william.scherk

It's from the Gulf 2000 project out of Columbia University. There are many more maps, all of them useful, saturated with knowledge. Check out this one of the Levant's ethno-religious groups: Yeah. It's what I call the 'Highlands Principle.' I think that over time, generations, hundreds of years, detested or suspect peoples -- of faith or custom different from neighbours or new conquerors -- took to the hills, which were most easily defended, and which were less economically interesting to the conqueror ... So, it is no surprise that the highlands of Iraq are spotted with distinct ethnocultural remnants of long gone wars, pogroms, exiles and so on. What that large map doesn't show, Adam, is a closer-level mixing in population centres, and the residential segregation by group that has occured in Iraq since the first Gulf 2000 maps came online. Here, for example, is Baghdad, over the span 2003 and 2007: Them 'green section people' are called Shia on the maps of Baghdad, with red being Sunni (yellow on the larger maps). You can see that the last years of inter-ethnic, Shia/Sunni civil war have led to a stark segregation in formerly mixed areas. This is not under a Sunni administration, of course -- Maliki is Shia, and leads a Shia-majority factional party in the new Parliament. For the moment he is the Grand Poobah. The dam is under IS/IS control; you can call them by their name too, the fascist maniacs. In any case it is not in the interests of IS/IS to blow up the dam. It supplies electricity, which they are not quite ready to renounce. This Globe and Mail story sez they have dispatched engineers to fix some blown up parts of the grid.

Not really. Yeah really! I agree with about 95.3 percent of what you just wrote on policy failures and prescriptions. On point, strongly argued.

The situation in Iraq seems fairly straightforward. KSA wants Maliki out. Somebody armed ISIL in Syria, suggested a plan. That's a good opening line to an analysis. I still get email alerts from WND. They are bracing. Such kooks. As for Hillary, I would never watch her if she was a news outlet, as I find her a dull and plodding speaker. She speaks the dialect of Politish used at the state level, wherein every word is part of a carefully considered script in an adversarial situation. The same dialect as almost every other Senator or senior Congressman or Governor (or Premier -- BC has some terrible examples). I really hope she does not run for the the White House. The Republicans deserve a turn presiding over the state, I figure. That said, I understand not trusting HRC one centimetre. I understand the poised 'my government is lying to me,' and I understand a most bleak assessment of mainstream media truth quotient. Yet before we give greater credence to Infowars and WND, I think we need an independent argument spelling out why. My position is that Infowars/WND are proven unreliable (as with my deconstruction above) time and again. For me, such a track record means I have to probe each story for accuracy and logic, read three links deep the articles cited, test claims and assertions one by one. It's a bore and a chore and I won't do it again in this thread. But. My goals in argument are to encourage critical assessment, intelligence gathering, testing assumptions, using all our proven skeptical tools -- in order to winnow out the bullshit and share the remains. Reason applied. Wolf, you are brainy, well-read, in command of a great 'literary' voice. To the bombing of Iraq today, to the salvation of the Yezidis today, to the rally-round-the-flag-boys media swoon today -- I think you likely have lots to say that is cogent and worth reading closely. Those props, Infowars and WND, are not necessary.

In neighbouring Syria, IS/IS took territory in a roughly similar fashion -- except that the Syrian armed forces have since settled into a relative truce with their erstwhile opponents. IS/IS depredations in Syria have occasionally erupted into the West's newsfeeds, but against the death toll of 170,000, and the hideous refugee situation resulting from three years of war, who cares? This Infowars article is a confection. Where to start in debunking its claims? Well, the operating assumption that the USA has made 'allies' with al Qaeda is incorrect. When Alex Jones says such and such "is well known" -- in this case, direct or indirect US support for Al Qaeda, IS/IS -- the only ones who 'know' this are the raft of nutterzone commentators like Tony Cartalucci, or the Pulitizer Prize Winning Seymour Hersh. Eg: Syria: U.S. Directly Collaborates with al-Qaeda(evidence? Well, none for this claim, unless you count as proved Cartalucci's mad speculation.) Tony Cartalucci documents how the al-Qaeda inspired, although supposedly no longer aligned, ISIL is the product of a NATO and ISIS has been harbored, trained, armed, and extensively funded by a coalition of NATO and Persian Gulf states within Turkey’s (NATO territory) borders and has launched invasions into northern Syria with, at times, both Turkish artillery and air cover. The most recent example of this was the cross-border invasion by Al Qaeda into Kasab village, Latikia province in northwest Syria.There is a grain of truth in this: Turkey is a Sunni-majority nation. They have been an opponent of Syria's regime since the first killings of demonstrators occured in early 2011. Turkey is a NATO nation. Turkey has uneasy relations with the Maliki government. Turkey has indeed sponsored and trained elements of the armed Syrian opposition. But here's the thing. There is a variety of 'rebels,' ranging from defected members of the Assad regime (FSA) to the right fucking crazy IS/IS. Award-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh wrote in 2007 that the Bush administration had aligned itself with radical Sunni elements in Iraq. Hersh has essentially allied his reporting with the needs of the Syrian Government, most famously with his two articles blaming 'the rebels' (in this case, Al Nusra) and the Turks for the August 21 2013 Sarin attacks on the Damascus Ghouta region ... According to Cartalucci, “The prospect of the US, NATO, or the Persian Gulf states delivering Iraq from ISIS is an ironic tragedy – as definitive evidence reveals ISIS’ brutal incursion was of this collective coalition’s own doing to begin with, and for its own insidious ends. Instead, a joint Iranian-Iraqi-Syrian anti-terror campaign should be conducted to corner and crush NATO’s terrorist mercenary expeditionary force once and for all.”-- the phrasing indicates to me (even if I was not familiar with Cartalucci's kook output elsewhere) that the gentleman is unhinged. Where is this fucking "definitive evidence"? Up Tony's ass, most likely. Not one conspiracy tale has this guy passed on. What makes the Infowars site unreliable is its swallowing hole any item, any claim, any preposterous assertion -- without fact-checking or corrections ... "Given that ..." whew, the only given is that Watson cannot make a case for the "Full Infiltration" ... so he proceeds on the assumption that it is true. Steve Watson is, as usual, full of shit. The headline for his article is "CIA TRAINED AL-QAEDA CELL TO ENTER SYRIA," but the article in no way offers evidence to support the claim ... Yikes. " the U.S. brazenly announced it was arming al-Qaeda." Not true. The USA did no such thing. Going to the Gertz article, you can see that the Infowars hacks cherry picked one phrase ... smudging the differences between Al Nusra and the secular rebels of the FSA. Here's the money quote from the actual article, which is worth a read only to highlight the differences between the Infowars claim and the story they crib from: This excerpt makes more sense when you realize who Riedel is, and when you add the two paragraphs surrounding it: Former intelligence official and counterterrorism specialist Bruce Riedel also questioned the United States arming the rebels. “If done well, this move can end a bloody civil war,” Riedel said in acolumn in the Daily Beast. “If done poorly, it could lead to disaster.” Riedel warned that other states involved in arming the rebels likely have differing interests than those of the United States. A worst case scenario: “Our arms could end up in al Qaeda’s hands not just in Syria but in Iraq, Jordan, and elsewhere,” Riedel said. “They could be used to kill Americans.” Riedel said there are many unanswered questions about the covert arms aid, such as whether the mission is to stop the use of chemical arms or to oust the Assad regime. I trust not single story from World Net Daily. In this case, their two links recycle the same speculation (as fact) that has already surfaced at Infowars, Russia Today, Global Research and elsewhere on the lunatic fringe. This is in academia and publishing called Log-rolling. In this case, the nicest way to refer to this reporting is A Circle Jerk. (Kelley's article in Business Insider is the best of the bunch -- he is a good reporter, and is careful not to overstate what he knows, what is possible, what is probably, and what is plausible) The current Parliament is deadlocked on choosing a new Prime Minister. Malikei cannot command a majority in the new house, but refuses to step down unless he gains immunity for all his actions, and is protected by a security detail for the rest of his life. Maliki's Shia-First policies have cost him mightily -- in terms of support from erstwhile allies. I think Iraq deserves a new government, one that is not as blindly sectarian. That the Saudis reject that Maliki continue in power is unremarkable. What is ugly? The Maliki government? Or that the US is pushing for him to give way to a new PM? In any case, instead of giving links and quotes from a shitty 'news as conspiracy theory" site like Infowars (or the crackpots at WND), why don't you give us your own take on things ...?

Well, no, though I appreciate the sarcasm. There is lots to see 'here' (there, in Iran's history). Nope. Don't forget Turkey, Jordan, and Egypt. This is special pleading, spurious. "Under the Shah, some good things happened on the surface. These cherry-picked good things outweigh the bad things." Really, not. Under the Shah, anyone could be arrested at any time by the fearsome secret police. Torture, summary executions, the whole nine yards. This was a dictatorship in every sense of the word. Sort of true. True in the way that the USA has very good relations with the religious dictatorship of royal Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. True, but so what? Because the current Islamic Republic is a mad religious dictatorship that oppresses its people -- this does not make the Shah's regime a beautiful thing without question. Well, is this your prescription for the USA to get in bed with any authoritarian regime, regardless of their oppression? In any case, Jules, pining for an Emperor to return to the Peacock Throne is pointless. There will not be a resumption of royal rule. (this does not make the current regime into a good thing).

American air-drops have just begun, according to ABC -- and at least one (disputed) report suggests that US air force has now bombed IS positions in the empty Yazidi towns ... some of the weakest for lack of water have already died on the mountain. Let it be no laughing matter to preserve their lives.

Wow, I wonder if they knew Martin Buber... Laughable.

Another article calling on the USA to act swiftly to help the Yezidi in their emergency. Here's a lengthy passage from Tom Rogan at the National Review. Also, below, a report from Rudaw (the Kurdish news portal) that details the situation on the ground, the absence of the Iraqi army, the weakness of the KRG Peshmerga, the heavy weight of the Islamic State, the first attempts at airdrops. I am cynical about the international response to The Ancient Religion Dying On A Mountain story. Nobody, not even the USA, did a fucking thing when the Christians were cleansed from Mosul. Why should they do anything about the Ancient Religion? (aside from the obvious that the Christians ended up in safe refuges, while the Yezidis on the mountain have no exit route. Oh and that they are classed by IS as scarcely human and can be killed without compunction) 40 Yezidi Children and Elderly Starve to Death on Mountain Refuge

I don't understand the 'laughable' part, Adam. Which situation or reaction would be laughable -- the airdrops of water, food and medications for the Yezidi folks that fled their villages and towns with nothing, and whose children are dying? Or maybe you mean that the airstrikes would do nothing to damage IS? Or perhaps that it is laughable for this administration to attempt to save lives in Iraq? Maybe more likely is that you think that the administration is too slow to react, too confused, too constricted by its military stance in Iraq ... ? Now that you have recovered from the boredom of reading about the Ahmadiyya and the Ismailis, here's a bit of background from a Telegraph columnist:

I dunno. Literature talks about honor killings and feuds -- but there's this item: "In Gaza, the death penalty is enforced for various crimes, and members of the Ahmadi community hide their true beliefs." http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/137789#.U-JyxWMnjIU A death penalty can be issued by the Gazan authorities for murder and for collaboration with the enemy (Israel), according to my reading. I've been checking with the local Gaza civil society/human rights orgs, such as they are, for information on executions. The authorities in Gaza, much less than a state and more than a government, are supposed to reflect the primary law (that setting up the 'constitution' of the proto-state Palestine aka the Palestinian Authority). That constitution reads like a lot of other Mideast constitutions, windy, expository, rambling, repeating the bumf of every other one about 'the indivisible Arab Nation' yadda yadda oppression blah blah blah. But. Although it asserts Islam as the religion of Palestine, it also asserts freedom of religion. To quote: "Islam is the official religion in Palestine. Respect for the sanctity of all other divine religions shall be maintained." This should mean that the Christians of Palestine (West Bank and Gaza) operate as they wish, and their personal status (eg, religious identity, responsibility, demands) is not subject to Sharia. Nor to Jizya. Nor to other seemingly automatic institutions of an Islamic State that harry and curb the activities of non-Muslims. So, in this sense, then, Gaza/Palestine has more freedom of religion than America's main Arab ally, Saudi Arabia, where professing Christianity is essentially a crime, and the sword is used against apostates, idolaters and sundry non-conformists). -- I think you're right if instead of claiming Gaza Christians face the axe, you are strongly suggesting that things ain't easy for the small Christian (and Ahmadiyya) minorities in Palestine/Gaza. According to some reports, Christian practice was subject to open suppression and punishment as recently as ten years ago, rendering meaningless any constitutional brass and flowers for the dwindling Christians. Of course, the also-dwindling Israeli Christians don't always fare much better: there has been a steady pattering of attacks and insults upon Christians and places of worship -- by Jews. Otherwise, useful link. Thanks. ***************************** The Ahmadi are an interesting branch or sprout off the Islamic Tree. Given the evils that the so-called Islamic State is dispensing in Syria and Iraq, I am happy to read of the utter rejection and loathing of IS by my Muslim contacts and acquaintances. Revulsion against the ethno-religious cleansing underway is attached to IS itself, though, not to any and every Muslim. However evil and stupid are the actions and policies of Hamas, from their covenant to their Iranian/Hezbollah funding, there are worse Islamic fascists (IS/ISIS/Nusra), worse allies (Hello, Pakistan!) as gauged by the fates of religious minorities. (Adam, here's another chance for your eyes to glaze over, another (larger) minority Muslim group: the Ismailis. You will have noted that this kind of Muslim is active in Canada. One of them is Mayor of Calgary, for heaven's sake. Brant! they are taking over up here!) )

Why should Europe, NATO and the USA 'jerk themselves' out of Ukraine, Brant? Does it make sense to you to let undemocratic Russia do what it wishes with Ukraine? Shouldn't we consider what the stakes are in Ukraine, all the players, all the contingencies? I read you as implying you consider Russia's actions in Ukraine to be relatively unremarkable, or maybe you figure Russia's seizing of Crimea and military operations in 'Novorossiya' to be benign, or benign enough to raise no alarm in Tucson. Appeaser. You're a clown. There. Easy to slap a label on something, ain't it? I would sure like to see a paragraph or two that shows your understanding of the sprawling mess in Ukraine, and what in particular should/should not be done by the USA, its NATO allies, and the European Union. Maybe start with the association agreement signed between Kiev and Brussels. Maybe not. Maybe just another enigmatic potshot. Oh noes! The Arabs slash Muslims (aren't they are one and the same?) of France will grow from 4 percent of the population to, oh, let's guess ... eleventy-five! And then France will plunge into the Dark Ages. Or something. Fiddle-de-dee. "Them" taking over, huh? The 'host countries' ... the chills down the spine. Infectious and deadly. Islam. I figure that every nation that tried to establish dominion in the world by conquest and subjugation (like the French Empire), colonized or seized power in Islamic nations (Hi, Great Britain), or that has deep and enduring military-political alliances within the Islamic World (Hello, USA, hello Emirates, hello Saudi!) will have to deal with the mutual interpenetration of the various parts of its previous empires or zones of influence. American University in Doha, Cairo, Lebanon, Grand mosque in London, Washington and Paris. -- silliness aside, the demographic threat of Them to France is mostly hoax and bad math. What is clear is that the general trend toward smaller families is also catching the Muslim population. So the inevitable incline of bad muslim births against good non-muslim births is, er, evitable. I would say the greater problem for France vis a vis Les Musulmans is integration. The system in France has allowed or encouraged or built racial segregation and social exclusion. This is the tinderbox, the menace to society, in my opinion. (Brant, near to half the Muslims in France are not Arab, just so you know)

William: Certainly you know that that is clearly not his position. How would I know that, Adam? He claims he exists apart from the terrible tendrils of governance that enslave other people (they, the poor fools, get the government they deserve). How might you describe his personal Going Galt, yourself, in detail? Greg asserts that he lives apart from the world of government, without detailing exactly how. I find this to be remarkable. How does he avoid paying taxes that other people do indeed pay, like sales, income, capital gains tax? How does he actually avoid all the tendrils that have snared the people he sneers at as having "deserved" their fates? If there was any real truth in his assertions of having Galted himself, stepped outside of the trap others are mired in, then the entailments I have described above are the least of his triumphs. If he does not actually exist in a holy plane where the State never takes from him, never tells him what to do and how to do, never faces the IRS in the same way any other businessman would, then his statements and claims of Galting are utter bullshit.

Are you sure about this, Wolf -- that apostasy in Gaza is punishable by death? Perhaps that isn't what you meant. If it is, maybe you can tell us about the last time a Gazan apostate was put to death (Gaza contains Christian Arabs, including evangelicals) ... I kind of admire Greg's complete and permanent removal from the world of government, taxes, regulations, building codes and electrical networks. He pays no taxes in any form (quite a feat), no payroll taxes, disregards his property tax assessments, keeps all his money under the mattress, empties his sewage into the bowels of the earth direct, and so on. Admirable.

Where is this 'airborne infection' information coming from? "Some say" yes, but who?

I spent some time on the forums, help tickets, blog and here and there at the website. My major reaction is "weird, weird, weird." It makes me think of a self-assembled civil service attached to political idea operating in a dream-world "Cause Market." I quote below a post from the blog that undlerlines the weirdness of the enterprise ... this isn't a simple FAQ, but more an explanation of new tax rules or regulations on financial transactions. Weird. -- As near I can tell, an amount of the GaltCoins pseudocurrency is issued to newly invited members once they are allowed to join and 'support' a cause. Then they spend their chits by up or down-voting 'updates' to causes. These transactions allow 'dividends' to those who 'own' a cause or part cause. New chits are also presumably issued in exchange for cold hard cash. One's investment in a particular cause is limited to 40 percent of the 'shares' in it. 'Shares' are acquired/spent by 'voting.' The valuation and the 'minting' of the chits/chips/pseudocurrency/Galt Coins/Bingo cards is obscure ... Hopelessly wrong, my grasp of the enterprise, probably. It may not be a straight-up Ponzi scheme, but the folks who can most easily turn their chips back into cash are the class of 'founders' who also own, design, run, and update the design and software for the scheme. Could a better comparison be made to a self-contained Vegas moneymaker, wherein the House, surprise surprise, ends up winning the lion's share of the proceeds? The "fun," if there is any remaining, seems akin to the buzzes, blares, clanging and flashing of the one-armed bandits. Just keep feeding it (the House) and hope for a pay-out (but then have nowhere to spend it but in the casino) ... Has anyone else got a more accurate sketch of how this weird thing actually works?

I don't get the part about the day after voting. Do you mean this to apply to Syria?** And should this also apply to Egypt? Both have had Presidential elections in the past year. One has a peace treaty with Israel, the other a truce lasting since 1973 (except for unanswered Israeli bombings in the last three years). And what about Lebanon? They have probably the free-est, fairest elections at the parliamentary level (while being unable to select a new President). Iraq? It is still struggling to form a new government after its recent parliamentary elections. It doesn't seem to apply to Tunisia, the sole Middle East/North Africa country to come through revolution with democratic, constitutional, achievements intact, and with new ones in place. It can't apply to the USA allies in the region: Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia. Even 'Syria-style' elections are a pipe-dream in those royally-ruled friends of America. In Jordan, elections have about as much import as those in Morocco, I would say. It does apply to Pakistan, then? Or to Afghanistan? Their recent Presidential election is still (!) in recount. Libya? Their new Parliament (at least a quorum) met today ... Algeria? They recently re-elected their hundred-year old President to a fourth term. In the Palestinian territories, the last election was a very long time ago by Western clocks. It would be very interesting to see the results of a free and fair election in both the West Bank and Gaza. (of course, none of this electioning means the same thing as a Canadian national election, though Tunisia comes close, and I don't presume to know what elections mean without freedom to associate) The day after they vote, I would say "It is not over, I'd say It tends to be more the same -- especially without the institutions that guarantee or support civil society or a turnover of power. The most interesting election in the region seems to me to be Turkey's current Presidential campaign. There is no doubt who will win. And nothing will be 'over' when he takes larger power à la Putin. It will be more of the same AKP ... Marc, would that you could sketch out what you know and what you hope about the 22 Arab/Muslim lands in the years to come.† I am fairly clear on what you know and hope about Israel, or at least that you consider it mostly beyond reproach in war, deserving of criticism for its treatment of Arabs only where it has been too soft ... I want to hear your sorrowful or elegiac or angry estimation of these other 22 worlds to come this century. ________ ** Syria's presidential election had three candidates, two of them hand-picked by the first guy, Assad. There were no parties involved. There were no rallies, no televised debates, no discussion of alternatives. All the refugees were without votes (except those that made it to an Embassy). Any area outside the control of the Syrian army did not vote. A sham, in other words. † -- I am without especial hope for any country in the region other than Tunisia. The worst thing about the current conficts in Libya, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq are the refugees. For some, the Syrians especially, but also the current flood within Iraq, there will be no going home for the forseeable future. I don't see an end to the Syrian war, nor to the involvement of Iraqis, Iranians, and Hizbollah in that conflict. The so-called Islamic State will only be eradicated by the same evil means that have been used by almost every side. The Kurdish lands are simply not going to let the clock run back on their autonomous reality, in Syria and in Iraqi Kurdistan. It looks like war, war, and more war, in Gaza, in Syria, in Kurdish/Yesidi lands, the areas under IS control, in the cleansed-of-Christians-and-Shiites lands ... of Iraq. In Afghanistan. These years of turmoil have warped and damaged humanity, both in victims and in victors. I won't live long enough to see reconstruction and reconciliation, I don't think. The talk of carpet bombing and cleansing sickens me in all contexts, as does indiscriminate or disproportionate destruction. Hamas may need taking out as a military player in any form, reduced to a political party slash government with rocks, a lot of rocks. Hamas may need crushing, crushing with overwhelming force, extirpating any ability to lob more than its gravel. Then what? A moat? An underground barrier wall? Gazans have no exit. George Ourfalian/Reuters

A close relative just went through the mammogram, biopsy, Dx, lumpectomy, sentinal node biopsy, results: clear; the involvement of new technology quite astonishing. Early detection and swift action -- all in the same building, by a dedicated team ... it was impressive. Not having had major illness or surgical necessity, my experience of the health-system was almost second-hand. Tommy Douglas, dear non-Canucki friends, was a founding member of something called the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (later to become the New Democratic Party). He was premier of Saskatchewan, our version of Iowa. His government forced socialized medicine upon inhabitants and medical personnel in 1962. One of the things, for better or worse, that has stuck in the Canadian psyche: universal medical coverage, publicly funded. There was a tremendous fight in Canucki Iowa, but Douglas stood firm. For the unpleasant-to-Objectivism details, see the CBC's brief tale on Tommy's power play, "The Fight for Medicare." Four cheers for Carol!

Great news, sobering news. Do you ascribe your success with Mr C to anything that Jerry has introduced?

Jules, do you honestly believe Obama is Muslim? To the other point, it looks like the 'illegally denying letters' is a misunderstanding, nothing to do with Council on American-Islamic Relations. From Jewish News ...

Bob does not always return to where he has shat. In this case, I think he means that the USA had developed chemical weapons and a chemical warfare strategy. In 1945, however, the USA did not have the capacity in chemical weapons to 'end the war in Japan,' unless by ending the war we mean extending the war. The only chemical agents perfected by the USA by that time were variations on mustard, phosgene and lewisite. Each was not a mass-casualty weapon of the same magnitude as incendiaries or nuclear bombs. The USA had not yet amassed the specialized troops necessary for safe and effective deployment of war-sized chemical weapons. Roosevelt had earlier established the war doctrine that chemical weapons were 'one step beyond' humanity, that the USA would only use them if provoked by first use on the enemy side. In any case, none of the Axis powers were stupid enough to unleash what confections they had at the time. According to the references I consulted, there is no evidence that Harry Truman favoured the use of chemical weapons (or that he ever propounded any other than retaliatory use). See, especially, Chemical Warfare: A Study in Restraints, by Frederic J Brown, -- I imagine Bob has read that the Americans developed chemical warfare agents and delivery systems in WWII (as did the Italians, Hungarians, Japanese, French, English, Russians, and the Germans). The more deadly and persistent V-class agents came only after the war upon seizure of the German tabun, soman and sarin plants ... There is one other reference to "Truman authorized poison gas" on the internet, at the FORUM for Ayn Rand Fans, the nearly dead forum: I excuse Bob/Ba'al/Mr ben Yosef because he is functionally autistic, and can probably barely empathize with 'collateral' deaths, let alone the particular horrors of chemical weapons.

It is not staged. It is not recent, but from relatively early days of the Syrian uprising. It was an instance, and not the only one, of a regime side IED/car bomb/mortar shell exploding during a funeral for protesters the regime forces had previously shot dead. As the repurposing for the IsraeliVideoNetwork site suggests 'suicide vest' on a corpse without noting who, where, how, why or when, I appreciate the grim humour in a kind of abtsract way. Since the time of this bombing, the scope of the regime war crimes has only broadened, of course. (it's not the first time that internet sites have used images or videos from Syria to illustrate current or parallel horrors) Death by explosion is par for the course in Syria every day of the week, whether by shelling from the rebels, air-strikes, shelling and barrel-bombs from the regime, or suicide bombs, shelling and mass executions by the demented religious force of IS. I advise OLers to not watch the video. It is horrifying. The numbers of dead, maimed, exiled, in refuge or otherwise made wretched by war ... ugly and awful and worse. Considering the numbers of people tortured to death in Syrian detention, or the number of children killed, maimed and orphaned, the heart grows ever heavier. I think the current Gaza operations will end long before a hint of peace comes to Syria, let alone a ceasefire.

Could be, that. I read the torture article linked by Francisco. Hurl. Here's an interview with Holzer about his animal rights work, from the Sans Everything blog:

Michael is right. The tribal sheik is a friend of Israel, travels from Jordan to Israel (enjoying the peace treaty which allows such movements), and proclaims his beliefs on his Facebook page, like any other sheik(!).** It's hard to know his reputation as a scholar, though some Islamic sources do indeed support his interpretation. This is the first of two Koran verses said to give Israel to the Jews until the End Days, Sura 5, verse 21, as cited in the Front Page article. I've read the context quotes above and below from the fifth chapter of the book (here, at one of many sites reproducing the entire thing). It is by no means clear to me just what the hell is being decided and promised and justified. The quote within the verse is purported to be that of Moses himself ... O my people, enter the Holy Land which Allah has assigned to you and do not turn back [from fighting in Allah 's cause] and [thus] become losers." Here's some further reporting on the sheik from the Jerusalem Online site. The larger quote gives an indication of how fraught the "Palestinian Question" is in Jordan, and of lingering hostility to those came to Jordan as refugees/displaced persons. The Jews News also adds a bit more information on the Sheik for analysis: I tend to like MSK's casting forth the notion of 'core story.' In this case, a muslim accepts the core of the modern Israel story, a nation reclaiming -- in the name of its covenant -- its ancient dividend, taking that which the jewish god intended for his chosen people ... ________________ ** "Sheik" is an honorific applied to the Jordanian fellow with no certain relationship to his reputation as a scholar of Islam. In this case, I think it means he is a respected elder of his tribe. My eyes cross/glaze over, generally, when Sheiks get to touting this or that verse and this or that hadith and this or that commentary. It is all a mile thick and made of the same excreta, from my humble atheist position. For those who can withstand such things, an interview with the sheik. There is, of course, much attention paid to the sheik's citing of the Koran, and some criticism of his interpretation. Here, for example. I am thinking maybe we need Greg to cut through the clutter of interpretation and tell what it Really Means in terms simple enough for children.

Geez, Carol, is there some sort of translation of that outburst? Carol's quick-posted comments are not completely opaque to me, Adam. I took her to admitting that she doesn't think about architecture too much. I also read 'highly unreliable contractor' to be a reference to the destruction of Roark's work (well, the work of the workers) in The Fountainhead. I read the 'googled a bunch' to be fairly straightforward: she googled, eg "Tucson Architecture.' The 'turquoise doors' she noted are depictions of Tucson architecture in the Old Barrio. She loved the feel of the neighborhood ... and the reference to "Design I with Reason' is to another result stemming from "Tucson architecture." Link One such Tucson doorway:

Cat-scratch fever hits hard in the America West. Another so-called tribal casino cancels an appearance by the bad boy of Detroit. From Raw Story ... I wasn't really curious enough to find out what Nugent has written or said to justify the first cancellation by the Coeur d'Alene tribal folks. But it does seem the drink is sometimes in control of the rock legend's mouth. Some commentary suggests that Nugent did not mean the native Indians were the 'unclean vermin' and unqualified-to-be-human, holding that he was referring to the Southern Poverty Law Center.