Here's another quote to ponder:
Abraham Joshua Heschel: "The Greeks learned in order to comprehend, the Hebrews learned in order to revere, while modern man (or woman) learns in order to use."
The Apostle Paul said: "The goal of our instruction is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith." 1 Timothy 1:5
Wednesday, March 7, 2007
Integrity
I just ran across this quote that I thought was powerful:
From Anthony Bloom's Beginning to Pray:
"I remember a certain number of (my father's) phrases. In fact there are two things he said which impressed me and have stayed with me all my life. One is about life. I remember he said to me after a holiday, 'I worried about you' and I said, 'Did you think I'd had an accident?' He said, 'That would have meant nothing, even if you had been killed. I thought you had lost your integrity.'
Then on another occasion he said to me, 'Always remember that whether you are alive or dead matters nothing. What matters is what you live for and what you are prepared to die for.'
These things (says Bloom) were the background of my early education and show the sense of life that I got from him."
From Anthony Bloom's Beginning to Pray:
"I remember a certain number of (my father's) phrases. In fact there are two things he said which impressed me and have stayed with me all my life. One is about life. I remember he said to me after a holiday, 'I worried about you' and I said, 'Did you think I'd had an accident?' He said, 'That would have meant nothing, even if you had been killed. I thought you had lost your integrity.'
Then on another occasion he said to me, 'Always remember that whether you are alive or dead matters nothing. What matters is what you live for and what you are prepared to die for.'
These things (says Bloom) were the background of my early education and show the sense of life that I got from him."
Black Echo
The Black Echo is Michael Connelly’s first detective novel and it won the Edgar Award for Best First Mystery Novel awarded by the Mystery Writers of America. Connelly is a good writer with an easy style and he paces the plot very well, adding new twists throughout so that the reading is kept guessing all the way to the end. Connelly has done extensive research on police procedures and culture and the novel rings true on every page. If you enjoy mysteries and detective novels, this is a good choice.
The main character is Harry Bosch, a homicide detective in Los Angeles, known for his lone-ranger style and already demoted after being investigated by internal affairs for shooting to death a high profile serial murderer. Harry investigates a dead Vietnam vet who appears to have overdosed and died in a pipe by Mulholland Dam. There are a few things that don’t fit and Harry begins investigating when he identifies the dead man as someone he knew back in Vietnam. The story takes off when it becomes clear that the dead man was involved in a high profile bank robbery that has never been solved.
One of the interesting aspects of the story revolves around Harry’s role as a tunnel rat during the war in Vietnam. Since the dead man was also a tunnel rat in Harry’s unit, there is a lot of discussion of what these men did during the war. This is one aspect of the Vietnam war that I haven’t heard much about and I found it interesting. Connelly makes you feel like you are there in the tunnels, feeling the fear and anticipation that Harry felt while reconnoitering enemy tunnels while the enemy was inside waiting for him.
This is the first novel in the Harry Bosch series which includes the following books:
The Black Echo (1992)
The Black Ice (1993)
The Concrete Blonde (1994)
The Last Coyote (1995)
Trunk Music (1997)
Angels Flight (1999)
A Darkness More Than Night (2001)
City Of Bones (2002)
Lost Light (2003)
The Narrows (2004)
The Closers (2005)
Echo Park (2006)
The Overlook (2007)
The main character is Harry Bosch, a homicide detective in Los Angeles, known for his lone-ranger style and already demoted after being investigated by internal affairs for shooting to death a high profile serial murderer. Harry investigates a dead Vietnam vet who appears to have overdosed and died in a pipe by Mulholland Dam. There are a few things that don’t fit and Harry begins investigating when he identifies the dead man as someone he knew back in Vietnam. The story takes off when it becomes clear that the dead man was involved in a high profile bank robbery that has never been solved.
One of the interesting aspects of the story revolves around Harry’s role as a tunnel rat during the war in Vietnam. Since the dead man was also a tunnel rat in Harry’s unit, there is a lot of discussion of what these men did during the war. This is one aspect of the Vietnam war that I haven’t heard much about and I found it interesting. Connelly makes you feel like you are there in the tunnels, feeling the fear and anticipation that Harry felt while reconnoitering enemy tunnels while the enemy was inside waiting for him.
This is the first novel in the Harry Bosch series which includes the following books:
The Black Echo (1992)
The Black Ice (1993)
The Concrete Blonde (1994)
The Last Coyote (1995)
Trunk Music (1997)
Angels Flight (1999)
A Darkness More Than Night (2001)
City Of Bones (2002)
Lost Light (2003)
The Narrows (2004)
The Closers (2005)
Echo Park (2006)
The Overlook (2007)
Monday, March 5, 2007
Amazing Grace
William Wilberforce is powerfully portrayed in the movie Amazing Grace. Wilberforce’s unrelenting attack on the slave trade is one of history’s greatest inspirations. The movie is expertly scripted, skillfully acted and perfectly edited to create a balanced, attention holding, inspiring story that you should see.
The story also touches upon Wilberforce’s Christian faith and the inspiration of his old pastor, John Newton. Newton was a slave ship owner who accepted Christ, gave up the slave trade, and became active in the abolitionist movement in England. After his conversion, he wrote one of the most familiar hymns in history, Amazing Grace. John Newton’s hymn, testimony and encouragement were instrumental in Wilberforce’s struggle to abolish slavery in England.
Wilberforce worked incessantly against slavery, until his health gave out after he was charged with sedition as war with France took center stage. Wilberforce retired to the country a defeated man and vowed never to speak against slavery again. However, he could not remain silent, and at the urging of his new wife and after reading his old pastor John Newton’s memoirs on the horrors of slave trade, Wilberforce returned to parliament and renewed the fight.
The courage, passion, and tenacity of Wilberforce inspired me. It is impossible to see Wilberforce’s dedication without evaluating your own. It also reminded me how important it is to keep on encouraging one another because it is impossible to keep fighting against evil without the support and encouragement of others. We all need someone to help us through the discouragement and failure, especially those who seem to not need it.
I highly recommend this movie. It has not been publicized as much as most other films; nevertheless, it is one of the best movies of the year so far. This is a “must see” movie.
The story also touches upon Wilberforce’s Christian faith and the inspiration of his old pastor, John Newton. Newton was a slave ship owner who accepted Christ, gave up the slave trade, and became active in the abolitionist movement in England. After his conversion, he wrote one of the most familiar hymns in history, Amazing Grace. John Newton’s hymn, testimony and encouragement were instrumental in Wilberforce’s struggle to abolish slavery in England.
Wilberforce worked incessantly against slavery, until his health gave out after he was charged with sedition as war with France took center stage. Wilberforce retired to the country a defeated man and vowed never to speak against slavery again. However, he could not remain silent, and at the urging of his new wife and after reading his old pastor John Newton’s memoirs on the horrors of slave trade, Wilberforce returned to parliament and renewed the fight.
The courage, passion, and tenacity of Wilberforce inspired me. It is impossible to see Wilberforce’s dedication without evaluating your own. It also reminded me how important it is to keep on encouraging one another because it is impossible to keep fighting against evil without the support and encouragement of others. We all need someone to help us through the discouragement and failure, especially those who seem to not need it.
I highly recommend this movie. It has not been publicized as much as most other films; nevertheless, it is one of the best movies of the year so far. This is a “must see” movie.
Culture of Fear
In his book, The Culture of Fear, Barry Glassner explains why Americans are afraid of the wrong things. This is a book worth reading, even if you don’t agree with everything he says. At least it should make you think twice about what you see on TV or read in the newspaper, if it doesn’t make you avoid the mass media all together.
Politicians, news media, and special interest groups use fear to sell their products, ideas and influence. Often they manipulate statistics, misuse studies or lie to create a sense of impending doom in order to get a large segment of the population to act in a way they want the public to act. “The short answer to why Americans harbor so many misbegotten fears is that immense power and money await those who tap into our moral insecurities and supply us with symbolic substitutes.”
These peddlers of damage our nation in several ways. First, they cause us to spend money to prevent dangers that are either not real or remote. For example, airlines are forced to spend more money for airline safety when air travel is the safest mode of transportation already. Second, they divert money and attention away from the real problem. Instead of wasting money on more air safety, money should be spent to reduce drunk driving, the number one cause of transportation fatalities. Third, it creates needless stress and turmoil, reducing the quality of life in our country.
There is no epidemic of kidnapping, child pornography, air disasters, road rage, postal shootings, or husband abuse. Instead, we should focus on poverty, education, guns and other more pertinent issues that are the real source of our nation’s problems. Time, energy and money should be spent on the real problems, not on these fantasy issues.
Think twice before buying into a fear campaign. Limit your exposure to news programs. Evaluate every message that uses statistics to create a sense that things are going from bad to worse and your money or support is needed to stem the tide. Fear is a powerful motivator, and the media, the government, religious organizations, corporations and special interests groups are using it on you to manipulate you.
For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.” (Romans 8:15)
For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline. (2 Timothy 1:7)
Politicians, news media, and special interest groups use fear to sell their products, ideas and influence. Often they manipulate statistics, misuse studies or lie to create a sense of impending doom in order to get a large segment of the population to act in a way they want the public to act. “The short answer to why Americans harbor so many misbegotten fears is that immense power and money await those who tap into our moral insecurities and supply us with symbolic substitutes.”
These peddlers of damage our nation in several ways. First, they cause us to spend money to prevent dangers that are either not real or remote. For example, airlines are forced to spend more money for airline safety when air travel is the safest mode of transportation already. Second, they divert money and attention away from the real problem. Instead of wasting money on more air safety, money should be spent to reduce drunk driving, the number one cause of transportation fatalities. Third, it creates needless stress and turmoil, reducing the quality of life in our country.
There is no epidemic of kidnapping, child pornography, air disasters, road rage, postal shootings, or husband abuse. Instead, we should focus on poverty, education, guns and other more pertinent issues that are the real source of our nation’s problems. Time, energy and money should be spent on the real problems, not on these fantasy issues.
Think twice before buying into a fear campaign. Limit your exposure to news programs. Evaluate every message that uses statistics to create a sense that things are going from bad to worse and your money or support is needed to stem the tide. Fear is a powerful motivator, and the media, the government, religious organizations, corporations and special interests groups are using it on you to manipulate you.
For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.” (Romans 8:15)
For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline. (2 Timothy 1:7)
Saturday, March 3, 2007
Guadalcnal
Donald Yerxa has written an excellent summary of the battle that changed the tide of the war in the Pacific against the Japanese in World War II. (“Guadalcanal” in Books & Culture, January/February 2007, pages 44-46). If you have any interest in military history in general or World War II in particular, you should read this article. Yerxa covers all of the major events in the war in a brief but comprehensive survey that explains the tactical decisions of both sides.
In his conclusion, Yerxa discusses the brutality of the war and looks for an adequate explanation for why American Marines hated the Japanese so much. The most likely explanation, he says, is not racism but the savagery and fanatical disregard for life of the Japanese soldiers who butchered injured Marines, attacked with unprecedented ferocity, and committed suicide rather than be captured. Here is the concluding paragraph from the article:
According to Bergerud, the only explanation for this visceral hatred and lack of restraint on the battlefield is fear mingled with a lust for revenge. Early on, the Marines perceived that the Japanese were uniquely cruel fighters who preferred death to surrender, even when there was no clear military purpose involved. The fate of Goettge's patrol and Ichiki's suicidal attack at the Tenaru confirmed this. Every encounter with the Japanese generated an intense sense of danger and fear. Since the Japanese would do anything to kill Americans, the Marines took no chances. The "savage physical environment" of Guadalcanal only intensified the fear. Visibility was often limited to a few yards in a jungle filled with strange and threatening sounds. Without dismissing the ferocity of American combat practices, Bergerud points the finger at the Japanese military government for indoctrinating soldiers "to find meaning in oblivion, and to accept the frightening idea that spiritual purification comes through purposeful death."
You can read the article at: http://www.ctlibrary.com/40832
In his conclusion, Yerxa discusses the brutality of the war and looks for an adequate explanation for why American Marines hated the Japanese so much. The most likely explanation, he says, is not racism but the savagery and fanatical disregard for life of the Japanese soldiers who butchered injured Marines, attacked with unprecedented ferocity, and committed suicide rather than be captured. Here is the concluding paragraph from the article:
According to Bergerud, the only explanation for this visceral hatred and lack of restraint on the battlefield is fear mingled with a lust for revenge. Early on, the Marines perceived that the Japanese were uniquely cruel fighters who preferred death to surrender, even when there was no clear military purpose involved. The fate of Goettge's patrol and Ichiki's suicidal attack at the Tenaru confirmed this. Every encounter with the Japanese generated an intense sense of danger and fear. Since the Japanese would do anything to kill Americans, the Marines took no chances. The "savage physical environment" of Guadalcanal only intensified the fear. Visibility was often limited to a few yards in a jungle filled with strange and threatening sounds. Without dismissing the ferocity of American combat practices, Bergerud points the finger at the Japanese military government for indoctrinating soldiers "to find meaning in oblivion, and to accept the frightening idea that spiritual purification comes through purposeful death."
You can read the article at: http://www.ctlibrary.com/40832
Thursday, March 1, 2007
Was Israel a Mistake
In the article “Was Israel a Mistake?” Books & Culture, January/February 2007, pages 36-37, Paul Merkley reviews three recent books on the relationship between Christians and the new state of Israel, Cross on the Star of David: The Christian World in Israel’s Foreign Policy, by Uri Baialer, Christian Zionism: Road-map to Armageddon, by Stephen Sizer, and Palestine: Peace not Apartheid, by Jimmy Carter. The first book is based on serious historical research that lays a solid foundation for future works, while the last two books take an anti-Israel stance and are based more on polemics than serious historical research.
According to Merkley, in Christian Zionism, Sizer brands all Christian supporters of Israel as mindless dispensationalists. His book is poorly researched and too polemical to be taken seriously. Jimmy Carter’s book is also one-sided and sounds like he is still sour about the failure of the Camp David Accords. Carter focuses only on Israel’s mistreatment of the Palestinians as if there were no provocations made by them at all. He is also naïve to think that peace will come to the Middle East if both sides just play nice and agree to just borders.
Here is Merkley’s conclusion:
But this is not the frame of mind of the people who so recently elected Hamas to be their government, and who consistently tell the pollsters, by whacking great margins, that there will never be peace until Israel ceases to exist. The Palestinians are never going to embrace this healthy attitude so long as international voices with the prestige of Jimmy Carter keep up their unrelenting assault on Israel's right to life.
You can read the article at: http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/001/12.36.html
According to Merkley, in Christian Zionism, Sizer brands all Christian supporters of Israel as mindless dispensationalists. His book is poorly researched and too polemical to be taken seriously. Jimmy Carter’s book is also one-sided and sounds like he is still sour about the failure of the Camp David Accords. Carter focuses only on Israel’s mistreatment of the Palestinians as if there were no provocations made by them at all. He is also naïve to think that peace will come to the Middle East if both sides just play nice and agree to just borders.
Here is Merkley’s conclusion:
But this is not the frame of mind of the people who so recently elected Hamas to be their government, and who consistently tell the pollsters, by whacking great margins, that there will never be peace until Israel ceases to exist. The Palestinians are never going to embrace this healthy attitude so long as international voices with the prestige of Jimmy Carter keep up their unrelenting assault on Israel's right to life.
You can read the article at: http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/001/12.36.html
Coffins on Their Shoulders
Gary M. Burge, in his article “Coffins on Their Shoulders” in Books & Culture, January/February 2007, pages 34-35, reviews two books on the Arab-Israeli tragedy, Scars of War, Wounds of Peace: The Israeli-Arab Tragedy, by Shlomo Ben-Ami, and Coffins on Their Shoulders: The Experience of Palestinian Citizens of Israel, by Dan Rabinowitz and Khawla Abu-Baker. Both books give a personal and intense look at the pain and suffering in Israel.
This topic is very volatile and generates more heat than light. Most books are either pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian with nothing in between. It is hard to write a balanced and fair account of what is happening in the Middle East, but these two books break new ground in attempting to do just that. Read this article for its personal histories and extensive impartial research in order to gain a more balanced view of what is happening in Israel today.
Read the article at: http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/001/11.34.html
This topic is very volatile and generates more heat than light. Most books are either pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian with nothing in between. It is hard to write a balanced and fair account of what is happening in the Middle East, but these two books break new ground in attempting to do just that. Read this article for its personal histories and extensive impartial research in order to gain a more balanced view of what is happening in Israel today.
Read the article at: http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/001/11.34.html
What Did You Go Out to See
In his article “What Did You Go Out to See?” in the January/February Books & Culture, pages 32-33, Andrew Jones evaluates modern American views of the church and missions. He shows how we have bought into the “bigger is better” mindset, causing us to overlook much of what God is doing around the world today.
“By focusing our attention on Western look-a-likes rather than the God-breathed expressions of ekklesia, we miss the joy of participating with the global church. We also miss the blessing these networks and ministries can offer us. But even more tragic is the reinforcement of our western stereotypes as superior models, each one another mega-brick in the colonial tower of Western Christian supremacy. Any attempts at finding a third space, where their world and ours could meet, are thwarted by our search for what appears successful in our own eyes. We need to learn to see the unexpected and unlearn our compulsion to see the expectable.”
“What did we go out to see? The influential missionary Roland Allen was once asked by his board to report some spectacular stories from the field. His response was unexpected: ‘I do not trust spectacular things. Give me the seed growing secretly every time.’”
When we look at Christianity around the world through our American glasses we miss most of what God is doing around the world. In fact, much of American Christianity is not healthy or biblical, so when we evaluate Christians from other cultures by our standards, we will measure incorrectly. Instead, we should learn from those who are different than us, and maybe we will be challenged to grow and change as well.
You can read the whole article at: http://www.christianvisionproject.com/2007/02/what_did_you_go_out_to_see.html
“By focusing our attention on Western look-a-likes rather than the God-breathed expressions of ekklesia, we miss the joy of participating with the global church. We also miss the blessing these networks and ministries can offer us. But even more tragic is the reinforcement of our western stereotypes as superior models, each one another mega-brick in the colonial tower of Western Christian supremacy. Any attempts at finding a third space, where their world and ours could meet, are thwarted by our search for what appears successful in our own eyes. We need to learn to see the unexpected and unlearn our compulsion to see the expectable.”
“What did we go out to see? The influential missionary Roland Allen was once asked by his board to report some spectacular stories from the field. His response was unexpected: ‘I do not trust spectacular things. Give me the seed growing secretly every time.’”
When we look at Christianity around the world through our American glasses we miss most of what God is doing around the world. In fact, much of American Christianity is not healthy or biblical, so when we evaluate Christians from other cultures by our standards, we will measure incorrectly. Instead, we should learn from those who are different than us, and maybe we will be challenged to grow and change as well.
You can read the whole article at: http://www.christianvisionproject.com/2007/02/what_did_you_go_out_to_see.html
Measure for Measure
Shakespeare’s play Measure for Measure, first performed on December 26, 1604, is sometimes called a dark comedy, but it really doesn’t fit any easy categorization. The story revolves around the question of true morality, and involves intricate plot twists and secret identities.
The Duke of Vienna is a wise leader but is not effective in maintaining order, so he pretends to go away on business but disguises himself as a friar in order to spy on the town while he is thought to be away. He puts the town in charge of Angelo, a strict legalistic man who quickly arrests Claudio on charges of fornication for getting his fiancé pregnant before they were able to marry. Even though Claudio intends to marry her, Angelo sentences him to death.
Isabella, a chaste nun and Claudio’s sister, begs Angelo to pardon Claudio. Angelo agrees to pardon Claudio on the condition that Isabella sleep with him. She refuses and tells Claudio, who begs her to save his life by giving up her chastity. Isabella is furious with Claudio and leaves him to die.
However, the Duke, disguised as a friar, tells Isabella that there is another way. He tells her to agree to Angelo’s terms but send a different woman in her place. The woman, Mariana, was engaged to Angelo five years earlier, but he broke off the engagement because her dowry was lost at sea. Angelo sleeps with Mariana thinking it is Isabella. In the morning, however, he goes back on his word and orders that Claudio be executed and his head sent to him.
The Duke has the jailor exchange Claudio with a condemned pirate, and sends his head to Angelo instead. Isabella is overcome with grief at her brother’s supposed death and threatens to take her case to the Duke when he returns. Angelo laughs because he is convinced the Duke will believe him over some crazy woman.
When the Duke returns, Isabella pleads her case before him, but he pretends to side with the Duke. Angelo is put in charge of the investigation, so he brings in witnesses to discredited Isabella and she is thrown into prison. Angelo also sends for the friar, the disguised Duke, who charged Angelo with making disparaging remarks about the Duke. When the friar is brought in Angelo accuses the friar of speaking against the Duke and calls the jailor to imprison him. However, the Duke takes off his disguise and everyone becomes aware of Angelo’s hypocrisy.
Angelo is sent to be executed and Isabella is released. Mariana pleads for Angelo’s pardon, and the Duke agrees only if he marries Mariana. The Duke eventually brings in Claudio to Isabella’s astonishment. After everyone is forgiven, the Duke proposes to Isabella and they agree to marry.
While the plot is somewhat unrealistic, it clearly points out the hypocrisy of those who claim public virtue while acting the opposite in private. The tension between chastity and loyalty is also brought into play but not developed. The concept of mercy is more central to the story, as everyone ends up pardoned and wrongs made right.
The following quote is from Lucio, Claudio’s friend, as he pleads with Isabella to go and do what she can to save her brother. She is reluctant to act, so he says:
Our doubts are traitors
And make us lose the good we oft might win
By fearing to attempt.
When faced with difficult decisions, it is helpful to remember these words, since our action may be what is needed to right a wrong, or to prevent a great evil from occurring. All that evil needs to succeed is for good men, and women, to do nothing. But if we act, then we can have a part in stemming the tide of evil in our world.
The Duke of Vienna is a wise leader but is not effective in maintaining order, so he pretends to go away on business but disguises himself as a friar in order to spy on the town while he is thought to be away. He puts the town in charge of Angelo, a strict legalistic man who quickly arrests Claudio on charges of fornication for getting his fiancé pregnant before they were able to marry. Even though Claudio intends to marry her, Angelo sentences him to death.
Isabella, a chaste nun and Claudio’s sister, begs Angelo to pardon Claudio. Angelo agrees to pardon Claudio on the condition that Isabella sleep with him. She refuses and tells Claudio, who begs her to save his life by giving up her chastity. Isabella is furious with Claudio and leaves him to die.
However, the Duke, disguised as a friar, tells Isabella that there is another way. He tells her to agree to Angelo’s terms but send a different woman in her place. The woman, Mariana, was engaged to Angelo five years earlier, but he broke off the engagement because her dowry was lost at sea. Angelo sleeps with Mariana thinking it is Isabella. In the morning, however, he goes back on his word and orders that Claudio be executed and his head sent to him.
The Duke has the jailor exchange Claudio with a condemned pirate, and sends his head to Angelo instead. Isabella is overcome with grief at her brother’s supposed death and threatens to take her case to the Duke when he returns. Angelo laughs because he is convinced the Duke will believe him over some crazy woman.
When the Duke returns, Isabella pleads her case before him, but he pretends to side with the Duke. Angelo is put in charge of the investigation, so he brings in witnesses to discredited Isabella and she is thrown into prison. Angelo also sends for the friar, the disguised Duke, who charged Angelo with making disparaging remarks about the Duke. When the friar is brought in Angelo accuses the friar of speaking against the Duke and calls the jailor to imprison him. However, the Duke takes off his disguise and everyone becomes aware of Angelo’s hypocrisy.
Angelo is sent to be executed and Isabella is released. Mariana pleads for Angelo’s pardon, and the Duke agrees only if he marries Mariana. The Duke eventually brings in Claudio to Isabella’s astonishment. After everyone is forgiven, the Duke proposes to Isabella and they agree to marry.
While the plot is somewhat unrealistic, it clearly points out the hypocrisy of those who claim public virtue while acting the opposite in private. The tension between chastity and loyalty is also brought into play but not developed. The concept of mercy is more central to the story, as everyone ends up pardoned and wrongs made right.
The following quote is from Lucio, Claudio’s friend, as he pleads with Isabella to go and do what she can to save her brother. She is reluctant to act, so he says:
Our doubts are traitors
And make us lose the good we oft might win
By fearing to attempt.
When faced with difficult decisions, it is helpful to remember these words, since our action may be what is needed to right a wrong, or to prevent a great evil from occurring. All that evil needs to succeed is for good men, and women, to do nothing. But if we act, then we can have a part in stemming the tide of evil in our world.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
See No Evil
See No Evil chronicles the twenty-five years of Robert Baer’s career as a field operative for the CIA. Bob spent many years on the ground collecting intelligence in the Middle East and is privy to much of what went on behind the scene in this volatile area. Much of the book is more fascinating than a Tom Clancy or Robert Ludlum spy novel, especially because it records real events. The people Bob dealt with and the situations he got himself into, and out of, are more colorful than any fiction author could have imagined and put down on paper.
In addition to being entertaining, it is very informative. It is one of the best books I have read on the Middle East and terrorism so far. Bob has first hand knowledge of many of the key players in the Middle East and he traces all the connections with great detail. In fact, there is so much detail it is impossible to keep all the people, places, dates and facts straight.
As a case officer, Bob recruited and ran hundreds of agents, collecting information on terrorists vital to the security of our country. He paints a vivid picture of what life is like as a real secret agent, not some James Bond fantasy. His descriptions are so realistic they draw you into the action so you feel as if you are there experiencing everything with him.
Bob has a clear purpose for writing this book, and it isn’t merely to entertain people or to boost his image. He is serious about the degeneration of America’s intelligence agencies and their increasing inability to collect valuable intelligence on our enemies. Bob clearly saw the decline of the CIA from the inside, and its devolution into near complete incompetence led him to resign. When America’s intelligence officers become more concerned with protecting their careers than in gathering intelligence, it is the beginning of the end. It was shocking to see how so many within the CIA and other intelligence agencies were not collecting intelligence and actually preventing those in the field from collecting any worthwhile intelligence.
As a result, America is blind and deaf and has no clue what is happening around the world, especially in Islamic countries. At the beginning of the Iraq war, there was not a single agent within Iraq collecting intelligence for the U.S. There are no human intelligence resources in any Muslim nation, nor has anyone penetrated any terrorist organization. It is no wonder that we were taken by surprise on 9/11.
Another problem is the politicization of the intelligence agencies. More often than not, presidents and elected officials are more concerned with their public image and getting reelected than they are in dealing realistically with terrorism. Terrorism is messy and it is easier to sweep the information under the rug than to deal with it. For example, the CIA had clear intelligence that gave them the exact date and time that the U.S. Embassy in Beirut would be bombed, but the information was never acted upon. The CIA knew from the very beginning that Iran was behind the bombing and was using the Islamic Jihadist Organization as a front to cover their tracks. But instead of punishing Iran, the U.S. chose to ignore Iran’s terrorist activities and let it get away with many more terrorist strikes. In fact, the U.S. knew that a high ranking Iranian government official was the leader of the IJO attacks, yet chose to pin their hopes on building a relationship with him in order to normalize relationships with Iran.
In the 1990s there was clear evidence that Osama bin Laden had networked with the IJO and was being backed by Iran. In fact, bin Laden had a hand in many of the IJO’s bombings. Bin Laden went to Iran and convinced them to stop trying to undermine the Central Asian states and to join him in attacking America. Bin Laden also networked with Egypt’s Islamic Brotherhood, forming the most formidable terrorist alliance in history. These three organizations, IJO, IB, and Al Qaeda are all working together to destroy the West, and they are not only determined, they are trained and equipped to carry out their goal. The attacks of 9/11 were not carried out solely by Al Qaeda, but by this new terrorist alliance. The problem is much larger than the U.S. government has let on.
The CIA and the U.S. government knew of the connections of Iran and Saudi Arabia to radical Islamic terrorist organizations yet chose to remain silent. They felt it is better to “See no evil” than to deal with the growing threat. It is easier to sweep the bad news under the rug and leave it for the next administration to deal with. Getting reelected was much more important than stopping global terrorism, especially since any effective action would be politically damaging. All the presidents in the last 15 years have glossed over the problems, kept the truth from the public, and pretended that they were doing all they could to fight terrorism, all the while refusing to act on the truth. This is why we are in such a mess today. Terrorism has grown into one of the most pernicious problems because our government didn’t have the backbone to do what is necessary to stop it while it was still a localized problem.
America’s response to 9/11 was misguided since it failed to deal with the source of terrorism. Even if we killed Osama bin Laden or captured him and paraded him down the streets of Manhattan, all we would do would be to make a martyr out of him around which millions of young Islamic men would rally. By attacking Saddam Hussein, we have only done what is easy and not what is needed. By attacking Iraq we have only infuriated all the Islamic states and given them a chance to give us a black eye.
One of the most startling revelations Bob gives is the failed attempt by the Iraqi military to overthrow Saddam Hussein. The Iraqi general behind the plot begged for American assistance but the U.S. waited until the last day to tell the general that we would not help. By then it was too late since the key players were already committed and couldn’t back out. The end result was the capture and execution of all the coupe leaders, except the general who escaped to Belgium. The U.S. could have had Saddam ousted without a single American life lost, but because Clinton didn’t have the guts to do what was right, we are stuck in Iraq today.
The key is to gather intelligence on the terrorists. We need to infiltrate their networks, and get agents on the ground who can tell us what the terrorists are planning so we can stop them. As long as we trust in satellites and high tech gadgets and refuse to employ human intelligence, we will lose the war. We also have to do what is necessary to stop the terrorists before they can strike.
Terrorists do not have bureaucracies to slow them down, bureaucrats interested in protecting their careers, calcified channels of command and do-nothing politicians. Instead, they are highly motivated, highly trained, focused and agile, forming networks when needed, and then dismantling those networks when they are finished. They are quick, intelligent, and won’t stop until they succeed. We can’t afford to play games and sweep the truth under the rug any longer.
After retiring from the CIA, Robert Baer became a consultant. He moved to Beirut and renewed old networks. In August of 2001, one of his contacts gave him a list of all the operatives in Al Qaeda along with information that they were planning something “big.” This information, along with other crucial intelligence on bin Laden, was sent to the CIA, but no response was ever given. Bob then met with a high Saudi government official who refused to even look at the list. They, too, like America, wanted to keep their head in the sand and “see no evil.”
Here are some helpful links:
http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/03/09/12_baer.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Baer
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200305/baer
http://books.guardian.co.uk/extracts/story/0,,631433,00.html
http://www.fpa.org/topics_info2414/topics_info_show.htm?doc_id=100339
In addition to being entertaining, it is very informative. It is one of the best books I have read on the Middle East and terrorism so far. Bob has first hand knowledge of many of the key players in the Middle East and he traces all the connections with great detail. In fact, there is so much detail it is impossible to keep all the people, places, dates and facts straight.
As a case officer, Bob recruited and ran hundreds of agents, collecting information on terrorists vital to the security of our country. He paints a vivid picture of what life is like as a real secret agent, not some James Bond fantasy. His descriptions are so realistic they draw you into the action so you feel as if you are there experiencing everything with him.
Bob has a clear purpose for writing this book, and it isn’t merely to entertain people or to boost his image. He is serious about the degeneration of America’s intelligence agencies and their increasing inability to collect valuable intelligence on our enemies. Bob clearly saw the decline of the CIA from the inside, and its devolution into near complete incompetence led him to resign. When America’s intelligence officers become more concerned with protecting their careers than in gathering intelligence, it is the beginning of the end. It was shocking to see how so many within the CIA and other intelligence agencies were not collecting intelligence and actually preventing those in the field from collecting any worthwhile intelligence.
As a result, America is blind and deaf and has no clue what is happening around the world, especially in Islamic countries. At the beginning of the Iraq war, there was not a single agent within Iraq collecting intelligence for the U.S. There are no human intelligence resources in any Muslim nation, nor has anyone penetrated any terrorist organization. It is no wonder that we were taken by surprise on 9/11.
Another problem is the politicization of the intelligence agencies. More often than not, presidents and elected officials are more concerned with their public image and getting reelected than they are in dealing realistically with terrorism. Terrorism is messy and it is easier to sweep the information under the rug than to deal with it. For example, the CIA had clear intelligence that gave them the exact date and time that the U.S. Embassy in Beirut would be bombed, but the information was never acted upon. The CIA knew from the very beginning that Iran was behind the bombing and was using the Islamic Jihadist Organization as a front to cover their tracks. But instead of punishing Iran, the U.S. chose to ignore Iran’s terrorist activities and let it get away with many more terrorist strikes. In fact, the U.S. knew that a high ranking Iranian government official was the leader of the IJO attacks, yet chose to pin their hopes on building a relationship with him in order to normalize relationships with Iran.
In the 1990s there was clear evidence that Osama bin Laden had networked with the IJO and was being backed by Iran. In fact, bin Laden had a hand in many of the IJO’s bombings. Bin Laden went to Iran and convinced them to stop trying to undermine the Central Asian states and to join him in attacking America. Bin Laden also networked with Egypt’s Islamic Brotherhood, forming the most formidable terrorist alliance in history. These three organizations, IJO, IB, and Al Qaeda are all working together to destroy the West, and they are not only determined, they are trained and equipped to carry out their goal. The attacks of 9/11 were not carried out solely by Al Qaeda, but by this new terrorist alliance. The problem is much larger than the U.S. government has let on.
The CIA and the U.S. government knew of the connections of Iran and Saudi Arabia to radical Islamic terrorist organizations yet chose to remain silent. They felt it is better to “See no evil” than to deal with the growing threat. It is easier to sweep the bad news under the rug and leave it for the next administration to deal with. Getting reelected was much more important than stopping global terrorism, especially since any effective action would be politically damaging. All the presidents in the last 15 years have glossed over the problems, kept the truth from the public, and pretended that they were doing all they could to fight terrorism, all the while refusing to act on the truth. This is why we are in such a mess today. Terrorism has grown into one of the most pernicious problems because our government didn’t have the backbone to do what is necessary to stop it while it was still a localized problem.
America’s response to 9/11 was misguided since it failed to deal with the source of terrorism. Even if we killed Osama bin Laden or captured him and paraded him down the streets of Manhattan, all we would do would be to make a martyr out of him around which millions of young Islamic men would rally. By attacking Saddam Hussein, we have only done what is easy and not what is needed. By attacking Iraq we have only infuriated all the Islamic states and given them a chance to give us a black eye.
One of the most startling revelations Bob gives is the failed attempt by the Iraqi military to overthrow Saddam Hussein. The Iraqi general behind the plot begged for American assistance but the U.S. waited until the last day to tell the general that we would not help. By then it was too late since the key players were already committed and couldn’t back out. The end result was the capture and execution of all the coupe leaders, except the general who escaped to Belgium. The U.S. could have had Saddam ousted without a single American life lost, but because Clinton didn’t have the guts to do what was right, we are stuck in Iraq today.
The key is to gather intelligence on the terrorists. We need to infiltrate their networks, and get agents on the ground who can tell us what the terrorists are planning so we can stop them. As long as we trust in satellites and high tech gadgets and refuse to employ human intelligence, we will lose the war. We also have to do what is necessary to stop the terrorists before they can strike.
Terrorists do not have bureaucracies to slow them down, bureaucrats interested in protecting their careers, calcified channels of command and do-nothing politicians. Instead, they are highly motivated, highly trained, focused and agile, forming networks when needed, and then dismantling those networks when they are finished. They are quick, intelligent, and won’t stop until they succeed. We can’t afford to play games and sweep the truth under the rug any longer.
After retiring from the CIA, Robert Baer became a consultant. He moved to Beirut and renewed old networks. In August of 2001, one of his contacts gave him a list of all the operatives in Al Qaeda along with information that they were planning something “big.” This information, along with other crucial intelligence on bin Laden, was sent to the CIA, but no response was ever given. Bob then met with a high Saudi government official who refused to even look at the list. They, too, like America, wanted to keep their head in the sand and “see no evil.”
Here are some helpful links:
http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/03/09/12_baer.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Baer
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200305/baer
http://books.guardian.co.uk/extracts/story/0,,631433,00.html
http://www.fpa.org/topics_info2414/topics_info_show.htm?doc_id=100339
What is Man
What is man? Is he merely a higher form of animal or is he something different in kind from the animals? Does man have a non-material nature, or is his “soul” merely the complex relationships in his brain?
These questions have been asked for millennia, and there is no simple answer. Much of theology has been tainted by Greek philosophy on this matter, so that many Christians view the soul as a separate part of man that will live on after the body dies. I don’t have time to go into all the biblical data, but I think that the Bible sees man holistically, having a body, soul and spirit integrally tied together into a cohesive unity.
That is why the resurrection is a fundamental Christian doctrine; the physical resurrection of the body is essential to a biblical view of man. Man will live for eternity in bodily form, having a new body that is imperishable. Man will not be floating around on clouds as disembodied spirits.
This is a Greek notion, not a biblical one. That is why the Greek philosophers on Mars Hill in Acts 17 laughed at Paul when we started talking about the resurrection of the body. To the Greeks, living forever in the body was a terrible notion since they sought freedom from the body to live on in a mental, spiritual world after death. However, Christianity rejects that notion and clearly sees man as a physical and spiritual being that cannot be separated.
Man, then, is more than an animal, since he has an immaterial soul that animates him. Yet he has a body and is tied to the physical creation. He is different in kind from the animals, yet he is like them in many ways. Man is also like the angels in some ways, but of a completely different kind.
The following quote from Pascal got me thinking on this subject:
“Man is a nothing in comparison with the Infinite, an All in comparison with the Nothing, a mean between nothing and everything. Since he is infinitely removed from comprehending the extremes, the end of thing, and their beginning are hopelessly hidden from him in an impenetrable secret: he is equally incapable of seeing the Nothing from which he was made, and the Infinite in which he is swallowed up.”
“Man must not think that he is on a level either with the brutes or with: the angels, nor must he be ignorant of both sides of his nature; but he must know both. In recognizing both lies his Wretchedness and grandeur. Man knows that he is wretched. He is therefore wretched, because he is so; but he is really greater because he knows it."
These questions have been asked for millennia, and there is no simple answer. Much of theology has been tainted by Greek philosophy on this matter, so that many Christians view the soul as a separate part of man that will live on after the body dies. I don’t have time to go into all the biblical data, but I think that the Bible sees man holistically, having a body, soul and spirit integrally tied together into a cohesive unity.
That is why the resurrection is a fundamental Christian doctrine; the physical resurrection of the body is essential to a biblical view of man. Man will live for eternity in bodily form, having a new body that is imperishable. Man will not be floating around on clouds as disembodied spirits.
This is a Greek notion, not a biblical one. That is why the Greek philosophers on Mars Hill in Acts 17 laughed at Paul when we started talking about the resurrection of the body. To the Greeks, living forever in the body was a terrible notion since they sought freedom from the body to live on in a mental, spiritual world after death. However, Christianity rejects that notion and clearly sees man as a physical and spiritual being that cannot be separated.
Man, then, is more than an animal, since he has an immaterial soul that animates him. Yet he has a body and is tied to the physical creation. He is different in kind from the animals, yet he is like them in many ways. Man is also like the angels in some ways, but of a completely different kind.
The following quote from Pascal got me thinking on this subject:
“Man is a nothing in comparison with the Infinite, an All in comparison with the Nothing, a mean between nothing and everything. Since he is infinitely removed from comprehending the extremes, the end of thing, and their beginning are hopelessly hidden from him in an impenetrable secret: he is equally incapable of seeing the Nothing from which he was made, and the Infinite in which he is swallowed up.”
“Man must not think that he is on a level either with the brutes or with: the angels, nor must he be ignorant of both sides of his nature; but he must know both. In recognizing both lies his Wretchedness and grandeur. Man knows that he is wretched. He is therefore wretched, because he is so; but he is really greater because he knows it."
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Women Intellectuals
Rosalie de Roseset, a professor at Moody Bible Institute, wrote a very interesting article, “Minding Your Mind,” in Christianity Today, posted online at: http://blog.christianitytoday.com/giftedforleadership/2007/02/minding_your_mind.html
She challenges women to get beyond the touchy-feely and learn to discipline their mind in order to become healthy, mature Christians. Women need to spend time in serious Bible study and reading deep, profound books. This is not a very popular topic today, especially for women, but it is right on.
Here is her conclusion:
“When people—in this case, women—neglect the use of their minds, they may get caught up in idle activities, too many activities, silly reading and leisure habits which lead, finally, to a shallow understanding of what it means to live the Christian life. Their faith may also be too thin to sustain them in the hardships that invariably accompany the average existence.
Their Christian understanding, undeepened by knowledge, may become boring whether they admit it or not. As J.I. Packer says in his popular book Knowing God, “The world becomes a strange, mad, painful place, and life in it a disappointing and unpleasant business for those who do not know about God. Disregard the study of God, and you sentence yourself to stumble and blunder through life, blindfold, as it were, with no sense of direction, and understanding of what surrounds you. This way you can waste your life, and lose your soul” (pp. 14-15).”
She challenges women to get beyond the touchy-feely and learn to discipline their mind in order to become healthy, mature Christians. Women need to spend time in serious Bible study and reading deep, profound books. This is not a very popular topic today, especially for women, but it is right on.
Here is her conclusion:
“When people—in this case, women—neglect the use of their minds, they may get caught up in idle activities, too many activities, silly reading and leisure habits which lead, finally, to a shallow understanding of what it means to live the Christian life. Their faith may also be too thin to sustain them in the hardships that invariably accompany the average existence.
Their Christian understanding, undeepened by knowledge, may become boring whether they admit it or not. As J.I. Packer says in his popular book Knowing God, “The world becomes a strange, mad, painful place, and life in it a disappointing and unpleasant business for those who do not know about God. Disregard the study of God, and you sentence yourself to stumble and blunder through life, blindfold, as it were, with no sense of direction, and understanding of what surrounds you. This way you can waste your life, and lose your soul” (pp. 14-15).”
Modern Slave Trade
“Twenty-seven million slaves exist in our world today. Girls and boys, women and men of all ages are forced to toil in the rug loom sheds of Nepal, sell their bodies in the brothels of Rome, break rocks in the quarries of Pakistan, and fight wars in the jungles of Africa. Go behind the façade in any major town or city in the world today and you are likely to find a thriving commerce in human beings. You may even find slavery in your own backyard.”
I was shocked to find out that:
• 800,000 are trafficked across international borders annually
• 17,500 new victims are trafficked across our borders each year
• 30,000 additional slaves are trans-ported through the U.S. on their way to other international destinations
• Of the 27 million people worldwide held captive and exploited for profit today, the Free the Slaves organization estimates that at least 15 million are bonded slaves in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Nepal.
• The slave trade generates $9.5 billion in revenue each year
Kevin Bales, a pioneer in the fight against modern slavery, expresses well those commercial connections: "Slaves in Pakistan may have made the shoes you are wearing and the carpet you stand on. Slaves in the Caribbean may have put sugar in your kitchen and toys in the hands of your children. In India they may have sewn the shirt on your back and polished the ring on your finger."
Read the story of a modern day abolitionist, Kru Nam at http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=magazine.article&issue=soj0703&article=07031.
I was shocked to find out that:
• 800,000 are trafficked across international borders annually
• 17,500 new victims are trafficked across our borders each year
• 30,000 additional slaves are trans-ported through the U.S. on their way to other international destinations
• Of the 27 million people worldwide held captive and exploited for profit today, the Free the Slaves organization estimates that at least 15 million are bonded slaves in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Nepal.
• The slave trade generates $9.5 billion in revenue each year
Kevin Bales, a pioneer in the fight against modern slavery, expresses well those commercial connections: "Slaves in Pakistan may have made the shoes you are wearing and the carpet you stand on. Slaves in the Caribbean may have put sugar in your kitchen and toys in the hands of your children. In India they may have sewn the shirt on your back and polished the ring on your finger."
Read the story of a modern day abolitionist, Kru Nam at http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=magazine.article&issue=soj0703&article=07031.
Father Attempts to Hack Son’s Brain
A father is using computers and programming to fix a problem with his son’s brain. Caleb, a six-year-old boy, has Sensory Processing Disorder that makes it difficult for him to hear, see and feel properly. The father is trying to reprogram Caleb’s brain so that he will be able to function normally. Read the article on Wired at: http://www.wired.com/news/technology/medtech/0,72810-0.html?tw=rss.tech
George Bush: Pro & Con
“The Leadership of George W. Bush: Con & Pro,” by Joseph Bottum / Michael Novak in First Things, March, 2007.
Many people are criticizing president Bush these days, and some of it is deserved, while some is not. I thought this article was very helpful because it was written by two men, one who fairly criticizes Bush and the other who fairly supports him. I am including some of the points that I thought were most pertinent, but you might want to read the whole article for yourself at http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=5444.
Joseph Bottum—Con:
“The problem isn’t his lack of conservatism. The problem is his lack of competence.”
“The consequences of American defeat in Iraq are likely to be similar. Around the globe, the Jihadists will be inspired to greater and greater violence—as the “lesson of Iraq” keeps any U.S. government, Democrat or Republican, from committing troops to a foreign struggle. The weaker opponents of radical Islam will quickly become even more vulnerable. Can southern Sudan hold without at least the distant intimidation of American military intervention? Can Nigeria? Can Indonesia? Terrorism, too, will surely expand as a chastened United States finds it cannot realistically threaten such nations as Syria, Iran, and North Korea with military consequences for supporting terrorist organizations.”
“Conservatives voted for George W. Bush in 2000 because they expected him to be the opposite of Bill Clinton-and so, unfortunately, he has proved. Where Clinton seemed a man of enormous political competence and no principle, Bush has been a man of principle and very little political competence.”
“Again and again, he has done the right thing in the wrong way, until, at last, his wrongness has overwhelmed his rightness.”
Michael Novak—Pro:
“Ronald Reagan taught us that the perceptions promoted by the liberal media do not, in fact, control the way Americans think. As Clare Boothe Luce once explained, from his experience as a B-movie actor Reagan learned the difference between the box office and the critics. If you win over the first, you can be awfully sweet-tempered to the second. He showed that the hostility of all the liberal media could not, finally, drown out common-sense reality.”
“A long-established lesson is that, even in the best of times, government is mightily incompetent—and the bigger government gets, the more incompetent it becomes.”
“This is why President Kennedy used to joke that he would send out executive orders, and they would sit in offices, and be pondered and discussed, until no action could be taken. He learned quickly how powerless a president is every time he must go through a bureaucracy. And I seem to recall how incompetent Lincoln’s first series of generals were—together with the Department of War, the Department of Justice, and practically everything else. Lincoln himself was frequently charged with incompetence, bumbling, and simplemindedness.”
“Besides, despite enormous blows to our banking, investment, and transportation systems, the decisive steps President Bush took allowed our economy not only to recoup the dreadful financial losses of September 11 but also to climb unparalleled heights.”
“The single most dominant issue we face remains the threat from Jihadism. The ugly words broadcast by the Jihadists may seem mad, but they are matched by steady actions upon a worldwide front. Their stated aim is forcibly to convert us to Islam or to exterminate us until the caliphate stretches around the world: one religion, one polity. President Bush addressed this threat with the greatest simplicity and power he has ever brought to the subject. A great many do not see the danger as President Bush does. They certainly do not recognize what bin Laden and his lieutenants have often declared-that Iraq is today the front line in that jihad. Some in America seem ready to withdraw U.S. troops. They seem willing to prove bin Laden’s maxim that in any protracted fight, the United States is the weak horse, and the Jihadists are the strong horse, which is the only one that people respect.”
http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=5444
Many people are criticizing president Bush these days, and some of it is deserved, while some is not. I thought this article was very helpful because it was written by two men, one who fairly criticizes Bush and the other who fairly supports him. I am including some of the points that I thought were most pertinent, but you might want to read the whole article for yourself at http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=5444.
Joseph Bottum—Con:
“The problem isn’t his lack of conservatism. The problem is his lack of competence.”
“The consequences of American defeat in Iraq are likely to be similar. Around the globe, the Jihadists will be inspired to greater and greater violence—as the “lesson of Iraq” keeps any U.S. government, Democrat or Republican, from committing troops to a foreign struggle. The weaker opponents of radical Islam will quickly become even more vulnerable. Can southern Sudan hold without at least the distant intimidation of American military intervention? Can Nigeria? Can Indonesia? Terrorism, too, will surely expand as a chastened United States finds it cannot realistically threaten such nations as Syria, Iran, and North Korea with military consequences for supporting terrorist organizations.”
“Conservatives voted for George W. Bush in 2000 because they expected him to be the opposite of Bill Clinton-and so, unfortunately, he has proved. Where Clinton seemed a man of enormous political competence and no principle, Bush has been a man of principle and very little political competence.”
“Again and again, he has done the right thing in the wrong way, until, at last, his wrongness has overwhelmed his rightness.”
Michael Novak—Pro:
“Ronald Reagan taught us that the perceptions promoted by the liberal media do not, in fact, control the way Americans think. As Clare Boothe Luce once explained, from his experience as a B-movie actor Reagan learned the difference between the box office and the critics. If you win over the first, you can be awfully sweet-tempered to the second. He showed that the hostility of all the liberal media could not, finally, drown out common-sense reality.”
“A long-established lesson is that, even in the best of times, government is mightily incompetent—and the bigger government gets, the more incompetent it becomes.”
“This is why President Kennedy used to joke that he would send out executive orders, and they would sit in offices, and be pondered and discussed, until no action could be taken. He learned quickly how powerless a president is every time he must go through a bureaucracy. And I seem to recall how incompetent Lincoln’s first series of generals were—together with the Department of War, the Department of Justice, and practically everything else. Lincoln himself was frequently charged with incompetence, bumbling, and simplemindedness.”
“Besides, despite enormous blows to our banking, investment, and transportation systems, the decisive steps President Bush took allowed our economy not only to recoup the dreadful financial losses of September 11 but also to climb unparalleled heights.”
“The single most dominant issue we face remains the threat from Jihadism. The ugly words broadcast by the Jihadists may seem mad, but they are matched by steady actions upon a worldwide front. Their stated aim is forcibly to convert us to Islam or to exterminate us until the caliphate stretches around the world: one religion, one polity. President Bush addressed this threat with the greatest simplicity and power he has ever brought to the subject. A great many do not see the danger as President Bush does. They certainly do not recognize what bin Laden and his lieutenants have often declared-that Iraq is today the front line in that jihad. Some in America seem ready to withdraw U.S. troops. They seem willing to prove bin Laden’s maxim that in any protracted fight, the United States is the weak horse, and the Jihadists are the strong horse, which is the only one that people respect.”
http://www.firstthings.com/article.php3?id_article=5444
Monday, February 26, 2007
Chemical Reactions
Neil Gussman, in Books & Culture, January/February 2007, pages 30-31, reviews two books on the history of chemical warfare, War of Nerves: Chemical Warfare from World War I to Al-Qaeda, by Jonathan B. Tucker, and Chemical Warfare: A Study in Restraints, by Frederic J. Brown. If you are interested in chemical warfare, then this article is a great introduction to these two books. I found the explanation interesting of why chemical weapons were not used in World War II like they were in World War I and why those reasons don’t apply to terrorists today. The restraint military leaders have shown since WWI are not shared by global terrorists, making a chemical terrorist attack much more likely than a military chemical attack. We need to find a new way to prevent the use of chemical and nuclear weapons since restraint or Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) does not exist for terrorists.
You can read the whole article at: http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/001/20.30.html
You can read the whole article at: http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/001/20.30.html
Madama Butterfly
I went to see Madama Butterfly performed by the Elgin Opera. The singing was excellent but the low budget left the stage sparse. The Elgin Opera has been in operation for five years and did a commendable job, especially the orchestra composed of two violins, a viola, a cello and a piano.
The story is about a U.S. Navy officer, Pinkerton, who marries a fifteen-year-old Japanese girl while his ship is anchored in Nagasaki. Pinkerton is warned by Sharpless, the U.S. Consul that such a marriage will only end in disaster, since the young girl will be devastated when he leaves. Pinkerton shrugs off the warning and declares that he has intentions of marrying a “real wife” when he gets back to the states. As the marriage proceeds, the villagers and family members denounce Cio-Cio-San, whom Pinkerton calls Madama Butterfly because of her innocent beauty, because she has rejected the local gods for Pinkerton’s God. Even though she is hurt by the denunciations, she is happy to be married to Pinkerton.
Three years later Cio-Cio-San is still waiting for Pinkerton to return as he has promised her. Everyone says she is foolish since they know Pinkerton has no intention of returning. Undaunted by their unbelief, she is so steadfast in her faith that he will return she turns down marriage proposals from wealthy suitors. Every day she searches the port for any sign of Pinkerton’s ship.
Finally, after three long years, she sees his ship coming into port. She is so elated that she stays up all night waiting for him to come home, yet he doesn’t appear. Finally, the next morning Pinkerton arrives with his American wife to break the news to Cio-Cio-San, but she is asleep. When he realizes that she has been faithfully waiting for him to return, he is stricken with grief over the pain he has caused her. He cowardly runs away, unable to tell her the news himself, leaving his wife to be found by Cio-Cio-San when she wakes up. Cio-Cio-San is devastated and realizes the Pinkerton has come not for her but for their three-year-old son. She tells her son to look closely at her face so he will remember her and then tells him to go and play. As he leaves to play, she kills herself with the same dagger that her father used to commit suicide. As she is dying, Pinkerton comes to retrieve his son, finding her too late. As he bends over her dead body, the curtain closes.
This is a powerful tragedy that illustrates the pain and suffering caused by military personnel stationed overseas who get involved with local women. The U.S. military has had a dark history in this matter, but it is not alone. Every major nation that has troops stationed on foreign soil is guilty of the same crime. While the U.S. military discourages such marriages, it does not prohibit them. Commanders and chaplains should be better trained to deal with this issue.
But the morale is limited to international marriages of convenience. Many men play fast and loose with women, leaving a trail of broken hearts behind them. It is hard not to find a woman who has not been mistreated by shallow professions of love only to find themselves used and abandoned when the relationship is no longer convenient. Modern pop culture tends to support this behavior through movies, TV shows, and music while at the same time lamenting the pain of such broken relationships. Parents, teachers and other leaders need to educate young women and guard them from predatory males intent on using women and then throwing them away.
The story is about a U.S. Navy officer, Pinkerton, who marries a fifteen-year-old Japanese girl while his ship is anchored in Nagasaki. Pinkerton is warned by Sharpless, the U.S. Consul that such a marriage will only end in disaster, since the young girl will be devastated when he leaves. Pinkerton shrugs off the warning and declares that he has intentions of marrying a “real wife” when he gets back to the states. As the marriage proceeds, the villagers and family members denounce Cio-Cio-San, whom Pinkerton calls Madama Butterfly because of her innocent beauty, because she has rejected the local gods for Pinkerton’s God. Even though she is hurt by the denunciations, she is happy to be married to Pinkerton.
Three years later Cio-Cio-San is still waiting for Pinkerton to return as he has promised her. Everyone says she is foolish since they know Pinkerton has no intention of returning. Undaunted by their unbelief, she is so steadfast in her faith that he will return she turns down marriage proposals from wealthy suitors. Every day she searches the port for any sign of Pinkerton’s ship.
Finally, after three long years, she sees his ship coming into port. She is so elated that she stays up all night waiting for him to come home, yet he doesn’t appear. Finally, the next morning Pinkerton arrives with his American wife to break the news to Cio-Cio-San, but she is asleep. When he realizes that she has been faithfully waiting for him to return, he is stricken with grief over the pain he has caused her. He cowardly runs away, unable to tell her the news himself, leaving his wife to be found by Cio-Cio-San when she wakes up. Cio-Cio-San is devastated and realizes the Pinkerton has come not for her but for their three-year-old son. She tells her son to look closely at her face so he will remember her and then tells him to go and play. As he leaves to play, she kills herself with the same dagger that her father used to commit suicide. As she is dying, Pinkerton comes to retrieve his son, finding her too late. As he bends over her dead body, the curtain closes.
This is a powerful tragedy that illustrates the pain and suffering caused by military personnel stationed overseas who get involved with local women. The U.S. military has had a dark history in this matter, but it is not alone. Every major nation that has troops stationed on foreign soil is guilty of the same crime. While the U.S. military discourages such marriages, it does not prohibit them. Commanders and chaplains should be better trained to deal with this issue.
But the morale is limited to international marriages of convenience. Many men play fast and loose with women, leaving a trail of broken hearts behind them. It is hard not to find a woman who has not been mistreated by shallow professions of love only to find themselves used and abandoned when the relationship is no longer convenient. Modern pop culture tends to support this behavior through movies, TV shows, and music while at the same time lamenting the pain of such broken relationships. Parents, teachers and other leaders need to educate young women and guard them from predatory males intent on using women and then throwing them away.
King John
The Life and Death of King John, written by William Shakespeare before 1596, but first published in 1623, chronicles the struggle for the English crown during the War of the Roses. Unlike his earlier historical plays, Shakespeare doesn’t give any fundamental importance to King John’s reign and tends to depict the events as unpredictable and not having any ultimate end. John’s rival to the throne, Arthur, son of John’s elder brother, was backed by King Philip of France, and had the stronger right to the throne since he was the son of the older child. John ordered Arthur’s death while trying to distance himself from it, lending him some degree of deniability.
The play begins with King Philip’s threat of war if John does not step down from the throne and allow Arthur to take his rightful place. John refuses, so France threatens to attacks the English-held town of Angers if it doesn’t swear allegiance to Arthur. John arrives with his army and asks the town which king they support. The citizens say they support the “rightful heir to the throne” but don’t say whether it is John or Arthur. The two armies fight, but since they are equally matched neither side wins. The two armies decide to join forces to attack the town and then fight each other. However, the citizens talk them out of it and suggest that Philip’s son Louis marry John’s niece Blanche in order to seal a peace treaty. Both armies agree and an ambassador from the Pope comes to marry the couple. The ambassador ends up excommunicating John because he refused to obey the Pope, and then charges Philip with the duty of overthrowing John.
More fighting ensues and John’s army captures Arthur. John sends Hubert to kill Arthur, but Arthur, tearfully pleading with his uncle, talks him out of it. Hubert orders Arthur to hide and then tells John that Arthur is dead. When the people of England become angry with King John for ordering Arthur’s death, along with robbing the monasteries to pay for the war, Hubert reveals that Arthur is still alive. However, Arthur tries to escape by leaping off the castle wall and falls to his death. The nobles find Arthur’s mangled body and accuse Hubert of severe brutality. In anger, they leave to join forces with Louis’ army.
John apologizes to the Pope and asks for the Pope to turn back the French army. During the battle a wounded French lord tells the English nobles that Louis plans to kill them after the battle, so they defect and return to John. Louis’ reinforcements are lost at sea and he realizes that he cannot win. Meanwhile, King John is poisoned by some monks and falls ill on the battlefield. John’s son Henry is declared king and a peace treaty is made with Louis.
The most impressive part of this play was the emotionally charged pleading of Arthur for his uncle Hubert to spare his life:
ARTHUR
Have you the heart? When your head did but ache,
I knit my handercher about your brows,
The best I had, a princess wrought it me,
And I did never ask it you again;
And with my hand at midnight held your head,
And like the watchful minutes to the hour,
Still and anon cheer'd up the heavy time,
Saying, 'What lack you?' and 'Where lies your grief?'
Or 'What good love may I perform for you?'
Many a poor man's son would have lien still
And ne'er have spoke a loving word to you;
But you at your sick service had a prince.
Nay, you may think my love was crafty love
And call it cunning: do, an if you will:
If heaven be pleased that you must use me ill,
Why then you must. Will you put out mine eyes?
These eyes that never did nor never shall
So much as frown on you.
HUBERT
I have sworn to do it;
And with hot irons must I burn them out.
ARTHUR
Ah, none but in this iron age would do it!
The iron of itself, though heat red-hot,
Approaching near these eyes, would drink my tears
And quench his fiery indignation
Even in the matter of mine innocence;
Nay, after that, consume away in rust
But for containing fire to harm mine eye.
Are you more stubborn-hard than hammer'd iron?
An if an angel should have come to me
And told me Hubert should put out mine eyes,
I would not have believed him,--no tongue but Hubert's.
ARTHUR
Hubert, the utterance of a brace of tongues
Must needs want pleading for a pair of eyes:
Let me not hold my tongue, let me not, Hubert;
Or, Hubert, if you will, cut out my tongue,
So I may keep mine eyes: O, spare mine eyes.
Though to no use but still to look on you!
Lo, by my truth, the instrument is cold
And would not harm me.
HUBERT
I can heat it, boy.
ARTHUR
No, in good sooth: the fire is dead with grief,
Being create for comfort, to be used
In undeserved extremes: see else yourself;
There is no malice in this burning coal;
The breath of heaven has blown his spirit out
And strew'd repentent ashes on his head.
HUBERT
But with my breath I can revive it, boy.
ARTHUR
An if you do, you will but make it blush
And glow with shame of your proceedings, Hubert:
Nay, it perchance will sparkle in your eyes;
And like a dog that is compell'd to fight,
Snatch at his master that doth tarre him on.
All things that you should use to do me wrong
Deny their office: only you do lack
That mercy which fierce fire and iron extends,
Creatures of note for mercy-lacking uses.
HUBERT
Well, see to live; I will not touch thine eye
For all the treasure that thine uncle owes:
Yet am I sworn and I did purpose, boy,
With this same very iron to burn them out.
ARTHUR
O, now you look like Hubert! all this while
You were disguised.
The play begins with King Philip’s threat of war if John does not step down from the throne and allow Arthur to take his rightful place. John refuses, so France threatens to attacks the English-held town of Angers if it doesn’t swear allegiance to Arthur. John arrives with his army and asks the town which king they support. The citizens say they support the “rightful heir to the throne” but don’t say whether it is John or Arthur. The two armies fight, but since they are equally matched neither side wins. The two armies decide to join forces to attack the town and then fight each other. However, the citizens talk them out of it and suggest that Philip’s son Louis marry John’s niece Blanche in order to seal a peace treaty. Both armies agree and an ambassador from the Pope comes to marry the couple. The ambassador ends up excommunicating John because he refused to obey the Pope, and then charges Philip with the duty of overthrowing John.
More fighting ensues and John’s army captures Arthur. John sends Hubert to kill Arthur, but Arthur, tearfully pleading with his uncle, talks him out of it. Hubert orders Arthur to hide and then tells John that Arthur is dead. When the people of England become angry with King John for ordering Arthur’s death, along with robbing the monasteries to pay for the war, Hubert reveals that Arthur is still alive. However, Arthur tries to escape by leaping off the castle wall and falls to his death. The nobles find Arthur’s mangled body and accuse Hubert of severe brutality. In anger, they leave to join forces with Louis’ army.
John apologizes to the Pope and asks for the Pope to turn back the French army. During the battle a wounded French lord tells the English nobles that Louis plans to kill them after the battle, so they defect and return to John. Louis’ reinforcements are lost at sea and he realizes that he cannot win. Meanwhile, King John is poisoned by some monks and falls ill on the battlefield. John’s son Henry is declared king and a peace treaty is made with Louis.
The most impressive part of this play was the emotionally charged pleading of Arthur for his uncle Hubert to spare his life:
ARTHUR
Have you the heart? When your head did but ache,
I knit my handercher about your brows,
The best I had, a princess wrought it me,
And I did never ask it you again;
And with my hand at midnight held your head,
And like the watchful minutes to the hour,
Still and anon cheer'd up the heavy time,
Saying, 'What lack you?' and 'Where lies your grief?'
Or 'What good love may I perform for you?'
Many a poor man's son would have lien still
And ne'er have spoke a loving word to you;
But you at your sick service had a prince.
Nay, you may think my love was crafty love
And call it cunning: do, an if you will:
If heaven be pleased that you must use me ill,
Why then you must. Will you put out mine eyes?
These eyes that never did nor never shall
So much as frown on you.
HUBERT
I have sworn to do it;
And with hot irons must I burn them out.
ARTHUR
Ah, none but in this iron age would do it!
The iron of itself, though heat red-hot,
Approaching near these eyes, would drink my tears
And quench his fiery indignation
Even in the matter of mine innocence;
Nay, after that, consume away in rust
But for containing fire to harm mine eye.
Are you more stubborn-hard than hammer'd iron?
An if an angel should have come to me
And told me Hubert should put out mine eyes,
I would not have believed him,--no tongue but Hubert's.
ARTHUR
Hubert, the utterance of a brace of tongues
Must needs want pleading for a pair of eyes:
Let me not hold my tongue, let me not, Hubert;
Or, Hubert, if you will, cut out my tongue,
So I may keep mine eyes: O, spare mine eyes.
Though to no use but still to look on you!
Lo, by my truth, the instrument is cold
And would not harm me.
HUBERT
I can heat it, boy.
ARTHUR
No, in good sooth: the fire is dead with grief,
Being create for comfort, to be used
In undeserved extremes: see else yourself;
There is no malice in this burning coal;
The breath of heaven has blown his spirit out
And strew'd repentent ashes on his head.
HUBERT
But with my breath I can revive it, boy.
ARTHUR
An if you do, you will but make it blush
And glow with shame of your proceedings, Hubert:
Nay, it perchance will sparkle in your eyes;
And like a dog that is compell'd to fight,
Snatch at his master that doth tarre him on.
All things that you should use to do me wrong
Deny their office: only you do lack
That mercy which fierce fire and iron extends,
Creatures of note for mercy-lacking uses.
HUBERT
Well, see to live; I will not touch thine eye
For all the treasure that thine uncle owes:
Yet am I sworn and I did purpose, boy,
With this same very iron to burn them out.
ARTHUR
O, now you look like Hubert! all this while
You were disguised.
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Andromache
In Andromache, Euripides dramatizes how the bitter jealousy of Hermione spurs her to seek the death of her rival, Andromache. Hermione is the wife of Neoptolemus, the son of Achilles, killed by Paris at Troy, and Andromache is the widow of Hector, brother of Paris, killed by Achilles at Troy. Andromache was given to Neoptolemus as the prize of war won by his father. The presence of Andromache infuriates Hermione, and becomes utterly unbearable when Andromache has a son by Neoptolemus while she remains barren. Her jealousy causes her to plot the death of Andromache and her son.
In order to carry out her plot, she summons her father, Menelaus, king of Sparta. He comes and is about to carry out the murders when he is confronted by Peleus, Achilles’ father, Neoptolemus’ grandfather. Peleus shames Menelaus for attempting to commit such a heinous crime, and he returns to Sparta, leaving Hermione alone. Hermione repents of her attempted murders and seeks to commit suicide before her husband returns and sends her away.
While Hermione is in a suicidal rage, Orestes, son of Agamemnon, brother of Menelaus, comes and stops her. He agrees to murder Neoptolemus and marry Hermione, so they run off together to Delphi to carry out the deed. Orestes lies, telling the residents of Delphi that Neoptolemus is going to rob the temple of Apollo. Arousing their anger, he gets them to kill Neoptolemus.
Peleus is distraught, having seen both the death of his son and his grandson. However, his wife, Thetis, the sea goddess who bore Achilles, predicts that Andromache’s son will move to Molosia, where his descendants will become an unbroken line of mighty kings.
Jealousy, untimely death, murder, and misfortune all tend to disrupt the plans of men, yet the gods also open up unexpected opportunities through these tragedies. The play ends with the chorus singing: “Many are the shapes of Heaven's denizens, and many a thing they bring to pass contrary to our expectation; that which we thought would be is not accomplished, while for the unexpected God finds out a way. E'en such hath been the issue of this matter.”
Here are several quotes from the play that I found interesting:
Adromache laments the cruelty of women when jealousy embitters them: “How strange it is, that though some god hath devised cures for mortals against the venom of reptiles, no man ever yet hath discovered aught to cure a woman's venom, which is far worse than viper's sting or scorching flame; so terrible a curse are we to mankind.”
The Chorus sings the bitterness that arises from jealousy when two women are married to the same man: “Never, oh! never will I commend rival wives or sons of different mothers, a cause of strife, of bitterness, and grief in every house. would have a husband content with one wife whose rights he shareth with no other. Not even in states is dual monarchy better to bear than undivided rule; it only doubles burdens and causes faction amongst the citizens. Often too will the Muse sow strife 'twixt rivals in the art of minstrelsy. Again, when strong winds are drifting mariners, the divided counsel of the wise does not best avail for steering, and their collective wisdom has less weight than the inferior mind of the single man who has sole authority; for this is the essence of power alike in house and state, whene'er men care to find the proper moment. This Spartan, the daughter of the great chief Menelaus, proves this; for she hath kindled hot fury against a rival, and is bent on slaying the hapless Trojan maid and her child to further her bitter quarrel. 'Tis a murder gods and laws and kindness all forbid. Ah! lady, retribution for this deed will yet visit thee.”
PELEUS: Surely after this every prudent man will seek to marry a wife of noble stock and give his daughter to a husband good and true, never setting his heart on a worthless woman, not even though she bring a sumptuous dowry to his house. So would men ne'er suffer ill at heaven's hand.
In order to carry out her plot, she summons her father, Menelaus, king of Sparta. He comes and is about to carry out the murders when he is confronted by Peleus, Achilles’ father, Neoptolemus’ grandfather. Peleus shames Menelaus for attempting to commit such a heinous crime, and he returns to Sparta, leaving Hermione alone. Hermione repents of her attempted murders and seeks to commit suicide before her husband returns and sends her away.
While Hermione is in a suicidal rage, Orestes, son of Agamemnon, brother of Menelaus, comes and stops her. He agrees to murder Neoptolemus and marry Hermione, so they run off together to Delphi to carry out the deed. Orestes lies, telling the residents of Delphi that Neoptolemus is going to rob the temple of Apollo. Arousing their anger, he gets them to kill Neoptolemus.
Peleus is distraught, having seen both the death of his son and his grandson. However, his wife, Thetis, the sea goddess who bore Achilles, predicts that Andromache’s son will move to Molosia, where his descendants will become an unbroken line of mighty kings.
Jealousy, untimely death, murder, and misfortune all tend to disrupt the plans of men, yet the gods also open up unexpected opportunities through these tragedies. The play ends with the chorus singing: “Many are the shapes of Heaven's denizens, and many a thing they bring to pass contrary to our expectation; that which we thought would be is not accomplished, while for the unexpected God finds out a way. E'en such hath been the issue of this matter.”
Here are several quotes from the play that I found interesting:
Adromache laments the cruelty of women when jealousy embitters them: “How strange it is, that though some god hath devised cures for mortals against the venom of reptiles, no man ever yet hath discovered aught to cure a woman's venom, which is far worse than viper's sting or scorching flame; so terrible a curse are we to mankind.”
The Chorus sings the bitterness that arises from jealousy when two women are married to the same man: “Never, oh! never will I commend rival wives or sons of different mothers, a cause of strife, of bitterness, and grief in every house. would have a husband content with one wife whose rights he shareth with no other. Not even in states is dual monarchy better to bear than undivided rule; it only doubles burdens and causes faction amongst the citizens. Often too will the Muse sow strife 'twixt rivals in the art of minstrelsy. Again, when strong winds are drifting mariners, the divided counsel of the wise does not best avail for steering, and their collective wisdom has less weight than the inferior mind of the single man who has sole authority; for this is the essence of power alike in house and state, whene'er men care to find the proper moment. This Spartan, the daughter of the great chief Menelaus, proves this; for she hath kindled hot fury against a rival, and is bent on slaying the hapless Trojan maid and her child to further her bitter quarrel. 'Tis a murder gods and laws and kindness all forbid. Ah! lady, retribution for this deed will yet visit thee.”
PELEUS: Surely after this every prudent man will seek to marry a wife of noble stock and give his daughter to a husband good and true, never setting his heart on a worthless woman, not even though she bring a sumptuous dowry to his house. So would men ne'er suffer ill at heaven's hand.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)