, will probably send 450 new soldiers, Deutsche Welle reports.

UPDATE: I decided to post excerpts from previous constitutions so we'll be able to compare them to the new one:

1923 Constitution
Article 1: Afghanistan is completely free and independent in the administration of its domestic and foreign affairs. All parts and areas of the country are under the authority of his majesty the king and are to be treated as a single unit without discrimination between different parts of the country.

Article 2: The religion of Afghanistan is the sacred religion of Islam. Followers of other religions such as Jews and Hindus residing in Afghanistan are entitled to the full protection of the state provided they do not disturb the public peace.

Article 13: Subjects of Afghanistan shall have the right to submit individual or collective petitions to government officials for the redress of acts committed by officials or others against the Sharia [religious law] or other laws of the country.

1963 Constitution
Article 1: Afghanistan is a constitutional monarchy; an independent, unitary and indivisible state. Sovereignty in Afghanistan belongs to the nation.

Article 21: In case the King dies before his successor has completed twenty years of life, the Queen shall act as regent until his successor reaches the stipulated age. In case the Queen be not living, the Electoral College, provided under Article 19 of this Constitution, shall elect someone from amongst the male lineal descendants of his majesty Mohammad Nadir Shah, the martyr, to act as regent.

Article 32: Afghan citizens have the right to assemble unarmed, without prior permission of the state, for the achievement of legitimate and peaceful purposes. Afghan citizens have the right to form political parties, in accordance with the terms of the law, provided that: 1) The aims and activities of the party and the ideas on which the organization of the party is based are not opposed to the values embodied in this constitution.

1976 Constitution
Article 2: The exercise of power by the people, the majority of whom consists of farmers, workers, the enlightened people and the youth.

Article 8: The elimination of exploitation in all its forms and manifestations.

Article 27: All the people of Afghanistan, both women and men, without discrimination and privilege, have equal rights and obligations before the law.

Article 41: Work is the right, honor and duty of every Afghan who has the capability of doing it. The major purpose of the laws that shall be promulgated to regulate work is to reach the stage in which the rights and interests of all toilers, farmers, workers and trades are protected, suitable working conditions provided, and in which relations between the worker and the employer are regulated on a just and progressive basis. The choice of work and vocation is free, within the terms determined by the law.

1987 Constitution

Article 2: The sacred religion of Islam is the religion of Afghanistan. In the Republic of Afghanistan no law shall run counter to the principles of the sacred religion of Islam and other values enshrined in this constitution.

Article 6: The National Front of the Republic of Afghanistan, as the broadest, sociopolitical organization, unites political parties, social organizations and individual members enrolled in their ranks for ensuring their active participation in the social, political and civic spheres on the basis of a common program.

Article 19: In the Republic of Afghanistan, state, mixed, cooperative, religious trust, and private property as well as properties of political and social organizations exist. The state protects all forms of lawful properties.

Article 21: The state shall assist strengthening and expansion of cooperatives and shall encourage the voluntary participation of the people to this end.

Article 23: The state guarantees the right of ownership of land of the peasants and other land owners in accordance with the law. The state shall adopt necessary measures for the realization of democratic changes in agriculture keeping in view the interests of peasants and other land owners. The state encourages the establishment of big agricultural and
mechanized state, mixed and private farms and helps the reclamation of virgin lands.

Article 29: The hereditary right to property shall be guaranteed by law on the basis of Islamic Sharia.

LUNACY WATCH #1: I can't decide who to give the "Asshat of the Day Award." The Democrats (minus 4), General Boykin or Mahathir Mohammad? All three.

Why in the world did the Democrats (minus Zell Miller, Maria Cantwell, Daniel K. Inouye, and Joseph R. Biden Jr.) and some Republicans (that would be Ben Nighthorse Campbell, John Ensign, Graham, Olympia J. Snowe, Sam Brownback, Saxby Chambliss, Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins) vote for an amendment to turn half of the reconstruction aid for Iraq into a loan? Yes, I'm all for debt-forgiveness even though that would cancel the $184 that Halliburton is owed. The foreign debt is already estimated to be between $60 billion to more than $130 billion and I'm a little curious where Kevin Drum gets his $300 billion number. The New York Times hints at "$150 billion to $200 billion." I guess nobody really knows. As Juan Cole notes:

It will be years before Iraq can produce much more than three to five million barrels a day. A good deal of that petroleum, and much of the profit from it, will be needed for internal reconstruction and debt servicing.

And, of course, paying for the debt that Saddam caused. There's much more outrage out there, so let me just say that this is incredibly stupid. This is like kicking the Iraqis in the teeth. And it hurts, damnit.

General Boykin calls my god "an idol," thinks that the war on terrorism is a holy war, and says the enemy is Satan. How do they find this guy? And no, this isn't just political-correctness. According to Terry of the Nitpicker blog, General Boykin should be guilty of violating article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Department of Defense directive 1344.10, Chapter 2 of the CGSC Handbook and Army Regulation 670-1. If he's sent on gardening leave, which is where he should be sent, he should be given a copy of Thomas Jefferson's treatise on the separation of church and state.

Add a third to the list: Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammed. He has been labeled a "moderate" by the media, mainly because he has done some good things for his country. Mohammad was speaking in front of the Organization of the Islamic Conference during its 10th summit., when he said this in his welcoming speech:

It cannot be that there is no other way. 1.3 billion Muslims cannot be defeated by a few million Jews. There must be a way.

[...]

We are actually very strong. 1.3 billion people cannot be simply wiped out. The Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million. But today the Jews rule this world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them.

[...]

We are up against a people who think. They survived 2000 years of pogroms not by hitting back, but by thinking. They invented and successfully promoted Socialism, Communism, human rights and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong, so they may enjoy equal rights with others. With these they have now gained control of the most powerful countries and they, this tiny community, have become a world power. We cannot fight them through brawn alone. We must use our brains also.

Of late because of their power and their apparent success they have become arrogant. And arrogant people, like angry people will make mistakes, will forget to think.

They are already beginning to make mistakes. And they will make more mistakes. There may be windows of opportunity for us now and in the future. We must seize these opportunities.

We Muslims must face a harsh reality: we have a problem with anti-Semitism. It's not always been like this and most of it started with the creature of the Jewish state. Hatred of Jews in the Islamic and Arab world is as rampant as that of crazy conspiracy theories. And we must realize that there's no denial to this and solve it. One can criticize appropriately the treatment of Palestinians and not be a racist ideologue. But one can also, like Mr. Mohammad, move away from these appropriate criticism to anti-Semitic trash-talk. No, the Jews don't rule the world. (I actually think that Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia is more influential on the President compared to, say, Ariel Sharon.) Deal with it. Wake up. Face the facts. We are lagging behind and there's a reason that Jews have been successfull in so many things. It's not because of their "evil Jewry-ness" but because they've worked harded and therefore earned it. If we spent more time educating ourselves and our children, we wouldn't have time to hate.

How is it possible that such hatred has become almost a standard? How can a Muslim think that the Jews control the world? The Qu'ran teaches us that Allah controls the world. Suddenly the Jews have taken over? We must overcome our obsession with these sham politics. Life is much simpler when it consists of anesthetized existence, punctuated now and then by angry shouts about ghosts in the shadows and nightmares in our dreams, preventing us from being what we do not have the courage to become. Al-Muhajabah once said that "Muslims sometimes are just too stupid to be evil." Too true, sister.

NEWS ROUND-UP: I hope you don't mind the bullet-format. Here we go:

A bomb in Northern Gaza killed three security guards who were traveling in a U.S. diplomatic convoy. The convoy carried a cultural delegate from the U.S. embassy who where to interview Palestinian candidates for a Fulbright scholarship. Al-Aqsa Martyr Brigades, Islamic Jihad and Hamas have all denied responsibility, which makes the situation even more complicated. The Palestinian Authority is claiming that it had warned about the possibility of an attack and had suggested changing travel routines. I'm not a big fan of Yasser Arafat and his Palestinian Authority, but this claim doesn't sound that crazy or odd at all; I think it's pretty plausible. The method of the bombing--a roadside bomb--reminds one of recent events of Baghdad. It also reminds us of other American casualties. Also read this Ha'aretz analysis.

While right-wingers are claiming that Iraq is not that bad (and they're right to some extent), Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani's militia and a street thug's Muqtada al-Sadr's army of the Mahdi are battling on the streets of Karbala. Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez indicated that the Coalition may have to "respond very forcefully" and that "a confrontation is possible." Tough words. Will there be a confrontation? Will the Iraqi Governing Council back it? And more importantly: how is it going to respond? So many questions, yet no answers. If you ask me, I don't think that arresting a firebrand during Ramadan is such a good idea, to put it nicely. (Juan Cole has more details.)

Speaking of Ramadan (which starts October 25th), there is a debate (yes, a debate in Islam; no joke) in Canada on the so-called "moon ruling." It's "science vs. reality." Fasting during Ramadan starts when the moon goes down and ends when the moon comes up. Three top Muslim scholars in Egypt say that even though you can't see the moon, the moon is scientifically there so you can start eating. The Canadian Islamic Congress agrees. But some don't. It's an interesting article and somehow refreshing. (I personally follow the "scientific rule." I pick up a free Calendar that the local Afghan market gives away.)

AFGHANISTAN UPDATE: Afghans have always been great entrepreneurs. There are dozens of Afghan markets and restaurants just in Northern Virginia alone. Many Afghan-American, from this exact region, have gone to Kabul to take up the task of funding and managing the private sector. Since Halliburton is not very interested in Afghanistan, I think that the task of privatization is in the hands of exiled Afghan refugees returning to rebuild Afghanistan. The Washington Post has a good story on this matter and it notes that "$4.5 billion in private development projects have been registered with the government, from pharmaceutical plants to fruit-packing operations." Can you believe that? A country ravaged for 20+ years and almost 5 billion in investment! Also, take a look at the guy in the picture. He's selling skittles and Nesquik.

And then there's more great news: the U.N. Security Council has voted to expand the ISAF-force in cities beyond Kabul. I actually expected this vote to happen in December but apparently NATO's secretary general, George Robertson and Germany took the initiative to make it happen faster, which would pressure NATO's members for the expanded mission.

Al Jazeera is reporting that Taliban fighters have shot four policemen in Uruzgan province, which is not a border providence (where such attacks have happened most of the time) but two provinces inside Afghanistan. Those peacekeepers better hurry. Brian Ulrich has more.

CLUELESS: So clueless it makes you want to rip your head off. Here's Sullivan:

It seems to me that the anti-Bush crowd has been missing the real story, as usual. Instead of attempting to parse the administration's arguments before the war, they'd do better to focus on the Pentagon's massive incompetence after the war.

Here's Newsweek:



And here's Time Magazine:

OPPOSITION TO THE TURKS: The Iraqi Governing Council is the worst puppet-government. Ever.

Al-Hakim's three-day visit to Syria, which for a long time was a close ally of his group, comes a week after Israeli warplanes attacked a camp near Damascus that Israel claimed was a training center for the Palestinian militant group Islamic Jihad. Syria denied the allegations and said Palestinian militants abandoned the camp years ago.

"Iraq and Syria, people and states, are brotherly, and their fate is the same. Therefore, we stand by their side," al-Hakim told reporters. "When there is an aggression against Syria, it is an aggression against Iraq." Asked if he considers attacks against U.S. troops to be terrorist acts, al-Hakim said, "We believe that many of these operations are terrorist acts because they target civilians, scholars, oil and water installations and public establishments. We consider these operations terrorist acts and increase instability in Iraq. They are harmful and are rejected by Iraqi people," he said.

You wanted democracy right? Democracy at work, ladies and gentleman.

As for Turkey, it's been an odd relationship. The Turks have been a longtime ally, ever since they entered NATO in 1952 and fought alongside us in the Korean War. We've developed and maintained several major military installations on Turkish bases. Although no American combat forces are based in Turkey, the air force uses less than half a dozen bases under NATO auspices for training exercises. The opposition to the Iraq war ran high, with more than 90% of the Turkish public. At the end, like a true democracy, the parliamentary couldn't get the support of the parliamentary to allow American troops to use Turkey as staging bases for the invasion of Iraq. This time around it was easier to get the Turks' support, but it didn't come easy. The cost? Around $850,000 per Turkish soldier.

We have two cases of democracy in the Middle-East--something the Bush administration allegedly waged this war for--in which both times they've acted against our interests. When one opposed it, the other supported it. When the other came through and supported us, the other opposed it. Gotta love democracy.

NOT HOME: Globe and Mail tries to call Islam, but Islam is not home.

Also: Operation Soda Mountain happened a while ago, but it seems like Operation War Crimes is just getting started. Our own West Bank, anyone? (Hmmm. Did this play a role, somehow?)

THE STREET-THUG CALLED AL-SADR: After the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime there were three prominent candidates to lead the Shiites of Iraq: Muqtada al-Sadr, Ayatollah Mohammed Baqer al-Hakim and Sayyed Abdul Majid al-Khoei. Both Al-Khoei and al-Hakim are killed and now there's one left: Al-Sadr. Unfortunately, he's the anti-American fundamentalist street thug.

Al-Sadra's popularity, which is growing by the day, owes everything to the reputation of his father, Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Sadeq al-Sadr, who was assassinated by Hussein's regime in 1999. (He, his two sons and his driver were shot in their car.) The residents of Saddam City, which houses around 2 million Shiites, renamed it Sadr City in memory of their murdered spiritual leader. Meanwhile, Al-Sadr quickly filled the power vacuum left by the collapse of the Baath party and the security vacuum left by U.S. forces. From his base near Najaf he sent his men around the country to set up neighborhood committees and control local assets. They took over hospitals, collected garbage, guarded warehouses, established roadblocks to deter looters, protected electricity and water stations and turned Baath offices into religious centers. (Read more about this smart move and who's puppet he is in this New York Magazine article.)

Al-Sadr announced on Friday that he would set up a shadow Islamic government. Juan Cole comments:

That young Shiite sectarian leader Muqtada al-Sadr has chosen this anniversary to announce that he will form an Iraqi government points to the millenarian beliefs of the Sadrists. (Milleniarian movements typically believe that the world as we know it is about to end through divine intervention.) Many Iraqis assume that the bewildering events of the past 6 months indicate that the return of the Mahdi is near. Some may think that Muqtada is the Mahdi. Mahdist movements in Islam have often turned violent, and several have fought against Western imperialism. Most Americans have heard of the Sudanese Mahdi, if only via the film Khartoum, who opposed British expansion into Egypt and the Sudan. But there were millenarian overtones to some Algerian revolts against the French, and among Muslims who revolted against the British in India in 1857. Also the Shiites produced the Babi movement, which threw Iran into turmoil in the 1840s and 1850s and had an anti-Western cast. Some of Khomeini's following was from millenarian Shiites.

The Sadrists don't need millenarian ideas to be militantly anti-Western, but such beliefs can bolster reckless violence. After all, if the world as we know it is about to be turned upside down by God, then what have we got to lose? Muqtada has instructed his followers to organize marches and processions in Baghdad and other cities in support of the new "government" once it is announced, according to al-Hayat.

[...]

The Western press keeps saying that the extent of Muqtada's influence is unknown. I'd guess he has about 2 million followers in Iraq. It is a guess, but an educated one. The reporters are confused that they are told by mainstream Shiites that Muqtada is too young and inexperienced to have such influence. But he leads a sectarian movement, not a mainstream one. In American terms, Muqtada is more like David Koreish, and Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani is more like an Episcopalian bishop. Except that Muqtada has a huge following compared to any American sect I know of.

[...]

Muqtada also plans to name ministers of Foreign Affairs, Finance, etc. He calls on his followers to support this 'government' with "peaceful" demonstrations. Al-Hayat newspaper says that Muqtada has claimed that his government would represent the Iraqi people, whereas the Interim Governing Council was merely appointed by a foreign power, the US, and was not elected in accordance with Muslim law. (Muqtada doesn't seem to realize the irony that his own proposed government is also appointed, only by him, rather than elected; though perhaps there has been informal consultation (shura) with his lieutenants).

Paul Bremer and his people need to do some desperate damage control. Earlier this week, thousands of Shiites came out in Sadr City to protest the arrest of a local imam, and than to protest the killing of two of their fellow Shiites. Ramadan starts in less than two weeks and unless you don't get things under control I expect things to get worse. Remember that in Shia Islam, there is a strong theme of martyrdom and suffering. You don't want Al-Sadr or one of his close friends in jail or, worse, dead.

Also, on Saturday, hundreds of thousands of Shiites came out in Karbala on Saturday, to commemorate the birth of the Twelfth Imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi. A beatiful sight if you ask me. I am Sunni, and I think I would be the wrong person to be asked in detail about Al-Mahdi and the commeration. Aziz Poonawalla would be a much better candidate.

THE BETRAYAL OF THE MARSH ARABS: Do you know who Marsh Arabs are? The chance is small, and if you don’t than you should either read Wilfred Thesiger’s “The Marsh Arabs” or look at the front page of Saturday’s Washington Post. Titled “'A Gift From God' Renews a Village,” it brings the story of Shiite Marsh Arabs (marsh dwellers), who’s marches are revitalized by Iraqi engineers and by U.S. soldiers after they were drained by Saddam Hussein after the first Gulf War. Out-of-job journalist Andrew Sullivan brings it up and asks:

How can you not be moved by such a story? How can you not be proud of what we have done?

Sure Sully, I am happy. But not incredibly happy. I was before though, but something ruined the mood. You know what it was? It was this article titled: “House GOP Cuts ZIP Code, Garbage Truck Funds From Iraq Plan”. In the article, the following is mentioned:

[D]ropped from Bush's request is $100 million for restoring Iraq's marshlands, systematically emptied and destroyed by deposed President Saddam Hussein's government to punish Shiite Muslims who live there.

It seems that the House Appropriations Committee, led by representative Bill Young (R-Fla) decided to not “waste” money to restore what Saddam Hussein has taken away from some 300,000 people. Representative Young calls it an “improvement.” Restoring the marshes take more than just opening gates smashing dams, but it’s a damn good start. What the Marsh Arabs really need is that $100 million was for. But don’t expect a peep from Sully. And yes, I am proud of the soldiers. But not of Bill Young and his fellow Republicans.

See more naiveness here and here.

DEFINITION OF "QUAGMIRE": From this week's Time Magazine:

T[he] Chechenization strategy — intended to remove the war as an issue in Putin's re-election campaign next spring — is reminiscent of the U.S.'s attempts to declare victory and get out of Vietnam three decades ago. It also has echoes in the U.S.'s current predicament in Iraq, as Bush seemed to acknowledge at a news conference with Putin at Camp David two weeks ago when he said, "Terrorists must be opposed wherever they spread chaos and destruction, including Chechnya." In Chechnya guerrillas have fended off a superior military force and used terrorist tactics to take the battle from Grozny to the streets of Moscow.

[...]

As many as seven Russian soldiers are being killed every day in Chechnya, according to close observers of the war. Moscow rarely publishes its losses, but last February the Kremlin admitted to almost 4,600 soldiers dead since late 1999--more than it lost in the first Chechen war but still considered a gross understatement.

[...]

Many doubt the Russians will ever leave. "Russian generals have zero enthusiasm" for Chechenization, says Deputy Prime Minister Doshukayev, because there's too much money to be made in Chechnya. The arms and explosives that kill Russian troops come straight from the Russian bases, according to local people and foreign observers. Russians deal the weapons on the black market even though they will be used to kill fellow soldiers. Guerrillas don't have to smuggle arms into Chechnya, says pro-Kadyrov newspaper editor Lechi Magomayev, because "they can buy them at the nearest base." Chechen officials say the military is also involved in oil smuggling and other rackets.

Don't be fooled or deceived.

More on Chechnya here.

NOBEL PEACE PRIZE: Shirin Ebadi has become the 3rd Muslim and 11th woman to win the Nobel Peace Prize. Good call. From her biography...

Ebadi represents reformed Islam, and argues for a new interpretation of Islamic law which is in harmony with vital human rights such as democracy, equality before the law, religious freedom and freedom of speech. As for religious freedom, it should be noted that Ebadi also includes the rights of members of the bahai community, which has had problems in Iran ever since its foundation.

EDIT: Argh. Stupid Blogger ate half my post. I shall continue.

Ebadi is a courageous and seldom voice in the Islamic world and now has become a spokesperson for the voiceless. Winning the prize does not only promote the Iranian cause, but it gives her the kind of immunity that would prevent the Iranian authorities from locking her up again, as they've done numerous times (the last time being 1999 if I'm correct). It's also an improvement over murderers, like Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin in 1994 and Henry Kissinger and Le Doc Tho in 1973.

Oxblog with more. (Oh, and don't miss Patrick Belton's article on the "Arab and Muslim capital of the United States;" Dearborn, Michigan. Very impressive.)

That's all for now.

NOBEL FOR KARZAI: This is strange. Hamid Karzai is speculated to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. The committee does not release the names of any candidates, but this "Nobel shortlist" most likely stems from names being guessed by Nobel watchers. The alleged guess list:

... Silva for trying to overcome social injustice in Brazil; Russian anti-war group Mothers in Black; jailed Iranian dissident Hashem Aghajari; Russian human rights activist Sergei Kovalyev; Italian charity The Community of Sant' Egidio; the Salvation Army; American politicians Sam Nunn and Richard Lugar for their Cooperative Threat Reduction Program; and Karzai. Other nominees include U2 singer, social activist Bon, pop singer Michael Jackson, former Illinois Gov. George Ryan, President Bush, Prime Minister Tony Blair, French President Jacques Chirac, jailed Israeli nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu, Chinese dissident Wei Jingsheng, Women in Black for promoting Israeli-Palestinian ties, and Cuban human rights activist Oswaldo Paya Sardinas.

Yes, Karzai is included, but the bets are against him:

[T]he Web-based betting site Centrebet gave John Paul 2-1 odds of winning the prize, ahead of Havel (8-1), who received this year's Gandhi Peace Prize. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva was given 14-1 odds, while Afghan leader Hamid Karzai had 25-1 odds.

Reuters is saying that the Pope is poised to win, but will only get the price if it's shared with an anti-war Muslim. Or something like that. Karzai is a Muslim, but he supported the war on Iraq.

Very strange indeed. The winner will be announced tomorrow.

WARLORD-DISPUTE UPDATE: The Associated Press' Amir Shah (one of the few journalists in Kabul when it fell) is reporting that Atta Mohammad and Dostum have signed a U.N-brokered cease-fire...

After fighting that killed dozens of people, rival warlords in northern Afghanistan said Thursday that they had reached a truce and would begin withdrawing tanks and other weapons within 48 hours. But with soldiers squared off along a tense battlefield, it was not clear whether the cease-fire would hold despite assurances from both sides. The fighting between the two groups "both nominally loyal to President Hamid Karzai" was the worst in northern Afghanistan in months, with one side claiming more than 60 people were killed.

One warlord, Atta Mohammed, said the truce took effect immediately and that both sides would return all weaponry to their bases in 48 hours. "I am sure this cease-fire will hold," Mohammed told The Associated Press. Gen. Majid Rozi, a senior commander for northern warlord Abdul Rashid Dostum, confirmed the details of the truce and said the withdrawal of weapons had begun. The agreement followed talks involving Afghan Interior Minister Ali Ahmad Jalali and British Ambassador Ron Nash.

"If there is no peace in the north of the country, it will damage the trust the international community has in us," Jalali said after the signing of the truce on Thursday.

[...]

It was not immediately clear what sparked the fighting. A government spokesman in Kabul said it was most likely due to disputes over land or access to water, the cause of repeated clashes in the past two years. The U.S. military in Afghanistan said it was concerned about the fighting and was closely monitoring it. Hours after the signing of the truce, the battlefield was still tense, commanders said, and it was not clear whether the deal would hold.

Residents of Mazar-e-Sharif were less than optimistic. "I do not believe in this cease-fire. It will just collapse," said Abdul Kadir, a guest house owner. Another resident, a teacher who only gave her name as Aziza, said foreign peacekeepers were needed to stop the fighting. "Please Mr. Karzai send ... (peacekeeping) troops to Mazar-e-Sharif," she said.

These kinds of cease-fires have been signed several times (under international pressure and pressure from Kabul) in the past 2 years, but they're not permanent truces; they won't prevent further bloodshed. The last few months have been a calm period for the warlords, and instead focus was on the Taliban insurgence. Maybe we can tell General Abizaid (Lebanese-American by the way) to fight the warlords the way he fights the Taliban: with B-52 bombers.

And the Contra Costa Time has the background story on Karzai's new Afghan ambassador to the United States, Said Jawan, an Afghan-American living in Oakland. Maybe I'll meet him when I go to the Afghan embassy in two weeks.

THANKS PATRICK: So that's the person who's been sending you over here, huh? Keep visiting guys.

WARLORDS AT IT AGAIN: Atta Mohammed versus Abdul Rashid Dostum at it again. I haven't counted all their clashes, but it's been more than a dozen times.

Dostum is a vicious man. He sided with Afghan communists and the Soviets, than joined the mujahedin. When the Taliban gained power, he sided with them. He split and the Taliban drove him into exile--twice; once in 1997 and again in 1998. He came back in 2001 to fight along with the Northern Alliance and U.S. special forces. The Tajik versus Uzbek fighting started in the beginning of 2002 when both Mohammad and Dostum focused on control of Mazar-e-Sharif, in the north. They both fought against the Taliban and now both are wearing Western tailored business suits. (Yes, that's right: warlords in suits. Nobody matches Afghan warlordism.) Even though Dostum is the deputy Afghan Defense Minister, it's Mohammad who's being backed by Defense Minister Fahim, because Mohammad (like Fahim) is Tajik and member of the Jamiat-e-Islami faction. Another reason Fahim is backing Mohammad: Dostum relaunched his old political party, the National Islamic Movement, or Jombesh-i-Milli Islami. Known simply as Jombesh, the group has a platform that rests on secular democracy (despite its name) and respect for minority rights, which translates to a federalist agenda. Dostum has hit out in speeches at "extremism" and "fundamentalism." Read: Jamiat-e-Islami.

Even though warlords are supposed to be disarmed in a U.N-sponsored plan starting October 15th, fighting will continue. Dostum is one politician who still fields an army. Whoever rules in Kabul is not apt to forget it.

UPDATE: If you want to know what Dostum's different costumes, check out the Google image search. You have him in Soviet fatigue, traditional Afghan clothes and yes, in a suit.

FEMALE FATWAS: The Washington Post on women in India issuing fatwas:

Last month, a woman here approached a panel of religious scholars on a vexing matter of Islamic law. What did the prophet Muhammad have to say about beauty aids such as tinted contact lenses, cosmetics, nail polish, leg waxing and creams for lightening facial hair?

The scholars consulted their religious texts and a few days later got back to her with an answer: Yes to limited applications of blush and eyeliner. No to everything else.

The answer was supplied in the form of a fatwa, a religious edict that is normally issued by a panel of male Islamic judges known as muftis. But this fatwa carried an extra measure of expertise. Its authors were women.

"Within limits, makeup is okay," said one of them, Nazima Aziz, from behind the black veil that obscured all but her large and apparently unmade-up eyes. "But when you use a colored contact lens you're trying to change the way you look. You're not allowed to alter or change the form that Allah has given you."

Aziz, 22, is a muftia, one of three who make up a newly inaugurated, all-female fatwa panel -- or dar-ul-iftah -- that operates out of a girls' religious school in this once princely capital about 750 miles south of New Delhi.

School administrators, Indian news reports and some academic experts say the panel is the first of its kind in India and perhaps the Sunni Muslim world. In any case, it is a striking departure from the norm. For centuries, Muslim women have had to rely on men for official religious guidance on gender-sensitive matters from makeup to menstruation. Now they can drop a line -- in writing or by e-mail -- to the muftias of Jamiat-ul-Mominat, as the girls' religious school is known.

Questions received so far have addressed the wearing of high heels outside the home, the obligation of fathers to provide child support after a divorce and the propriety of wearing bangles before marriage, among other things.

"Before, they would go to their husbands, or to the man of the family, and he would take her problems to the mufti, and the male would bring the answer back to her," said Mohammed Hassanuddin, who has often figured in that process as the school's chief mufti.

Read it all.

AFGHANISTAN UPDATE: Daniel Drezner talks about nation-building in Afghanistan and the progress--or lack thereof-- that's been made recently. He notes a Chicago Tribune article about the city of Gardez, serving as a model for an instable Afghanistan.

The U.S. military chose Gardez, a three-hour drive southeast of Kabul, as the pilot for its first Provincial Reconstruction Team, a concept the U.S. military hopes will restore stability and bolster reconstruction efforts across the country.

The team is made up of about 60 military and civil affairs officers doing mostly humanitarian work. But their presence was an undoubted deterrence to any thoughts of resistance the warlords may have had, said Asadullah Wafa, the governor of Paktia province. "Without the Americans, this would be very difficult," he said. "They are helping us a lot."

New Zealand has an Provincial Reconstruction Team in Bamian and Germany may join in.

Meanwhile, there's increased talk of a NATO-expansion and from what I can make up, Germany and the Netherlands are going to be taking a leading role (as they've done in past; they shared the ISAF-command for 6 months). There also... the Serbs. Yes, they're sending about 1,000 combat troops (not peacekeepers) which demonstrates just how desperate we need these guys. Brian Ulrich notes that Serbia and Montenegro have a gendarmerie. Time Magazine notes that the initial deployment to Afghanistan is a "mix of 250 army officers and members of the gendarmerie."

Some have noted Washington Post article which reports a split-up between Northern Alliance and Hamid Karzai. Even though I wouldn't call it a "revolt" I do think this needs a closer look. Do the people of Northern Alliance want to chose a presidential candidate or do they want to use their tanks against Karzai? The rumors that Burhanuddin Rabbani may be the candidate (which I think are false) does indicate that Jamiat-e Islami and Nahzat-e Mille, the main Northern Alliance political parties, may remain aligned. I predict that Fahim, who's firmly in control, may nominate himself or someone very close; using Ahmed Shah Massoud's posters to keep the flames of nostalgia for him burning in an effort to boost their political standing.

UPDATE: Take a look at the latest Reuters/AP pictures.

HITCHENS: Hitchens opposes abortion. Hitchens admires Two Live Crew. Hitchens supports Columbus's extermination of Native Americans. Hitchens wants to invade Iraq. Hitchens takes shots at dead people. Hitchens wants to invade Iran.

The man amazes me. Having sided with the late Edward Said for years, he now calls the neoconservatives of D.C. his comrades. And because of that--rushing so fast to the right--he gets more press and more publicity. But for Hitchens it's lucrative nonsense that he's peddling. It's not exactly a martyr's fate defecting from The Nation, a frills-free liberal magazine, to Atlantic Monthly, the well-heeled house organ of Zionist crazies. His credibility is also nearing zero, if not at zero already. I'm not an apologist for Turkish human rights abuses (to the contrary), but the fact remains that his former wife and mother of his children, Eleni Meleagrou, is a Greek who is employed by a Greek-American lobby. He hates Turkey for personal reasons. Period.

I could go on and complain for hours. Go on and read Hitchens wishing for bloodshed in Iran that, I think, will inevitably lead to a disastrous civil war between the conservative religious faction against the rest of the population. Here's a lesson from the newly liberated Iraq you visited: no matter how bad your government is, people will unite to repel foreign invaders. Most Iranians want to get rid of the current regime, but they'll be better off on their own.

In the meanwhile, I'm thinking about starting a petition urging Hitchens to serve in the Sunni Triangle.

SHOUT-OUT TO BUSH HATERS: Do you hate President Bush so much that you'll vote for any Democrat to get him out of office? Are you a real Bush hater? If not, Fred Hiatt fives you a very good reason to become one:

The description [see below] of Putin's Russia was so outlandishly fictional, so at odds with the KGB-inspired screw-tightening that has been the hallmark of Putin's regime, that the only possible conclusion was that Bush just doesn't care. Aides said Bush delivered a different message in private. But his public message seemed to be: Stand by my side and proclaim yourself an ally in the war on terror, and all else may be forgiven. You can shut down your media, rig elections, send troops rampaging through Chechnya, and Bush will stay mum.

[...]

Putin pockets his Camp David and Crawford visits and his accolades from his friend George, and then stiffs the United States on Iraq, stiffs the United States on Iran and won't even talk about Chechnya. China hosts a six-nation conference on North Korea, heralded by the administration as a sign of great cooperation, and then attacks the United States as the intransigent party.

[...]

Muslims everywhere know that Putin has been engaged since 1999 in a ruthless campaign against the Muslim population of Chechnya. They know that just yesterday he rigged an election in that rebellious province by forcing every credible candidate but his own to withdraw. When he praises Putin's vision of "democracy and freedom and rule of law in Russia," how can Bush expect anyone to believe that he is any more serious about his own commitment to democracy and freedom in Afghanistan or Iraq?

Hiatt was referring to Putin's visit to Camp David last Saturday, where Bush praised and hailed Russia's anti-democratic and brutal human rights violations:

I respect President Putin's vision for Russia: a country at peace within its borders, with its neighbors, and with the world, a country in which democracy and freedom and rule of law thrive.

And no, he wasn't being sarcastic.

And if you think that Chechnya's recent election (in which—surprise!—Putin-puppet Ahmad Kadyrov "won") wasn't an outright sham and a farce, than I really would like to give you a backhand across the head.

ISRAEL STRIKES SYRIA: In retaliation to the bombing of an Arab restaurant in Haifa, the Israeli air force targeted an alleged Islamic Jihad-trainings camp deep inside Syria. Sure, it does bring over the "Better listen or we'll blow the crap out of you!" point, but is Israel going to target foreign countries everytime there's a suicide bombing? Once is acceptable, but multiple times just escalates the situation. To put it simply: it was just reckless, but I do think it send a message. Will Syria learn its lesson? I'm sorry, but I don't see them cave to Israeli pressure. And Israeli Ambassador Dan Gillerman saying things like "it was as if bin laden would have asked for a Security Council meeting after 9/11" doesn't help either.

Doesn't mean I'm not confused by all of this. I thought Arafat was to blame. Don't tell me you didn't get that feeling over the past few weeks?

UPDATE: Brian Ulrich comments:

Everyone stop and consider the target of the recent terrorist attack in Haifa: a restaurant partially owned and frequented by Arabs in a city famous for its multicultural atmosphere. This was an assault on the peace process as surely as any of those timed to derail important initiatives or inflame tensions in sensitive areas. Not only that, but as they have before, the terrorists have shown they do not care if Arabs they consider collaborators are killed in their attacks. In this there is a warning.

Read the rest. (Not that I completely agree though.)

PROOF THAT RUSH WAS WRONG: If Rush Limbaugh still thinks that McNabb is overrated, he should've seen the Eagles vs. Redskins game this afternoon. Paul Ramsey took a heavy beating (what, 15 sacks in the first quarter?) but had his "insanely good" and "insanely bad" moments. Unfortunately, he had definitely more "insanely bad" moments. Especially when the Skins needed those 3 points. Coming back from a 11-point deficit is still a great achievement. (I don't blame BloggerCon though, but the dozens of penalties. Steve needs to work on that.)

CRACKHEAD OF THE DAY AWARD: Representative Cass Ballenger (R-NC) says: "Muslims in hoods across the street and Congress doesn't allow bribes. How could this marriage last any longer?!"

U.S. Rep. Cass Ballenger blames the breakup of his 50-year marriage partly on the stress of living near a leading American Muslim advocacy group that he and his wife worried was so close to the U.S. Capitol that "they could blow the place up." Another stress on their marriage: the decision by "we holier-than-thou Republicans" in the House, Ballenger said, to ban gifts -- including meals and theater tickets from lobbyists -- that once meant "a social life for (congressional) wives."

Ballenger, a Republican from Hickory, called the Council on American-Islamic Relations -- whose headquarters are across the street from his Capitol Hill home -- a "fund-raising arm" for terrorist groups and said he reported CAIR to the FBI and CIA. Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the group, which looks out for Muslims' civil rights and sponsors interfaith gatherings, said Friday that Ballenger's unsubstantiated remarks were bigoted.

The nine-term Republican made the comments during a Wednesday evening phone interview with The Observer, in which he discussed his legal separation from his wife, Donna. It was the couple's proximity to CAIR after Sept. 11, 2001,"bugged the hell" out of his wife, he said. "Diagonally across from my house, up goes a sign -- CAIR ... the fund-raising arm for Hezbollah," said Ballenger, 76, referring to a Lebanese militia group the United States has labeled a terrorist organization. "I reported them to the FBI and CIA." Ballenger said in the post 9-11 environment in Washington, his wife, a homemaker, was anxious about all the activity at CAIR, including people unloading boxes and women "wearing hoods," or headscarves, going in and out of the office building on New Jersey Avenue. "That's 2 1/2 blocks from the Capitol," he added, "and they could blow it up."

"This is out-and-out bigotry," Hooper said. "It's unworthy of an elected official at the national level. ... You wonder what he's been doing in Congress if this is the kind of analysis he does: `You're a Muslim, so you're guilty.' " This isn't the first time Ballenger has been criticized for comments some consider insensitive. Last December, in another interview with The Observer, he said that then-Rep. Cynthia McKinney, an African American from Georgia known for her abrasive style, had stirred in him "a little bit of a segregationist feeling. I mean, she was such a bitch." He later apologized for what he called "pretty stupid remarks" even as an aide was painting white the black lawn jockey -- a symbol of racial insensitivity to many -- in Ballenger's front yard.

[S]he echoed Ballenger's comments on CAIR and on her feelings about living across the street from the group's headquarters. "It's a very good location if you really wanted to raise trouble," she said.

Ballenger's wife also agreed with him that the GOP-controlled House's 1995 decision to restrict the money spent on members of Congress and their spouses had helped turn Washington into "a lousy place to live. ...It used to be you'd get invitations to the symphony or the theater ... I don't think you should get $1,000 trips to the Bahamas (from lobbyists). But I don't see where a dinner or a theater ticket is that bad. We had friends who are lobbyists."

Is he supporting the War on Terror Muslim Environmentalists, already? Now please sing along:

Times have changed,
Our kids are getting worse,
They won't obey their parents,
they just wan't to fart and curse

Should we blame the government?
Or blame society?
Or should we blame the images on TV?

No! Blame Canada! Blame Canada!

With all thier beedy little eyes,
have packed thier heads so full of lies,

No! Blame Canada! Blame Canada!

We need to form a full assault,
It's canadas fault,

Don't blame me for my son Stan,
He saw the darn cartoon and now hes of to join the klan,
And my boy Eric once had my picture on his shelf,
But now when I see him he tells me to fuck myself,

Well? Blame Canada! Blame Canada!

It seems that everythings gone wrong,
Since Canada came along

Blame Canada! Blame Canada!

They're not even a real country anyway,

My son could have been a doctor or a lawyer rich and true,
Instead he burned up like a piggy on a barbeque,
Should we blame the matches? Should we blame the fire?
Or the doctors who allowed him to expire,

Heck no! Blame Canada! Blame Canada!
With all their hockey hollabaloo,
And that bitch Ann Murray too

Blame Canada! Shame on Cana-da!

WESLEY CLARK: What to make of Wesley Clark? The guy became the tenth Democratic Presidential candidate and looked pretty good in his first debate. A look at the post-Clark polls showed his immediate competitiveness with front-runner Howard Dean. Clark, a four-star general, was the NATO Supreme Allied Commander in charge of the military campaign against Yugoslavia in 1999. He's also a prominent advocate of diplomacy and multilateralism.

Recently he spoke to Josh Marshall and had the following to say:

The proxy states, Syria, Lebanon, whatever. These states are not -- they need to transform. But, why is it impossible to take an authoritarian regime in the Middle East and see it gradually transform into something democratic, as opposed to going in, knocking it off, ending up with hundreds of billions of dollars of expenses. And killing people. And in the meantime, leaving this real source of the problems -- the states that were our putative allies during the Cold War -- leaving them there. Egypt. Saudi Arabia. Pakistan.

Earlier on, Clark criticized the Bush administration's policy on state-sponsorship of terrorism:

It's the principal strategic mistake behind the administration's policy. If you look at all the states that were named as the principal adversaries, they're on the periphery of international terrorism today. Syria -- OK, supporting Hezbollah and Hamas -- yeah, they're terrorist organizations. They're focused on Israel. They're getting support from Iran. It's wrong. Shouldn't be there. But they're there. What about Saudi Arabia? There's a source of the funding, the source of the ideology, the source of the recruits. What about Pakistan? With thousands of madrassas churning out ideologically-driven foot soldiers for the war on terror. Neither of those are at the front of the military operations.

I would summarize my interpretation of Clark's argument as follows... "Bush is targeting the irrelevant terrorism supporters and we should be focused on the real source of terrorism in the region, like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Egypt. Sure, Iran, Syria and the like are bad, but we can't take them all out. And they don't pose a global threat." And I'd agree with that. Completely. The countries mentioned--Syria, Iran, Lebanon and the like--are not our problem; they're Israel's. Let them deal with it.

But questions still remain and I'm very curious to find out his answers. So what if the Saudis and Pakistanis are our biggest problem, how are you going to deal with them and what kind of diplomatic or militaristic solution are you suggesting? The closer we get to 2004, the more answers (I anticipate) we get.

There's also the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. There's this interview from this week's Rolling Stone:

How do you grade the Bush administration's attempt to forge peace between Israel and the Palestinians?

Right now we've got the worst possible regional dynamic, and we've got to change it. You cannot make peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. I don't care if the president of the United States sits there in Gaza and forces the two sides to talk -- they can't. The question of conflict is coming from outside. You've got to get people in the Middle East to say they don't want war. But unfortunately, we seem to want it.

How about the question of Israel. Do you think Ariel Sharon needs to be hemmed in?

Israel has a unique problem. It is beset by nations that want to destroy it. Any nation that is under attack has the right to self-defense. And the right to self-defense is the right to strike pre-emptively to disrupt the threat. Therefore I totally support Israel's effort to go after these terrorists before they can strike Israel. Israel must be willing to participate in negotiations. But if it's going to ever have its chance at the negotiating table, Israel also has to show [its survival doesn't depend on making a deal]. So, the process of building the fence [separating the occupied territories from the rest of the country] is very important. It says to the Arab world, the clock is ticking, we're not prepared to make unlimited concessions, we have our principles and we will fight for them.

But that doesn't mean the U.S. should behave and strike the way Israel does. Two entirely different things. We can make Israel safer by not doing that. We need to bring a council together like we did for the Balkans: Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran. And instead of telling them we're going to nuke them, we've got to give them an incentive to want to participate in preventing conflict in the Middle East. The process has to be driven by optimism and hope, not fear. We will be there for Israel, and they will survive and be a great nation.

What about the Palestinians?

The Palestinians have always been used by the Arabs as a weapon against Israel. The Palestinians are the most educated, most Westernized, most enterprising, least tribal of all the Middle Eastern groups. They were a force for the modernization and economic development in Middle Eastern countries. They were a source of instability and insecurity for the ruling elite. So they were pushed back and not given the rights of citizenship, not given the opportunity to be assimilated. All that's gotta be unwound. They're human beings like everyone else, and they've gotta be given a chance.

Several points to be made here.

His answer to the first question comes over kind of vague to me, but he attributes many of the problems of the conflict from outside forces and to a certain degree that's true, whether it's support for Hamas or interference in the peace-process. But the biggest problem remains: the main problem comes from the conflict itself, the extremists on both sides pulling the strings. And on one side it's Ariel Sharon and Likud. On the other side it's Yasser Arafat, who's convinced the world that his puppet (Mahmoud Abbas) worked independently. And those are the people to deal with. And that leads to the second question.

He supports the extremist (Sharon); he supports the apartheid wall; and supports Israel's pre-emptive strikes (which have showed to work against Israel and to be inefficient). There's my fundamental agreement. I'm convinced a solution is to be found at the negotiating table and not through violence.

Than he makes the point, on which I agree, that Palestinians are being used as a propaganda weapon against Israel. But it's sad that he has to remind people that the Palestinians "are human beings like everyone else" and that they deserve a chance. He'd have a very short career if he suggested the same thing about other groups like, say, Jews, if you will.

All by all, he still has to answer many questions. I'm not endorsing anyone yet, but I will continue to cover Clark and the rest of the relevant candidates over the coming months.

CHECHNYA'S RAPE: Why is the world over-zealously focused on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Why so many United Nations Security Council resolutions on the Palestinian conflict? Why the media attention on Ramallah? Forget Palestine. Chechnya is worse -- far worse.

When the Soviet Union broke up, Chechnya declared independence. The world failed to recognize the little nation, though its people probably suffered more from Russian savagery than any other on earth. In 1944, Stalin sent 75% of the entire Chechen people to Siberian concentration camps. For the past 250 years, Russia resorted to genocide to crush attempts by Chechen to regain their independence. After Chechen fighters routed a KGB invasion force in mid-1994, whose goal was the overthrow of President Dudayev, Moscow sent in the Russian Army in December, 1994. Since then, Russian forces have killed 40,000 Chechens and laid waste the country. Two thousand Chechen `disappeared' after being arrested by KGB and Interior Ministry units. Human rights organizations accuse Russian forces of mass executions, bloodthirsty reprisals, and widespread torture. They pounded their own city, Grozny, to rubble and are murdering Russian civilians in the process. Their conquest of Grozny completed a methodical campaign of brutality. Since October of 2000, more than 100,000 Russian troops have inched through Chechnya, leveling villages with low-precision artillery and dumb bombs. This "War on Terror" has killed many Chechen guerrillas and civilians and has turned most of the survivors into refugees. In its indiscriminate use of firepower against civilian targets, it is as bad as anything since World War II. The war against the Chechens, who are despised as Muslim terrorists in slavic Russia, is payback for the humiliating defeat in 1989 in Afghanistan, for the humiliating defeat during the first war against the Chechens in 1996 and for NATO's bombing of Serbia. Chechnya's rape continues today -- and the United States, Britain and India have become Russia's willing executioners.

Why are the Russians getting a free pass on Saddam-like behavior? Why are these countries abetting and turning a blind eye to Russia's crimes? It's easy to see why Putin's government wants to link Chechnya to more complex issues like India's presence in Kashmir and the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq. It's a lot harder to understand why New Delhi, Washington and London would allow this blatant case of Russian imperial overstay and support of a farce to blight their already difficult relations with the countries of the Muslim world.

HAJJI: I respect the troops serving all over the world, whether in Germany or Iraq. They're heroic young patriots who serve their country and we owe them. But, let me say this--they're not immune to criticism. I think it's a real shame that so many of the soldiers are racists. And, I'm sure that, it isn't winning the hearts and minds either.

World War II had its "krauts," Vietnam had its "gooks," and now, the war on terrorism has its own dehumanizing name: "hajji." That's what many U.S. troops across Iraq and in coalition bases in Kuwait now call anyone from the Middle East or South Asia. Soldiers who served in Afghanistan say it also is used there. Among Muslims, the word is used mainly as a title of respect. It means "one who has made the hajj," the pilgrimage to Mecca.

But that's not how soldiers use it. Some talk about "killing some hajjis" or "mowing down some hajjis." One soldier in Iraq inked "Hodgie Killer" onto his footlocker. Iraqis, friend or foe, are called hajjis. Kuwaitis are called hajjis. Even people brought in by civilian contractors to work in mess halls or drive buses are hajjis - despite the fact that they might be from India, the Philippines or Pakistan, and might be Hindu or Christian.

[...]

"This is more of a commonsense thing," he said. "It's like using any other derogatory word for a racial or ethnic group. Some may use it in a joking way, but it's derogatory, and I'm sure people have tried to stop it."

"Hajji," [Samer] Shehata [of Georgetown University's Center for Contemporary Arab Studies] said, sounds like racist terms that U.S. soldiers used in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, such as "towel-head."

Exactly. I mean, towel-head and Ay-rab were getting so old.

GITMO: I haven't comment on the recent arrests of three Arab-Americans/Muslims at Guantanoamo Bay camp in Cuba, so here goes. I remain skeptical and will refrain from saying anything substantial on the suspects themselves until they are prosecuted and a verdict is known. I have no knowledge of military tribunals so don't expect anything from that angle.

Here is my take on it: Gitmo is a place full of dangerous people. And that's just the Americans serving there I'm talking about. (Hey, maybe they outed Plame because they thought she was another spy aiding the enemy, but she turned out to be on our side? Not plausible, but still.) Here are the facts surrounding the first suspect, Muslim US Army chaplain Youssef Yee: he's an alumni of the Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences in Leesburg, Virginia (which is a couple of miles from here). It's one of the few institutes that's credentialed by the Pentagon to certify chaplains. The Pentagon is reviewing its ties to al-Qaeda and it's also Saudi-funded. The latter should've been reason enough to become suspicious if you ask me.

BIDEN: Joseph R. Biden Jr.; hero.

Of President Bush's $87 billion proposal for the military protection and reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan, he has allocated $1.2 billion for Afghanistan — a sum that does not even match the amount pumped into the economy by the drug trade. What's more, a third of this is recycled money: funds raided from existing accounts, like a desperately needed program for embassy construction. That leaves a mere $800 million in new money.

Inadequate funding is just one way the president has failed to make good on his pledge of a Marshall Plan for Afghanistan. He has also failed to provide the leadership necessary to encourage the rest of the world to join in the rebuilding effort.

Read it all.

Meanwhile, Karzai announced that a draft of the new Constitution is being released in two weeks. The Boston Globe's Victoria Burnett:

But interviews with officials and an English-language copy of a recent, but not final, draft, indicate that the constitution will establish an Islamic republic whose laws are based on international conventions but where "no laws shall run counter to the sacred principles of Islam."

The country will be run by a president, a prime minister, and a parliament with two chambers -- a house of the people and a house of elders. The prime minister will be picked by the president but will need parliamentary approval.

The penultimate draft, which has since been amended and is therefore not definitive, lays out the rights of men and women to speak freely, form political parties, vote and run for office, and get a free education.

[...]

The text received by the Human Rights Commission failed to spell out the protection of citizens' rights, he said. For example, Nadery's commission had inserted a clause to protect the right to freely practice any religion. It also called for the creation of an independent human rights body and a constitutional tribunal.

The section of the penultimate draft that deals with the relation between religious and secular law is vague, hinting at the commission's struggle to please different religious factions.

The draft says the judiciary should fall back on Islamic law when there is "no clear law in this constitution or other laws" with which to judge a case. It leaves open the possibility of judging the case according to the laws of the Hanafi school, followed by the Sunni majority in Afghanistan, or the Jafari school, followed by the country's minority Shi'ites.

PLAME-UPDATE: Here are the latest developments in the Plame-affair:

Questions have arisen on Valerie Plame's exact position. Was Plame a covert CIA agent or just an analyst behind a desk in Langley? Kevin Drum makes a decent and compelling case, but the best I've heard is by Larry Johnson, a former CIA analyst and counterterrorism official at the State Department. He appeared on Jim Lehrer's Newshour:

Let's be very clear about what happened. This is not an alleged abuse. This is a confirmed abuse. I worked with this woman. She started training with me. She has been undercover for three decades, she is not as Bob Novak suggested a CIA analyst. But given that, I was a CIA analyst for four years. I was undercover. I could not divulge to my family outside of my wife that I worked for the Central Intelligence Agency until I left the agency on September 30, 1989. At that point I could admit it.

So the fact that she's been undercover for three decades and that has been divulged is outrageous because she was put undercover for certain reasons. One, she works in an area where people she meets with overseas could be compromised. When you start tracing back who she met with, even people who innocently met with her, who are not involved in CIA operations, could be compromised. For these journalists to argue that this is no big deal and if I hear another Republican operative suggesting that well, this was just an analyst fine, let them go undercover. Let's put them overseas and let's out them and then see how they like it. They won't be able to stand the heat.

[...]

I say this as a registered Republican. I'm on record giving contributions to the George Bush campaign. This is not about partisan politics. This is about a betrayal, a political smear of an individual with no relevance to the story. Publishing her name in that story added nothing to it. His entire intent was correctly as Ambassador Wilson noted: to intimidate, to suggest that there was some impropriety that somehow his wife was in a decision making position to influence his ability to go over and savage a stupid policy, an erroneous policy and frankly, what was a false policy of suggesting that there were nuclear material in Iraq that required this war. This was about a political attack. To pretend that it's something else and to get into this parsing of words, I tell you, it sickens me to be a Republican to see this.

[...]

You do not -- it is not up to the journalists to decide which officer they are going to out. We saw this in the 70s with Marchetti and others and Philip Agee who outed officers and they were killed. I don't want to wait until we get a body count. The principle's established: do not divulge the names of these people. In my own career trainee class I did not know Joe's wife last name; we went by our first initials.

[...]

I was in the same class with her. I was Larry J. In fact, when I first saw her last name I didn't recognize her until one of other my classmates who's out now called me up and said, hey. To realize this is a terrific woman, she's a woman of great integrity and other people that don't know her were trying to suggest that she is the one that initiated that. That is such nonsense. This is a woman who is very solid, very low key and not about show boating.

As I mentioned yesterday, the Department of Justice has ordered the F.B.I. to investigate. But the chance of finding the alleged culprit is small. Can Robert Novak, or any of the other 5 reporters be ordered to testify? Eugene Volokh makes the case. I'm not convinced the full 100% though.

Atrios informs that the Guardian's D.C. correspondent Julian Borger tells us that reporters are privately acknowledging that Karl Rove was the leaker. Because I rate the Guardian's credibility not as high as the Washington Post's, I remain skeptical of this claim. (Borger is the one of the first to report on Rumsfeld's Office of Special Plans.

Alberto Gonzales, Counsel to the President, has sent two letters to the White House staff. Josh Marshall has them.

As the scandal grows, I'll be sharing images like the one below. Enjoy.

TALIB PRANKS: Who would've thought? The once infamous and notorious Taliban are now reduced to… childish pranks that could be mistaken for something a bunch of high-school students could’ve done. I'm talking about this pranker in particular. Keep an eye on the trouble-maker.

BREAKING...: From tomorrow's Washington Post. Key grafs...

A senior official quoted Bush as saying, "I want to get to the bottom of this," during a meeting yesterday morning with a few top aides, including Rove. Senior intelligence officials said yesterday that the CIA filed what they termed a "crime report" with the Justice Department in late July, shortly after syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak, citing two unnamed administration sources, identified Wilson's wife by name. The CIA report pointed to a "possible violation of federal criminal law involving the unauthorized disclosure of classified information."

[...]

Another journalist yesterday confirmed receiving a call from an administration official providing the same information about Wilson's wife before the Novak column appeared on July 14 in The Post and other newspapers.

The journalist, who asked not to be identified because of possible legal ramifications, said that the information was provided as part of an effort to discredit Wilson, but that the CIA information was not treated as especially sensitive. "The official I spoke with thought this was a part of Wilson's story that wasn't known and cast doubt on his whole mission," the person said, declining to identify the official he spoke with. "They thought Wilson was having a good ride and this was part of Wilson's story."

[...]

Wilson said yesterday that he believes Rove "at a minimum condoned the leak," but said he has no evidence Rove was the original leaker. Wilson said that based on reporters' statements, he believes Rove participated in calls that drew attention to his wife's occupation after Novak's column was published. "My knowledge is based on a reporter who called me right after he had spoken to Rove and said that Rove had said my wife was fair game," Wilson said. He said that conversation occurred on July 21.

Wilson said a producer from another network told him about the same time, "The White House is saying things about you and your wife that are so off the wall that we won't use them." Wilson said the series of similar calls he received, which included four journalists from three networks, stopped on July 22, after he appeared on NBC's "Today" show and said the disclosure of his wife's maiden name could jeopardize the "entire network that she may have established."

The article also mentions that "[i]f the department's career counter-espionage lawyers find grounds for a full investigation, Attorney General John D. Ashcroft will have to decide whether to name a special counsel to oversee the case." But as mentioned in the post below, the New York Times is already reporting that Ashcroft has opted for a FBI investigation instead of a special council. To be continued.

VALERIE PLAME: News-item of the day (and the many days to come, presumably): the Valerie Plame-affair. It goes as follows. In the event that you are not familiar with this story, it is as follows: Ambassador Joseph Wilson went to Niger in 2002 to look into the possibility that Iraq had sought to purchase uranium from that country. According to the Washington Post, "senior administration officials" made phone calls to "at least six journalists" revealing Valerie Plame's name and identity.

The Democrats are doing what the Republicans did during the Lewinsky-affair: asking for an independent council. Back than the Democrats replied that the Department of Justice could handle it. Today, they're doing the exact opposite. The Democrats are calling for an independent council, while the Republicans, or the White House at least (for now), say that the Justice Department can handle it. The Independent Council Statute, first enacted in 1978 that had to be renewed every 5 years, expired and was subsequently not renewed in 1999, since neither Republicans like it when they're being gored or Democrats don't like it when they're being gored.

Right now there's a pseudo- Independent Council provision which would makes it largely independent, but he or she can still be fired by the Attorney-General, which would be a politically stupid and (with the elections coming up in 1 year) suicidal move.

All we can do is speculate, which is fun, but I will leave that to the experts: Kevin Drum and Josh Marshall.

I will be covering breaking news if there is any, but I hope to get back to subjects I have touched upon earlier. My prediction of the outcome of all of this? Well, a) the leakers aren't going to get caught b) a lot of political firestorm that will divide this country even more and c) Bush trying to cover his ass up. Yeah, it seems vague, but that's my skeptical looks on a country that's so incredibly politically divided. Questions still remain: is it true? Did a senior White House administration official blow Plame's cover?

Stay tuned.

UPDATE: I need to use my words more carefully from now on. The Democtars are calling for an independent investigation.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Has Attorney-General John Ashcroft told the FBI to start investigating? Blogger Swopa exerpts from tomorrow's New York Times:

Mr. Ashcroft decided over the last several days to move ahead with a preliminary inquiry, and the Justice Department notified the F.B.I. late today that the bureau would lead the investigation.

SYSTEMATIC TERRORISM: Israel's racist laws in action. The IDF is fighting terrorism; ethnically cleansing Arabs from Jerusalem one at a time. This isn't an accident; it's explicitly-stated, intentional government policy to achieve the Israeli demographic objective. It is done to preempt any challenge to the Israeli claim and sovereignty of Jerusalem. Because when Israel is forced to make peace, by the public or international community, it has already won.

VDH BACKS WARLORDS: (Please excuse me for plagarizing Slate.) Victor Davis Hanson's latest column:

Example: "For all the criticism about warlords, it is now likely that Afghanistan will never again be turned over to al Qaeda to train thousands to conduct the type of murder we saw on September 11."
What it means: Al-Qaeda has been eradicated from Afghanistan and they won't come back.
What it hides: Al-Qaeda and the Taliban are launching attacks from their safe-haven in Pakistan. Osama hasn't been caught. We back warlords who oppress Afghans of any other ethnicity than their own.
Subtext: We're winning. Stop spinning.

CLINTON-LOVIN' MUSLIMS: I didn't agree with some of Clinton's policies. But when it comes down to his personality and charisma: I really like the guy. Anyways, he recently traveled to Srebrenica to commemorate the massacre of 8,000 Muslim men and boys. Albanians see him, well, as a hero!

Thousands of Kosovo Albanians turned out to greet the man they see as their liberator from a decade of repression under then Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic. Schoolchildren got the day off and well-wishers waving the Star and Stripes thronged Pristina’s Bill Clinton Boulevard as his motorcade drove by.

Loud applause erupted when Clinton, while also preaching ethnic reconciliation with Serbs, gave what Kosovo Albanians may be keen to interpret as implicit support for their drive for complete independence from Serbia.

“I love this country,” he told a packed Pristina University hall in a speech which, like much of his visit, was broadcast live on television.

“I want to see you move toward self-government...,” he said after receiving an honorary doctorate. True to form, Clinton later worked the crowd waiting outside, shaking hands as NATO-led peacekeepers and U.N. police held people back.

Unlike many other predominantly Muslim places in the world, the United States is genuinely popular in this landlocked territory of two million, placed under U.N.-led administration in the summer of 1999 after NATO’s 11-week air war.

“There is a holiday in Kosovo today because Clinton is here,” said local journalist Blerta Foniqi, 20, as she waited for him to arrive. “He’s one of Kosovo’s most loved people,” said her colleague."

They don't like the Dutch though.

THE HOUSE OF CARLYLE SA'UD: Guess what? Robert Jordan, the American ambassador to Saudi Arabia is resigning because of "personal reasons." In case you didn't know, Jordan is an old buddy of Bush. He used to be Bush's personal lawyer; he contributed $2,500 to the GOP of which a thousand bucks went to Bush; he defended Bush in a probe of insider trading allegations in 1990; and he works for the Houston-based law firm Baker Botts. Baker Botts represents more than half of the Fortune 100 companies and the Carlyle Group. And the "Baker" in "Baker Botts" is James Baker III, former secretary of State under the first President Bush.

I'm not doubting that Mr. Jordan is leaving for "personal reasons." But let me go out on a limb and guess that he'll go back to defending the Saudis against that trillion dollar law suit on behalf of the the victims of 9/11.

REMOVE ARAFAT: Sarcasm at its best. The question asked is: 'should Yasser Arafat be removed?' Here's my favorite:

"Hey, there's nothing like martyring a leader to calm the Palestinian extremists."

EDWARD SAID CONTINUED: To treat Edward Said solely, or even primarily, as a political figure is necessarily to produce a distorted view of his life. He is, first and foremost, a literary critic. Here is a man who advocated peaceful settlement, who had many, many Jewish friends and who wrote compassionately about Jewish deaths and the need for reconcilliation. And yet, because he supported full rights for Palestinians, and critiqued Zionism, and supported a secular state, and was a leftist, he is pilloried by the same people who claim to want to see a 'peaceful Palestinian'. The reality is that some people want submission, not debate. They want death of the enemy, not peace. The same people who claim that there's no such thing as a "Palestinian," claimed that he wasn't a "real" one. Garbage was written about his past which took three years to write and was debunked in less than three minutes. The hate expressed towards Said, on the blogs, are an honorbadge for Said. Rest in peace.

And back to regular blogging.

UPDATE: Said obituaries: The New York Times, Guardian, The Washington Post, Christopher Hitchens, Ahdaf Soueif and IE with many more. Among the bloggers: Aziz Poonawalla, Jonathan Edelstein and Bill Connolly.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Orientalist is #35 on Amazon.

EDWARD SAID: Edward Said has died at the age of 67, losing his decade-long battle with leukemia. The announcement of his death is heart-breaking and we will mournhim, yet we must not forget him. As an intellectual of the first rank, he led the academic fight for the Palestinian cause. Unabashed and unashamed he led to the forefront of the Pro-Palestinian academia in the United States.

He was not perfect. He was angry and arrogant. He was boiling with rage, but rightfully so. He was a truly eloquent spokesperson and hated (by the Jewish right) for daring to come so energetically to the defense the people of Palestine.

I express my condolences to Edward Said's wife, family and friends.

"We belong to God, and to Him is our return."
(Qur'an 2:156)

IRAQ'S LIBERALOZATION: I haven't commented on the "Sale of Iraq"--the plan that promises Iraq open foreign privatization--but it looks like the Iraqi Governing Council has backed down, saying that it "can't be considered official."

What Issandr El Amrani said.

MASSOUD POST: If you're looking for my commemoration-post of Ahmed Shah Massoud, it was posted on Tuesday, September 09th, 2003. The permalinks don't work (have they ever worked?), so scroll down a bit.

By the way, I'm working on a nice graphic to use as an header.

Al-Jazeera banned from Iraq

Department of Defense Agence France Press

Iraq's Governing Council today banned the American television station Fox News Arab satellite television stations Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya from covering official activities here for two weeks, a statement said.

It said the ban was a warning to the stations and other broadcasters for inciting anti-Baathist anti-United States violence.

"Fox News Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya will temporarily be excluded from any coverage of Governing Council activities or official press conferences, and correspondents of the two channels will not be allowed to find out what the hell we're doing enter ministries or government offices for two weeks," the statement said.

The statement made no mention of coverage of occupational activities US military activities or the workings of the puppet council Coalition Provisional Authority.

A military spokesman, Major William Thurmond, said, "That decision has not been made."

Neo-conservative Paul Wolfowitz US officials have accused the American-based Fox News Qatar-based Al-Jazeera and the Dubai-based Al-Arabiya of giving too much prominence to anti-Baathist anti-US attacks, and of providing a forum for backers of the occupation of Iraq ousted president Saddam Hussein.

Back to the studio, where Abu has an analysis of this news.

PIRATE OF THE YEAR: If you think about it, piracy is really a natural fit for al-Qaeda and the Taliban terrorists. They already possess several of the traits we usually associate with pirates. Pirates and terrorists tend to be men with facial hair who hang out almost exclusively with other men (a trait they also share with The Village People, but I won't get into that). Pirates are often short a working eye or two. Well, it just so happens that the Taliban's leader Mullah Omar only has one eye. Sheikh Abdel-Rahman, the Egyptian who supposedly masterminded the 1993 World Trade Center attacks, is blind! British-based cleric and al-Qaeda supporter Abu Hamza is not only optically odd-numbered, but when his right hand was blown off while clearing mines in Afghanistan, he replaced it the ultimate in pirate-chic, a metal hook! And, rumor has it that Osama bin Laden played Maj. Gen. Stanley in his boarding school's production of Gilbert & Sullivan's The Pirates of Penzance. But that's just a rumor.

This year's Pirate of the Year award goes to "Mullah"¹ Mohammed Omar. If you happen to see him, please let me know.

¹ Pirate Omar is not really a Mullah. His religious studies were interrupted by the Soviet invasion in 1979. He lived simply as a village clergyman until, he claims, he had a dream in which the Prophet Muhammad revealed that he, Omar, should lead the country out of lawlessness and immorality.

DISARMING THE WARLORDS: I promised a response to wire reports concerning Karzai's Defense Ministry-reform. Agence France Press report the following appointments:

Eight appointments were given to members of the Pashtun majority… [t]he deputy ministerial position has been given to a Pashtun, Major General Farooq Wardak. He replaced General Bismullah Khan, a close ally of powerful Tajik Defense Minister Marshal Mohammad Qasim Fahim, who was made army chief.

Five Tajiks, four Hazaras, two Uzbeks, one Baluchi and one Nuristani were also named to new positions, the ministry said.

Even though the reform is a good (first) step from the quite reluctant Karzai, the status quo remains; the Ministry of Defense remains firmly under control of the Tajik Northern Alliance, led by Defense Minister Mohammad Qasim Fahim, even though the Pashtuns gained the largest representation. Karzai's opponents and rival warlords—mostly Pashtuns—have always complained of Northern Alliance-hegemony and ethnic under-representation in the Defense of Ministry and therefore remaining wary of giving up power or arms. The question remains if Fahim's rivals will be sufficiently confident and convinced enough, in the new ethnic and factional representation in the ministry, to go along with an ambitious plan, announced yesterday, to disarm and demobilize 100,000 factional fighters. The plan would start in the cities of Kunduz, Gardez and Mazer-e-Sharif, slowly moving the disarmament drive to Kandahar and Kabul.

Moving power away from Fahim and his fellow Northern Alliance commanders won’t be easy. Their grip on Kabul is still going strong, almost 2 years after the Bonn agreement ordered the removal of Northern Alliance soldiers and tanks. That has not happened.

The Northern Alliance’s fixation with Ahmed Shah Masoud, the martyred hero, has subsided but their political ambitions have joined forces with genuine reverence in keeping his spirit alive. They’re anxious to keep the flames of nostalgia for their lost hero burning in an effort to boost their political standing making it difficult to block their influence over the local population. Divided by their own differences and lacking a common political agenda, Northern Alliance leaders are using the figure of Masoud as a symbol around which to rally support. And most of the time—it’s works.

UPDATE: All those fired were Tajiks.

TARGET OF THE PATRIOT ACT: So what is Ashcroft using the Patriot Act for?

If you're an American citizen, if you're a Palestinian activist, if the government unsuccessfully has tried to deport you for 16 years, if the courts have ruled your deportation unconstitutional and if you're still in the United States...than you might be a target of the Patriot Act.

UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY: Just got my hands on the United Nations General Assembly schedule for the coming week.

President Bush will speak Tuesday shortly after 10:15 A.M. after the head of state of Brazil. President Karzai will speak after 3:00 P.M after the head of state of Paraguy. Karzai won't be visiting Washington, just New York. If anyone can find the either President's schedule, please drop me an e-mail. Thanks.

HYPOCRITICAL STATEMENT OF THE DAY:"People who live in the big settlements don't even think of themselves as settlers. They would feel insulted if they were left outside the fence. Personally, I think it's better not to have any fences at all. Why should we willingly put ourselves in ghettoes?"
- Einat Dayan, an administrator at the 7,000-student College of Judea and Samaria of the Ariel settlement in the West Bank

WE INVADE, YOU PAY: Outrage of the day: apparently, Russia wants the Afghan government to recognize the $9.8 billion debt it somehow owes.

A U.S. official said on Saturday that Russian Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin told Treasury Secretary John Snow Russia would contribute aid to Afghanistan once the issue of Afghan debts owed to Russia was settled. Kudrin told Snow that Russia calculates it is owed $9.8 billion by Afghanistan, debt that Afghanistan wants forgiven but which Russia is prepared to consider heavily discounting to a total $2 billion.

"The Russians are considering discounting 80 percent of the debt," the U.S. official said. "Then they said when the debt is restructured, then they will donate to the Afghanistan reconstruction."

Let me get this straight: you invade, but we pay for the costs? (For the record, the Soviets invaded in 1979 and left in 1989 after we gave them their Vietnam.)

The mind boggles.

NEWS ROUND-UP: According to some news reports (no link yet), Hamid Karzai has set an October 15-deadline for warlords "disarm, demobilize and reintegrate" warlords, including Ismail Khan (Herat), Abdul Rashid Dostum (Mazer-e-Sharif) and Gul Agha Sherzai (Kandahar). Apparently, this move and his alleged "re-shuffle" are just part of the first stage of reforming and restructuring the Afghan government. I vaguely remember a National Security Council (yes, Afghanistan has one) decision on May 20th that basically said the same things about warlords' private fighters. Karzai will leave tomorrow, Tuesday, for visits to Great Britain, Canada and the United States. According to the UN-sponsored Bonn agreement, "participants [including the Northern Alliance] in the UN Talks on Afghanistan pledge to withdraw all military units from Kabul and other urban centers or other areas in which the UN mandated force is deployed." This, of course, never happened. Tanks are seen all over Kabul and Defense Minister Fahim's Northern Alliance fighters form a police force together with the peacekeeping force. They love rob taxi-drivers and shopkeepers, arrest political opponents and arrest critical journalists. (Recently, the Kabul police chief--an ally of [Defense Minister] Fahim and [Education Minister] Qanuni--was fired. I extensively wrote about it here.)

Newsday has a decent article on the steady progress being made in Kandahar, the Taliban's former capital. Good news amid the troubling reports that are heard almost daily.

More good news: the U.S. military has confirmed the death of two senior Taliban commanders; Mullah Abdur Rahim and Mohammad Gul Neyazi. Both were staging anti-coalition attacks from just area known was Waziristan, where there's staunch Pashtun support for the Taliban. Rahim was rumored to be dead for a week now and was wounded in February of this year. Mullah Omar appointed Mullah Abdus Samad, a former "intelligence officer," to help him.

ISAF-EXPANSION UPDATE: Jaap de Hoop Scheffer is the new NATO secretary-general, who supports the idea of peacekeepers outside of Kabul. NATO is currently drawing plans to expand the peacekeeping force. Kofi Annan and Antonio Maria Costa, head of the UN office on drugs and crime, is also pushing NATO to cut drug trafficking routes in Afghanistan.

Sources tell me that the size of an expanded ISAF-mission will depend on the willingness of the biggest contributors to send more troops, but thinks a deal is very likely. The source is also reporting on cabinet in-fighting between those who oppose the expansion and those who welcome it. "The warlords don't want to loose their control and they make their money by opium poppy cultivation through local commanders."

The United Nations will debate on the ISAF-mandate in December.

TARGET OF THE PATRIOT ACT: Attorney-general Ashcroft is making fun of the deserved criticsm of the Patriot Act:

"The charges of the hysterics are revealed for what they are: castles in the air," he scoffed. "Built on misrepresentation. Supported by unfounded fear. Held aloft by hysteria." And he continued: "Allow me to take a moment to clarify who should, and who should not, be worried about these tools in the hands of law enforcement. If you are spending a lot of time surveilling nuclear power plants with your al Qaeda pals, you might be a target of the Patriot Act. If your idea of a vacation is two weeks in a terrorist training camp, you might be a target of the Patriot Act. If you have cave-side dinners with a certain terrorist thug named bin Laden . . . if you enjoy swapping recipes for chemical weapons from your 'Joy of Jihad' cookbook . . . you might be a target of the Patriot Act."

If you're a journalist, the journalist's roomate, a taxi driver, a student or a newspaper salesman.... you might be a target of the Patriot Act. If you're a dissident....you might be a target of the Patriot Act.

Somehow that part of the speech was left out.

DEFENSE MINISTRY RE-SHUFFLE: The Associated Press is reporting on a re-shuffle in the Ministry Defense, approved by Karzai. I'm skeptical and that story isn't telling the whole story. I'll definitely get back to this when I learn more.

Karzai is visiting Canada, Great Britian and the White House. Also, more on this too.

THE IRAQI-HIGHWAY: Tapped is worried that the new Iraqi army (among other things) is being built the same way the Kabul-Kandahar highway is being build. Time to ask the question again: are you going to finish an road army that is useful or half-finish an road army that is perfect?

John Snow, U.S. Treasury Secretary, visited Kabul today, meeting with Karzai (and leaving him a nice letter too!). I love the talk about "peace," and "prosperity." But talk money, Mr. Moneyman! The Washington Post:

the U.S. Treasury secretary, John W. Snow, said during a visit here that total U.S. funding for Afghan reconstruction would be about $1 billion in 2004, twice as much as in 2003, the Reuters news agency reported.

The LA Times:

[Finance Minister] Ghani said Afghanistan needed $30 billion more over the next five years. Aides said that despite his upbeat public demeanor, Ghani spoke out because he privately believes the needs of Afghanistan are considered a distant second to those of Iraq in the eyes of the U.S. and its allies.

But wait. There's a plan:

Snow said the rebuilding of Afghanistan, as well as Iraq, was a responsibility that must be shared among many countries. "We're hoping to get the amount the U.S. is coming up with at least matched" by participants at the Group of 7 meeting this weekend in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, as well as other U.S. allies, the Treasury secretary said.

Donor conference, you say? You mean the guys who were nice enough to promise us $4.5 billion in reconstruction funding last year? Asia Times:

[US relief organization CARE] argues that donors have failed to follow through on earlier promises of desperately needed reconstruction assistance. Moreover, what aid is being provided is becoming increasingly expensive because of the insecurity that is growing outside the capital Kabul, the only part of the country that is patrolled by the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).

Here's the State Department travel advisory for Afghanistan in case you missed it:

Afghan-Americans returning to Afghanistan to recover property have become involved in complicated disputes and, even given favorable court proceedings, often face retaliatory actions including threats of kidnapping for ransom.

Recover what property, Foggy Bottom?

Don't get me wrong here. I'm happy that the John Snow was generous enough to double aid for Afghanistan? But compare the $2 billion Afghanistan gets to the $20 billion Iraq gets. Big difference.