You'll want to read this article, from the Guardian, of all places, on French complicity in the Rwanda genocide of 1994. The author charges that France was so obsessed with the grandeur of la Francophonie and its own status as central African hegemon that it aided and armed the pro-French Hutu government while the killings were happening.
One caveat here: You may know that Iberian Notes is pretty sensitive to anti-Americanism, and the standard I use to define it is: Does the speaker or writer show bias against the whole society or just opposition to some American government policy? Does he who judges the US show balance by pointing out the good as well as the bad, or does he portray everything as bad because it's American and so it must be?
Well, while reading this, my anti-American sensors went off, except this time what I detected was anti-Frenchness. The writer of this article clearly doesn't believe that France ever does anything right.
However, if what he reports is even half true, French conduct in Rwanda was despicable.
Key paragraph:
As the French left, years of anger among Rwanda's Tutsis spilled out over the price they believe they have paid for Paris's unique view of its place in post-colonial Africa - a role critics say is shaped by an obsession with the influence of its language and culture that led Paris to support a murderous regime because its opponents spoke English. France went on backing the killers even as the bodies piled up in the streets, churches and football stadiums. "France wants to blame us, the ones whose families were murdered, the ones who put a stop to the murderers; they want to blame us for the genocide because they cannot face their own guilt," says Rwanda's foreign minister, Charles Murigande. "The French armed the killers and they trained them even when they were saying they were going to kill the Tutsis, and France supported the genocide regime right up until the end, even helping the killers to escape." Why? "Because they have this obsession with Anglo-Saxons."
Thursday, January 11, 2007
This paragraph from Wikipedia's biography of Real Madrid's Brazilian footballer Emerson can't possibly be true.
When Emerson was a child he learned at an early age that he was gay, however, he didn't come out of the closet till he was 18 and playing proffesional soccer. After this not many teams wanted to sign him because of his sexual orientation. Though none of the owners stated this.
I Googled it and got nothing, leading me to believe that it's false. Also, if such a prominent player had come out of the closet, I'd probably have heard about it by now.
If it is true, though, that's just one more act in Madrid's three-ring circus. Supposedly Madrid's GM, Pedja Mijatovic, told the Italian media that Beckham's contract would not be renewed next year. The US media has been reporting for months that Beckham is on his way to MLS.
Meanwhile, Ronaldo and Robinho are in the doghouse for going out and getting drunk last week and showing up for practice hung over two days in a row.
Coach Fabio Capello told the Spanish media yesterday that, basically, his team sucks and he doesn't know why, except that a lot of the players don't seem to give a crap. He declared, though, that he wouldn't resign.
The Spanish press is reporting that Beckham, Ronaldo, Cassano, and Salgado are on their way out at Real. That's not enough. They also need to get rid of Roberto Carlos, Cannavaro, Helguera, Raul, Guti, Diarra, and Emerson. This team needs to be broken up, like Barcelona broke up Van Gaal's team in 2002-03, and then regroup.
The following are young players with promise who I would keep: Robinho, Marcelo, Ramos, Reyes, Gago, Higuain, Diogo (now on loan to Zaragoza), and of course Casillas. In addition, they have four fairly young defenders from the youth squad, Bravo, Pavon, Miñambres, and Mejia. Among these four guys, a couple at least ought to be able to play reasonable center-defense. I'd also keep the veteran striker Van Nistelrooy, since he's new, not contaminated by the bad attitude of the other veteran players, is doing OK this year, and should still have a decent year or two left in him.
Meanwhile, Barcelona does not look great, though they hold second place with one fewer game than league leader Sevilla. They've been moving the ball slowly and not taking advantage of opportunities to score. They have been hurt by injuries, especially to Eto'o and Messi, and when these two come back in February or so, Barça will get a lot better quick. One thing to remember, of course, is that if you're going to have a bit of a cold streak (two consecutive League draws), January is a good time to have it. You need your best players to step up for the stretch run in April or May, not in January.
Of this year's signings, only Gudjohnsen has been good. He's not Eto'o, and he knows it, but he is a competent player and has done exactly what they asked him to. Zambrotta has been OK, not awful, but not an upgrade over Belletti and Oleguer either, which is what they did ask him to be, and Thuram has not been good. I suspect he's over the hill and needs to play somewhere else next year.
You Americans who don't have a soccer team to follow might adopt Sevilla; they're young and hungry, and they've been playing very well this year. They've got several very good players like Kanouté, Luis Fabiano, Alves, and Navas, who are worth watching. They're the underdog, the little guys, in comparison with behemoths Barça and Madrid; also, they put a lot of emphasis on their youth squad and so a lot of their players are homegrown, guys who actually believe in the team.
When Emerson was a child he learned at an early age that he was gay, however, he didn't come out of the closet till he was 18 and playing proffesional soccer. After this not many teams wanted to sign him because of his sexual orientation. Though none of the owners stated this.
I Googled it and got nothing, leading me to believe that it's false. Also, if such a prominent player had come out of the closet, I'd probably have heard about it by now.
If it is true, though, that's just one more act in Madrid's three-ring circus. Supposedly Madrid's GM, Pedja Mijatovic, told the Italian media that Beckham's contract would not be renewed next year. The US media has been reporting for months that Beckham is on his way to MLS.
Meanwhile, Ronaldo and Robinho are in the doghouse for going out and getting drunk last week and showing up for practice hung over two days in a row.
Coach Fabio Capello told the Spanish media yesterday that, basically, his team sucks and he doesn't know why, except that a lot of the players don't seem to give a crap. He declared, though, that he wouldn't resign.
The Spanish press is reporting that Beckham, Ronaldo, Cassano, and Salgado are on their way out at Real. That's not enough. They also need to get rid of Roberto Carlos, Cannavaro, Helguera, Raul, Guti, Diarra, and Emerson. This team needs to be broken up, like Barcelona broke up Van Gaal's team in 2002-03, and then regroup.
The following are young players with promise who I would keep: Robinho, Marcelo, Ramos, Reyes, Gago, Higuain, Diogo (now on loan to Zaragoza), and of course Casillas. In addition, they have four fairly young defenders from the youth squad, Bravo, Pavon, Miñambres, and Mejia. Among these four guys, a couple at least ought to be able to play reasonable center-defense. I'd also keep the veteran striker Van Nistelrooy, since he's new, not contaminated by the bad attitude of the other veteran players, is doing OK this year, and should still have a decent year or two left in him.
Meanwhile, Barcelona does not look great, though they hold second place with one fewer game than league leader Sevilla. They've been moving the ball slowly and not taking advantage of opportunities to score. They have been hurt by injuries, especially to Eto'o and Messi, and when these two come back in February or so, Barça will get a lot better quick. One thing to remember, of course, is that if you're going to have a bit of a cold streak (two consecutive League draws), January is a good time to have it. You need your best players to step up for the stretch run in April or May, not in January.
Of this year's signings, only Gudjohnsen has been good. He's not Eto'o, and he knows it, but he is a competent player and has done exactly what they asked him to. Zambrotta has been OK, not awful, but not an upgrade over Belletti and Oleguer either, which is what they did ask him to be, and Thuram has not been good. I suspect he's over the hill and needs to play somewhere else next year.
You Americans who don't have a soccer team to follow might adopt Sevilla; they're young and hungry, and they've been playing very well this year. They've got several very good players like Kanouté, Luis Fabiano, Alves, and Navas, who are worth watching. They're the underdog, the little guys, in comparison with behemoths Barça and Madrid; also, they put a lot of emphasis on their youth squad and so a lot of their players are homegrown, guys who actually believe in the team.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
History buffs will be glad to know that Time magazine has opened up its archives going all the way back to 1923. There is lots of fascinating stuff here. In many cases, the articles tell you more about American society at the time than about the subject. You could just browse around in here for hours.
I searched for "spain," just to see what would turn up, and this is some of what did:
A 1962 article on Spain after Franco.
A 1966 article on Spain's modernization.
1975: Franco dies.
1992: Before the Olympics.
1946: Spain after World War II.
1982: Felipe gets elected.
1931: The Republic takes over.
1936: One month into the Civil War.
1977: Spain's first election.
Fascinating stuff, full of useful information.
I searched for "spain," just to see what would turn up, and this is some of what did:
A 1962 article on Spain after Franco.
A 1966 article on Spain's modernization.
1975: Franco dies.
1992: Before the Olympics.
1946: Spain after World War II.
1982: Felipe gets elected.
1931: The Republic takes over.
1936: One month into the Civil War.
1977: Spain's first election.
Fascinating stuff, full of useful information.
Yesterday we linked to a Pave France post on a new book by Frederic Martel called On Culture in America. La Vanguardia made the book its main story in the Culture section last Saturday, and in a tone of some surprise, reported that the American "cultural model" has its virtues.
According to La Vangua: "The United States is not only a dominant cultural power because of its imperialism, but 'because, with its immense minorities, it has become the world in miniature'." Well, I question whether American cultural imperialism even exists, but that's fair enough.
The article adds that among Martel's points are a) US government spending at all levels on culture oscillates between $25 and 50 billion dollars a year, more per capita than France b) private donations to culture add up to $13.5 billion a year, four times the French culture ministry's budget c) The US has 4000 universities, 700 museums, 2300 performing arts centers, 110 publishing companies, and 3500 libraries d) some universities, like Harvard, have tons of money--Harvard's endowment is $26 billion e) the US has seven times as many libraries per capita as France.
Quotes from Martel: "A continuity exists between the cultural activities of the universities, the non-profit institutions, and the commercial sector," the result of "fierce competition in the non-profit sector." He adds, "The powerful European culture ministries, which so often distribute subsidies arbitrarily, opposes the American policy of massive tax exemptions, which empowers those actually in the field."
Martel criticizes high prices (true for top-line performances, but every city with a university has theater and music with some standards at accessible prices), puritanical donors (that's not much of a problem; if donor X won't give you money for peeing on a statue of the Virgin Mary, donor Y probably will just to look avant-garde), and the growing "mercantilization" of charitable foundations and nonprofits, which he is spot on about. From what I have seen, there are a lot of mediocre careerists in the nonprofit foundation bureaucracy.
My only question for the writer of the article, Oscar Caballero, who is generally more than fair to US society, is why he's so surprised at the flourishing of the cultural industry in the United States.
According to La Vangua: "The United States is not only a dominant cultural power because of its imperialism, but 'because, with its immense minorities, it has become the world in miniature'." Well, I question whether American cultural imperialism even exists, but that's fair enough.
The article adds that among Martel's points are a) US government spending at all levels on culture oscillates between $25 and 50 billion dollars a year, more per capita than France b) private donations to culture add up to $13.5 billion a year, four times the French culture ministry's budget c) The US has 4000 universities, 700 museums, 2300 performing arts centers, 110 publishing companies, and 3500 libraries d) some universities, like Harvard, have tons of money--Harvard's endowment is $26 billion e) the US has seven times as many libraries per capita as France.
Quotes from Martel: "A continuity exists between the cultural activities of the universities, the non-profit institutions, and the commercial sector," the result of "fierce competition in the non-profit sector." He adds, "The powerful European culture ministries, which so often distribute subsidies arbitrarily, opposes the American policy of massive tax exemptions, which empowers those actually in the field."
Martel criticizes high prices (true for top-line performances, but every city with a university has theater and music with some standards at accessible prices), puritanical donors (that's not much of a problem; if donor X won't give you money for peeing on a statue of the Virgin Mary, donor Y probably will just to look avant-garde), and the growing "mercantilization" of charitable foundations and nonprofits, which he is spot on about. From what I have seen, there are a lot of mediocre careerists in the nonprofit foundation bureaucracy.
My only question for the writer of the article, Oscar Caballero, who is generally more than fair to US society, is why he's so surprised at the flourishing of the cultural industry in the United States.
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
People interested in the Spanish Civil War will want to read this American Heritage article from 1969 on the Lincoln Battalion.
Blog roundup:
All you need to know about Hugo Chavez and Venezuela is at Publius Pundit. Check out the links.
¡No Pasarán! pokes a hole in French hypocrisy.
The EU Serf is pessimistic on reform.
Angie Schultz meditates on the infamous "plastic turkey."
Pave France comments on a new book about American culture in France; we'll post later on how La Vanguardia dealt with this subject.
Davids Medienkritik castigates a Yank-bashing German politician; here's the follow-up post.
Finally, check out this bit of Catalan nationalist dogma; it's a rather partial history of FC Barcelona and its Cataloony connections.
All you need to know about Hugo Chavez and Venezuela is at Publius Pundit. Check out the links.
¡No Pasarán! pokes a hole in French hypocrisy.
The EU Serf is pessimistic on reform.
Angie Schultz meditates on the infamous "plastic turkey."
Pave France comments on a new book about American culture in France; we'll post later on how La Vanguardia dealt with this subject.
Davids Medienkritik castigates a Yank-bashing German politician; here's the follow-up post.
Finally, check out this bit of Catalan nationalist dogma; it's a rather partial history of FC Barcelona and its Cataloony connections.
News from around here: ETA issued an official communiqué this morning claiming that their "permanent cease-fire" is still in effect. Yeah, right, what happened at Barajas?
Batasuna did publicly criticize the Barajas bomb, which I believe is a first, and this adds weight to the thesis that there are two factions among ETA and its supporters, the soft-liners and the hard-liners. Both groups are still demanding an independent Basque country, the annexation of Navarra, an amnesty for jailed ETA terrorists, and other such absolutely unacceptable things; the difference is that the soft-liners are now against using violence because they're hoping not to spend the rest of their lives in jail when they get caught.
Speaking of caught, the French cops busted two members of the ETA cell that abandoned large quantities of explosives and bomb-making materials a few days ago in a rural area of Vizcaya. One of them was Asier Larraniga, the guy that they had identified and were trying to hunt down.
Zap and Rajoy had a meeting. Nothing happened. Zap's reaction to the bombing has not been good; he's been repeating the same platitudes about negotiations and peace that he was repeating before. Other top Socialists, like Rubalcaba and Blanco, have sounded much more realistic and responsible.
TV3 is running this crazy conspiracy theory, which you know they got from the Quai d'Orsay, claiming that the Americans hit the Al Qaeda base in Somalia for geostrategic reasons since they want to increase their influence in Africa and control the exit to the Red Sea. Europeans are full of geostrategy, probably left over from their mercantilistic pre-capitalist economic ideas.
See, they haven't figured out that free trade makes it unnecessary to have political control over areas that don't belong to you. That is, in the bad old colonial days, Belgium had a monopoly over the mineral riches of the Congo, and nobody else could buy any of the minerals unless Belgium said it was okay. Now, with the elimination of trade barriers, those minerals are available to the highest bidder. You don't have to occupy the Congo to buy those minerals. You would have to do so if you wanted to STEAL the minerals--grab them without having to pay--but that's terribly inefficient, costly in lives and treasure, and wrong anyway.
This is why the United States and Great Britain did not go into Iraq to grab the oil. The oil is available on the world market at the market price, and there was no need to steal it when we could just buy it.
Batasuna did publicly criticize the Barajas bomb, which I believe is a first, and this adds weight to the thesis that there are two factions among ETA and its supporters, the soft-liners and the hard-liners. Both groups are still demanding an independent Basque country, the annexation of Navarra, an amnesty for jailed ETA terrorists, and other such absolutely unacceptable things; the difference is that the soft-liners are now against using violence because they're hoping not to spend the rest of their lives in jail when they get caught.
Speaking of caught, the French cops busted two members of the ETA cell that abandoned large quantities of explosives and bomb-making materials a few days ago in a rural area of Vizcaya. One of them was Asier Larraniga, the guy that they had identified and were trying to hunt down.
Zap and Rajoy had a meeting. Nothing happened. Zap's reaction to the bombing has not been good; he's been repeating the same platitudes about negotiations and peace that he was repeating before. Other top Socialists, like Rubalcaba and Blanco, have sounded much more realistic and responsible.
TV3 is running this crazy conspiracy theory, which you know they got from the Quai d'Orsay, claiming that the Americans hit the Al Qaeda base in Somalia for geostrategic reasons since they want to increase their influence in Africa and control the exit to the Red Sea. Europeans are full of geostrategy, probably left over from their mercantilistic pre-capitalist economic ideas.
See, they haven't figured out that free trade makes it unnecessary to have political control over areas that don't belong to you. That is, in the bad old colonial days, Belgium had a monopoly over the mineral riches of the Congo, and nobody else could buy any of the minerals unless Belgium said it was okay. Now, with the elimination of trade barriers, those minerals are available to the highest bidder. You don't have to occupy the Congo to buy those minerals. You would have to do so if you wanted to STEAL the minerals--grab them without having to pay--but that's terribly inefficient, costly in lives and treasure, and wrong anyway.
This is why the United States and Great Britain did not go into Iraq to grab the oil. The oil is available on the world market at the market price, and there was no need to steal it when we could just buy it.
Monday, January 08, 2007
Aaron Hanscom has a piece up on Pajamas Media called "The Islamification of Europe's Cathedrals," in the wake of Muslim requests/demands that Islamic services be held at Cordoba Cathedral, which was formerly a mosque. (If you've never been there, it's well worth a visit.)
Check it out. I think the article is a little bit alarmist, but you be the judge.
Check it out. I think the article is a little bit alarmist, but you be the judge.
A&L Daily links to this review of a book called "American Fascists" by a guy named Chris Hedges. You'll have no problem guessing who the so-called Americanazis are, but in case you needed a hint, he's not referring to the Osama fans out there.
Check out this bit:
Hedges concludes the United States today faces an internal threat analogous to that posed by the Nazis in Weimar Germany.
There are problems with this analogy. First, democracy in America is much stronger than it was in Weimar Germany in 1933. Nor is the Christian right as widespread or powerful as Hedges suggests. Among conservative Christians who are working class or lower class, "a dramatic majority" voted for Bill Clinton for president — that's the finding of sociologists Andrew Greeley and Michael Hout in their recent book "The Truth About Conservative Christians." A 2004 survey for "Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly" on PBS found that a majority of evangelicals have an unfavorable view of Falwell and that a significant minority of them are more concerned about jobs and the economy than about abortion and gay marriage.
And it isn't as if conservative Christians are the only obstacle to gay marriage: Yes, 85% of white evangelicals oppose gay marriage, but in the general population the figure is 61%. In fact, the differences between today's Christian right and the movements led by Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini are greater than the similarities. Hitler was more pagan than Christian. Street violence was a key tactic of Mussolini's Brownshirts; the Christian right has focused on nonviolent demonstrations outside U.S. abortion clinics and on changing laws at the ballot box. And there's a big difference between supporting laws against gay marriage and putting gays in concentration camps.
Nevertheless, Hedges concludes that the Christian right "should no longer be tolerated," because it "would destroy the tolerance that makes an open society possible." What does he think should be done? He endorses the view that "any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law," and therefore we should treat "incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal." Thus he rejects the 1st Amendment protections for freedom of speech and religion, and court rulings that permit prosecution for speech only if there is an imminent threat to particular individuals.
Ironically, Mr. Hedges's disdain for the rights of freedom of thought, expression, and religion, and his totalitarian streak that makes him want to ban speech he disapproves of and punish those who do not conform make him much more similar to the real Fascists than the American Christian conservatives are.
Now get this. Mr. Hedges is a reporter for the New York Times. How can he claim to be an unbiased reporter when he thinks that more than a quarter of his fellow citizens are Fascists? Has his newspaper no judgment at all in who it hires?
Naturally, of course, both he and his editors would scream bloody murder if anybody tried to interfere with their own precious rights.
Note: This is how a lot of anti-American crap gets over here to Europe. Our own left wing thinks it up, and the Europeans just parrot what they hear from renegade Americans.
Check out this bit:
Hedges concludes the United States today faces an internal threat analogous to that posed by the Nazis in Weimar Germany.
There are problems with this analogy. First, democracy in America is much stronger than it was in Weimar Germany in 1933. Nor is the Christian right as widespread or powerful as Hedges suggests. Among conservative Christians who are working class or lower class, "a dramatic majority" voted for Bill Clinton for president — that's the finding of sociologists Andrew Greeley and Michael Hout in their recent book "The Truth About Conservative Christians." A 2004 survey for "Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly" on PBS found that a majority of evangelicals have an unfavorable view of Falwell and that a significant minority of them are more concerned about jobs and the economy than about abortion and gay marriage.
And it isn't as if conservative Christians are the only obstacle to gay marriage: Yes, 85% of white evangelicals oppose gay marriage, but in the general population the figure is 61%. In fact, the differences between today's Christian right and the movements led by Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini are greater than the similarities. Hitler was more pagan than Christian. Street violence was a key tactic of Mussolini's Brownshirts; the Christian right has focused on nonviolent demonstrations outside U.S. abortion clinics and on changing laws at the ballot box. And there's a big difference between supporting laws against gay marriage and putting gays in concentration camps.
Nevertheless, Hedges concludes that the Christian right "should no longer be tolerated," because it "would destroy the tolerance that makes an open society possible." What does he think should be done? He endorses the view that "any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law," and therefore we should treat "incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal." Thus he rejects the 1st Amendment protections for freedom of speech and religion, and court rulings that permit prosecution for speech only if there is an imminent threat to particular individuals.
Ironically, Mr. Hedges's disdain for the rights of freedom of thought, expression, and religion, and his totalitarian streak that makes him want to ban speech he disapproves of and punish those who do not conform make him much more similar to the real Fascists than the American Christian conservatives are.
Now get this. Mr. Hedges is a reporter for the New York Times. How can he claim to be an unbiased reporter when he thinks that more than a quarter of his fellow citizens are Fascists? Has his newspaper no judgment at all in who it hires?
Naturally, of course, both he and his editors would scream bloody murder if anybody tried to interfere with their own precious rights.
Note: This is how a lot of anti-American crap gets over here to Europe. Our own left wing thinks it up, and the Europeans just parrot what they hear from renegade Americans.
Check out this girly-man slap-fight between Diogo and Luis Fabiano in yesterday's Zaragoza-Sevilla game.
I think I set a record in last week's Spanish First Division soccer picks. I went 0-for-10. Got every single one of them wrong. That leaves me at .000 for the week and .000 for the year.
Here's next week's picks; I can't possibly do worse.
Espanyol-Barça 2
Nastic-Getafe X
Celta-At. Madrid X
Osasuna-Betis 1
Racing-Real Sociedad 1
Valencia-Levante 1
Sevilla-Mallorca 1
Recreativo-Deportivo 1
Athletic Bilbao-Villarreal X
Here's next week's picks; I can't possibly do worse.
Espanyol-Barça 2
Nastic-Getafe X
Celta-At. Madrid X
Osasuna-Betis 1
Racing-Real Sociedad 1
Valencia-Levante 1
Sevilla-Mallorca 1
Recreativo-Deportivo 1
Athletic Bilbao-Villarreal X
I got a Google hit for something like "spain three kings blackface offensive." Yep, it is true that traditionally in Spain, one of the Three Kings paints his face black.
The story is that every city has a parade on Three Kings Eve, Jan. 5, when the Three Kings (the Wise Men from the Bible), all dressed up in flowing robes, ride through the streets on their way to bring presents to all the good little boys and girls and caca i carbó (poop and coal) to the bad ones. (Now, the poop and coal are meringue candy with brown or black food coloring.) In Spanish tradition, one of the Three Kings is blond and wears a blond wig and beard, and one of them is black. Since black people in Spain were extremely rare until about five years ago, and are still rare in a lot of places, they usually get a white guy to black up in order to be the black King--I think Baltasar is his name. The other two are Melchor and Gaspar. As far as I know, here in Barcelona they get a real black man to play Baltasar, but in smaller places they paint someone's face.
Come on, people, this isn't offensive. They're not making fun of black people here; they just need someone to dress up as a black Wise Man. Remember, the character of Baltasar is a good guy, one of the wise Kings of Orient who brings pressies to the kids. He doesn't do a minstrel-show Stepin Fetchit act, he throws candy to the kids lining the streets and waves at them.
The story is that every city has a parade on Three Kings Eve, Jan. 5, when the Three Kings (the Wise Men from the Bible), all dressed up in flowing robes, ride through the streets on their way to bring presents to all the good little boys and girls and caca i carbó (poop and coal) to the bad ones. (Now, the poop and coal are meringue candy with brown or black food coloring.) In Spanish tradition, one of the Three Kings is blond and wears a blond wig and beard, and one of them is black. Since black people in Spain were extremely rare until about five years ago, and are still rare in a lot of places, they usually get a white guy to black up in order to be the black King--I think Baltasar is his name. The other two are Melchor and Gaspar. As far as I know, here in Barcelona they get a real black man to play Baltasar, but in smaller places they paint someone's face.
Come on, people, this isn't offensive. They're not making fun of black people here; they just need someone to dress up as a black Wise Man. Remember, the character of Baltasar is a good guy, one of the wise Kings of Orient who brings pressies to the kids. He doesn't do a minstrel-show Stepin Fetchit act, he throws candy to the kids lining the streets and waves at them.
People interested in language ought to look at this report from the American Dialect Society. I like the verb "to pluto," and plan to use it on every occasion. I hate "truthiness," though. Just awful.
Sunday, January 07, 2007
Check out this paranoid crap from the Guardian. The headline should read, "Britons Who Choose to Visit the United States to Be Scanned for National Security Reasons." See, if you stay in Britain, none of this will happen to you!
Get this: Britons already have their credit card details and email accounts inspected by the American authorities following a deal between the EU and the Department of Homeland Security.
1. Only if they choose to visit the United States! 2. My understanding is that such transactions are merely monitored--that is, Homeland Security can easily find out if you sent an e-mail to Osama, or sent cash through your Visa card to Hamas, but they can't inspect the contents without a court order, just as they always could monitor your mail, but not open it without a judge's permission.
Look, people, if you choose to go visit another country you have to obey their laws. When I applied for Spanish residency, they fingerprinted me, and I had to have a medical checkup, which the government knows the results of. What's the problem? I have to carry my ID card at all times here. So what's the big deal? I have to inform the government every time I change address. Who cares? I'm not allowed to work for the civil service (which includes teaching in the public schools) because I'm not a Spanish citizen. I'm not complaining. These are the Spanish government's policies, and if I don't like it I can leave.
Get this: Britons already have their credit card details and email accounts inspected by the American authorities following a deal between the EU and the Department of Homeland Security.
1. Only if they choose to visit the United States! 2. My understanding is that such transactions are merely monitored--that is, Homeland Security can easily find out if you sent an e-mail to Osama, or sent cash through your Visa card to Hamas, but they can't inspect the contents without a court order, just as they always could monitor your mail, but not open it without a judge's permission.
Look, people, if you choose to go visit another country you have to obey their laws. When I applied for Spanish residency, they fingerprinted me, and I had to have a medical checkup, which the government knows the results of. What's the problem? I have to carry my ID card at all times here. So what's the big deal? I have to inform the government every time I change address. Who cares? I'm not allowed to work for the civil service (which includes teaching in the public schools) because I'm not a Spanish citizen. I'm not complaining. These are the Spanish government's policies, and if I don't like it I can leave.
Friday, January 05, 2007
News update: The cops found sixty more kilos of explosives in the Basque Country all ready to be used, the third important find in two days. They're looking for a four-person ETA cell in that area, probably traveling together; the only one identified so far is one Asier Larrañaga. They searched a couple of apartments in Bilbao, but didn't find much.
The bomb scare at the Bilbao airport, fortunately, was just a scare.
They found the body of the second man killed in the airport bombing under tons of rubble this afternoon. He was an Ecuadorian immigrant who'd been sending $300 a month to his family back home; the TV crews went to his hometown to get his family's reaction. Those people are poor. Way to go, ETA.
Socialist party head honcho hack Jose Blanco admitted that the Zap administration had been a bit naive regarding its dealings with ETA, and promised they wouldn't do it again.
In case you were interested, TV3 made a big deal out of Keith Ellison's being sworn into the House of Representatives on a Koran; they let him use one from the National Archives that belonged to Thomas Jefferson. They emphasized that Ellison had been criticized for being "un-American." I think they erred in their emphasis, since it was one idiot Congressman who said that, and everyone else told him to shut up.
The bomb scare at the Bilbao airport, fortunately, was just a scare.
They found the body of the second man killed in the airport bombing under tons of rubble this afternoon. He was an Ecuadorian immigrant who'd been sending $300 a month to his family back home; the TV crews went to his hometown to get his family's reaction. Those people are poor. Way to go, ETA.
Socialist party head honcho hack Jose Blanco admitted that the Zap administration had been a bit naive regarding its dealings with ETA, and promised they wouldn't do it again.
In case you were interested, TV3 made a big deal out of Keith Ellison's being sworn into the House of Representatives on a Koran; they let him use one from the National Archives that belonged to Thomas Jefferson. They emphasized that Ellison had been criticized for being "un-American." I think they erred in their emphasis, since it was one idiot Congressman who said that, and everyone else told him to shut up.
La Liga Loca has its predictions for next weekend up; it's back in business after the long Spanish winter break in league play.
Our picks:
Atletico Madrid-Nastic 1
Real Sociedad-Osasuna X
Zaragoza-Sevilla 2
Getafe-Barça 2
Betis-Celta X
Levante-Racing X
Mallorca-Athletic Bilbao 1
Espanyol-Recreativo X
Deportivo-Real Madrid 2
Villarreal-Valencia X
Our picks:
Atletico Madrid-Nastic 1
Real Sociedad-Osasuna X
Zaragoza-Sevilla 2
Getafe-Barça 2
Betis-Celta X
Levante-Racing X
Mallorca-Athletic Bilbao 1
Espanyol-Recreativo X
Deportivo-Real Madrid 2
Villarreal-Valencia X
National Public Radio ran a debate the other day on Hollywood and anti-Americanism, and they've got it up on their website, so you can listen to the whole thing. Check it out. I haven't listened to it yet, because it's an hour and a half, but there are plenty of ideas here.
Arts and Letters Daily links to this piece from Commentary on the Robert Redeker affair, anti-Semitism, and just plain bad judgement in France. Check it out. Two key paragraphs:
The effect of these views on the wider political discussion in France is profound. The present generation of Orientalists is omnipresent in the French media, unavoidable on radio and television. They assure the country that the progressive Islamization of European suburbs, plain for all to see, poses no danger. They suggest that the problem with Israel is its very existence. They inspire the open sympathy with Hamas, Hizballah, and Iran that can be found in newspapers like Le Monde and Libération. And they encourage the use of the term “Islamophobia” (a coinage of Iranian clerics) in order to delegitimize all those who might be tempted to disagree with them—individuals like Redeker.
I am neither an Orientalist nor any kind of expert on the issue of Islamism. But I have spent years in the Middle East, as well as in other Muslim countries, and I know that the situation in the Islamic world corresponds very little to the wishful thinking of so many French scholars, journalists, and political leaders. A quick look at a world map—from Chechnya to Israel and the Palestinian Authority, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, Somalia, Kashmir, southern Thailand, and the southern Philippines—reveals that the planet’s most devastating wars are now of the jihadist type. All are fueled by Islamism.
The effect of these views on the wider political discussion in France is profound. The present generation of Orientalists is omnipresent in the French media, unavoidable on radio and television. They assure the country that the progressive Islamization of European suburbs, plain for all to see, poses no danger. They suggest that the problem with Israel is its very existence. They inspire the open sympathy with Hamas, Hizballah, and Iran that can be found in newspapers like Le Monde and Libération. And they encourage the use of the term “Islamophobia” (a coinage of Iranian clerics) in order to delegitimize all those who might be tempted to disagree with them—individuals like Redeker.
I am neither an Orientalist nor any kind of expert on the issue of Islamism. But I have spent years in the Middle East, as well as in other Muslim countries, and I know that the situation in the Islamic world corresponds very little to the wishful thinking of so many French scholars, journalists, and political leaders. A quick look at a world map—from Chechnya to Israel and the Palestinian Authority, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan, Somalia, Kashmir, southern Thailand, and the southern Philippines—reveals that the planet’s most devastating wars are now of the jihadist type. All are fueled by Islamism.
From the News-in-These-Here-Parts department: TV3 is reporting that there has been a bomb threat at the Bilbao airport, and it has been evacuated. We'll update this if it turns out to be important.
The cops found a hundred-kilo bomb apparently abandoned by ETA near the side of a road in the Basque Country, along with the timers and detonators and other stuff necessary to make it go boom. I think this means that ETA is on the offensive again.
I've seen several analyses recently backing the theory that there are two different factions within ETA. One is made up of people who haven't committed murder and those who have served their sentences, and they're broadly in favor of negotiations. The other is made up of current prisoners and others who have blood on their hands, and they want to keep killing until the government agrees to an amnesty. According to this theory, faction number 2 has won out in the internal struggle. All I can say is amnesty, over my dead body.
The cops found a hundred-kilo bomb apparently abandoned by ETA near the side of a road in the Basque Country, along with the timers and detonators and other stuff necessary to make it go boom. I think this means that ETA is on the offensive again.
I've seen several analyses recently backing the theory that there are two different factions within ETA. One is made up of people who haven't committed murder and those who have served their sentences, and they're broadly in favor of negotiations. The other is made up of current prisoners and others who have blood on their hands, and they want to keep killing until the government agrees to an amnesty. According to this theory, faction number 2 has won out in the internal struggle. All I can say is amnesty, over my dead body.
Here's Bill Buckley on the ethics of watching the Saddam hanging video. I watched it. I suppose what surprised me most was the effectiveness of hanging: Saddam was dead as a doornail five seconds after the trap dropped.
This, of course, is not the first death video on Internet; you'll remember that when Nick Berg was murdered, the killers released the video. I didn't watch it, nor do I have any plan to watch anything of the sort.
I had no problem watching Saddam hang, though. I suppose the difference is that I hated, feared, and despised Saddam, and I'm glad he's dead.
This, of course, is not the first death video on Internet; you'll remember that when Nick Berg was murdered, the killers released the video. I didn't watch it, nor do I have any plan to watch anything of the sort.
I had no problem watching Saddam hang, though. I suppose the difference is that I hated, feared, and despised Saddam, and I'm glad he's dead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
