&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ALSHOUSE &amp; ASSOCIATES &nbsp;

For an up-to-date accounting of U.S. military, coalition, contractors, etc. killed, MIA, and wounded see http://icasualties.org/oif/
For a current count on Iraqi civilian deaths go to http://www.iraqbodycount.net/background.htm

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++

Bitterness ???

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++

Al Gore's Nobel Prize Acceptance Speech

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++

Speaking the Truth

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++

Observations from the Ground

http://thenewshole.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/07/03/256978

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++

It's Time to Resign

by Keith Olbermann: Broadcast on MSNBC, July 4, 2007

A Guest Editorial

For a live video click below:

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++

We Will Know We Have "Won" The War, When:

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++

Help Restore Sanity to our Democracy

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++

A Week of Irony

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++

A MUST DO List To Restore Democracy

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++

Can the Sword be Broken?

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++

EROS and MARS

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++

truth and TRUTH ?

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++

A New Beginning

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++

Welcome to TIVOland

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

A Fitting Holiday

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Who Speaks for Them?

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

November 8th: The Morning After

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Facing the Facts

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Halloween Ghosts

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Paranoid or Perceptive?

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Don't Throw Me In That Briar Patch, Mr. President

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

A Transformative Thought

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Toward a Political Credo for 2008

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Banned Books Week marks 25th anniversary September 23-30

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

The Other Side of Patriotism

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Patriotism

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Two Days in September ...

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

What is Peace?

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Our Best Hope?

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Ancient Wisdom

Solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant.

(They make a wilderness and call it peace.)

---Tacitus, reporting the words of Calgalus

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

BEFORE the next July 4th !

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Biofuels are the Latest Greenscam

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

The Idea(s) of Democracy

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

(return to top of page)

Get this Message to Washington
A Guest Editorial by John David Maguire

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Energy Policy Draft for Unity08

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Toward a Draft Platform

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

(return to top of page)

Mapping the Issues

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

(return to top of page)

Nulla tenaci invia est via

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

(return to top of page)

Laying New Tracks

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Leadership

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

(return to top of page)

A Community Vision: Principles of Creativity

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

++++++++++++++++

Toward A Vision Borne of Optimism

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

How is Your Bread Sliced?

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

The Democracy Project

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

In Search of a Common Ground for Discussion About America’s Vision

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

An Ever Present Danger

Americans are becoming more alarmed (For example see: Francis Fukuyama’s new book, America at the Crossroads and Kevin Phillips’
recent American Theocracy) about the direction their political future. Democracies, under stress, can evolve into fascisms. Lawrence Britt,
a political scientist, defined the 14 Characteristic of Fascism in the Spring 2003 issue of Free Inquiry magazine.

Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen
everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be
ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary
executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial,
ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
Supremacy of the Military
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding,
and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
Rampant Sexism
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender
roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.
Controlled Mass Media
Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by
government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
Obsession with National Security
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
Religion and Government are Intertwined
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion.
Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are
diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
Corporate Power is Protected
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power,
creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
Labor Power is Suppressed
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government; labor unions are either eliminated
entirely, or are severely suppressed.
Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for
professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments
often refuse to fund the arts.
Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook
police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually
unlimited power in fascist nations.
Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government
positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist
regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
Fraudulent Elections
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against
or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries,
and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

____________________________________________

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

On this Third Anniversary - A time to remember

On this third anniversary of our invasion of Iraq, it is important to recognize those civilians and combatants who have given their lives in this
tragic period of history.

For an interesting web site from inside Iraq go to: http://www.uruknet.info

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

"Conservative"

Today’s posting, “Defining ‘Conservative’” is the sequel to “Defining ‘Liberal’” two weeks ago. This project is part of an effort to move beyond the polarities of “Liberal” and “Conservative” as they have paralyzed American life today. But before we seek a new form for our failing democracy, we need to define the boundaries of where we are today in terms of basic political values. The next step is to move beyond these restrictions and seek a fresh definition of our vision as a nation. So this has been a look backwards before we turn forward into a less defined world.

Again, these terms, “Liberal” and “Conservative” are NOT meant to be associated with specific political parties. Rather, they are a way of looking at the world. They reflect our deepest values and beliefs. It is out of some of these assumptions that the future will be forged, beyond our present Democratic and Republican parties.

“Conservative,” Webster defines as “tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions,” but it is much more, and these 11 points seek to define that conservative mind.

1. Human nature’s role in the larger ecological environment is to dominate and tame Nature.

2. Human nature represents the highest development of Nature. Man is substantially at the peak of the chain-of-being, the end of the process of development.

3. Institutions, like religion, are the creators of “civilization” and not the byproducts of civilization; thus protection of the institutional infrastructure of democracy is basic to the future of civilization.

4. Governments and voluntary associations depend upon the leadership of strong individuals and their values are “the individual writ large.”

5. Governments derive their powers and efficacy from individuals. In general, the best government is the least government.

6. There is a manifest destiny about human history. The special role of the U.S. in the 21^st century is to advance democracy.

7. Compromise on essential matters that affect our national sovereignty or ability to act unilaterally is impossible.

8. Preserving the values of the inherited past is our best path to the future; the past was better than the present. The “good” will prevail only if mankind routes out the evil doers and returns to it past values. Evil may prevail unless those who advance the “good” increase their power and influence.

9. Democracy represents the highest and best form of political organization. As cultures become more “developed” they will from democratic governments as a law of human nature. Adjustments may be required from time to time in every democracy, but we will not need a new form of government.

10. Diversity of ten leads to chaos and anarchy. Uniformity results in a stronger and more effective form of social organization. Dissent is dangerous.

11. Postscript: In the end, a free mankind will prevail.

merle

++++++++++++++++

Note: For an up-to-date accounting of U.S. military, coalition, contractors, etc. killed, MIA, and wounded see http://icasualties.org/oif/
For a current count on Iraqi civilian deaths go to http://www.iraqbodycount.net/background.htm

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

"Liberal"

Some one once asked me, “What does a liberal believe?” Many have noted that the term seems vague and is rarely used these days, except in a divisive context. Webster leads us to the political party definition associating it with the “ideals of individual and economic freedom, grater individual participation in government and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives.” So our history gives evidence of both Republican and Democratic “liberals.” Still unsatisfied, I have attempted to define the essential core of what I understand defines the “liberal” mind. So what do you think?

Human nature is an integral part of the larger ecological environmental system of the universe.
Humans, as we know them, are part of an evolving development of homo sapiens, and we are in “process.”
The achievements we call “civilization’ over the past six thousand years are represented in institutions (social and governmental systems) that are fragile and need constant care and feeding.
While individuals can accomplish much, there are great needs that only can be met by cooperative enterprises such as voluntary associations, governments, etc.
At times governments can accomplish what individuals cannot – both for the good and for destructive purposes.
Our futures, both as individuals and as a society, are not guaranteed, and thus we need to individually work toward ways of making our world a better place.
In this effort, we sometimes must choose between the lesser of two evils, and accept compromises.
There is at the core of humans a capacity for creativity, imagination and goodness; but there is also a capacity to hold on to the past, find security in the known and to exploit our fellow man. In that struggle, liberals believe that the good will prevail.
Democracy, as a form of social political organization, comes in many varieties and is only one of many potential systems that are constantly evolving and changing. There is no one universally “best” political system for every region of the world, since each region has unique cultural histories and traditions.
In all things the liberal is tolerant of diversity and seeks to maximize the good while minimizing pain and suffering. In all matters pride and hubris are to be avoided in the interests of playful creativity.
Postscript: In the end, Nature will have its way.

merle

++++++++++++++++

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

"Freedom" of the Press

The First Amendment to our Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom...of the press." Although the First
Amendment specifically mentions only the federal Congress, this provision now protects the press from interference at all levels of government.
That is the theory and myth.

The reality is that the First Amendment does not prevent the media from political and governmental “influence” or financial control by mega
corporations. So is our press “free?” Aside from a few courageous journalists associated with the Independent Press Association http://www.indypress.org/site/index.html our media reflects corporate interests and content that reflects the intense desire of reports to keep
their channels open to those with political influence. The result is an obsessive focus on “human interest stories” and an absence of in-depth
investigatory reporting. Hence we have learned more about Dick Chaney’s “accident” quail hunting than we ever did about his role in engineering
the war in Iraq, lying about the WMD that we knew Iraq no longer retained. How many Americans have any idea about the WMD we supplied to
Saddam for his war against Iran? No wonder we were worried. The media, government and corporate policy makers can count on the memory
loss factor of a majority of our citizens.

Perhaps it is appropriate that many persons get their “news” on the Comedy Channel’s Daily Show from Jon Stewart, or with the satire of Andy Borowitz. Rapidly decreasing newspaper subscriptions are resulting in more pink slips for news editors, leaving the “news” in the hands of young, underpaid, less experienced “reporters.” The result is that our news is without the context provided by those who have traveled broadly and have some experience
with other cultures. So we have both “sound bites” and “word bites” taken from the wire services.

Today (02-19-06) the St. Petersburg Times http://www.sptimes.com ran an ad defining its “independence” as “freedom from control or influence of another or others.” Yes, this paper is one of the few that is not controlled by a for profit corporation but rather the Poynter Institute, a non profit organization http://www.poynter.org/ Yet the readers of this “independent” paper will not find editorials about Florida’s great sugar subsidy or
concerns about current development issues when they involve downtown property owned by the Institute. Just what are the Institute’s financial
interests and how do they influence the paper’s editorial policies.

What prompted all this was the flack over the satiric cartoons about Muhammad that ran in Denmark and prompted a violent response from
conservative Muslims and a defensive salute to the “free press” flag in the West. Both responses are off target. The former reflect an internal
struggle within Islam itself and the latter a misunderstanding of what needs to be “free” about the free press. Yes, images are powerful, more so
than words. Thus cartoonists need to be very well informed; they are super-journalists. Satire is easy; insight is difficult. I can hardly wait to see
how The New Yorker deals with the cartoon issue.

merle

++++++++++++++++

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

FEAR

I “fear” that at the core of our fears is the fear that we have lost control of the variables by which we have traditionally understood politics/society/economics and culture in general. The pace of change and events has become incrementally faster with each passing month. In many
ways the last 200 years of human society, when we grew from a population of about 1B to 6.6B has been unprecedented in human history. We are in the middle of a rapidly moving current and have no idea where it is going.

What are the driving forces of this current? Academics increasingly are discovering that the old methodological paradigms just don’t work. Politicians run for easy answers and quick fixes. “Wars” have been waged against tyrants, poverty, etc., so it was the most convenient political metaphor (never mind
that we have not really “won” a war since 1945). Sooner or later we will learn that the issues we face are so much greater than can be fit into the old “box” of “war” language. There is no precedent or easy analogue for where we are. And that IS frightening. Perhaps we cannot control the future any longer.

We really need to take a good look at those factors that are truly different and thus perhaps driving this current. One major factor must be technology.
In the past few decades the cost of creating, possessing and using technology for destructive purposes has dropped dramatically. Now a small group of individuals can inflict the kind of catastrophic damage to a society than previously was possible only by other nation states or natural disasters. So we
live in a mode of perpetual fear that no national state can truly protect us anymore. So in a state of first shock we run to the easy solutions: religion, isolationism, patriotism, better technology, etc. We fear that the homeland can never really be secure again. We cannot “fix” it.

Finally, I fear most the driving force of technology itself. There seems to be inevitability about the fact that new technologies “demand” to be tested.
The old adage that “we will use it if we have it” seems to be the rule. Thus new military technologies demand to be “real world” tested, and real battles are the final reality testing grounds. So it is with communications technology. If we have the capacity to monitor massive amounts of data transmissions, then we will do it. The constitution really does seem to be showing its age and 18^th century irrelevance. Are we any longer a “nation of law”? I fear
we are not.

++++++++++++++++

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Thought for the Week

"A great many people think they are thinking when they are really rearranging their prejudices."
  - Edward R. Murrow

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Celebrating Carter
-- Martin E. Marty
Sightings 1/23/06

In weekly Sightings and biweekly "M.E.M.O" and Context, my regular outlets, readers may have noticed that I very rarely "do" presidents, especially sitting ones. Today an ex-president comes into periscope range, since it's exactly a quarter of a century since Jimmy Carter left office. It would seem to be a safe time to get distance on him. Still, this "best ex-president we ever had" stirs slurs -- as in the weeks-ago Wall Street Journal's trashy trashing of his new bestseller, Our Endangered Values: America's Moral Crisis. Carter the politician knows that politics is not a sport for the timid, and is used to the give-and-take of criticism, some of which he gives in his new book.

….Let his detractors say what they wish; Mr. Carter strikes me as someone who can be at ease with himself. Millions of voters in scores of nations are better off for his (and his team's) monitoring of their elections. Literally hundreds of thousands of the poor, especially in Africa, are alive and healthy, thanks to Carter-inspired ventures (for example, against river blindness and guinea worm infestation).

This is not the place to review Carter, but a review of Carter's book by Gary Wills, which concentrates so much on religion (as it has to if it wishes to "catch" the man), inspires some quoting and commenting. Wills compares religion-in-politics in 1972, when he first tracked Governor Carter in Georgia, with politics-in-religion today. One unavoidable theme, for Carter and Wills, is the 180-degree turn by the Southern Baptist Convention majority since Carter's younger years. Such Southern Baptists "have become as authoritarian as their former antitype, the Roman Catholic hierarchy" -- something that grieves Carter, who grew up in the Convention back when Baptists were Baptists. Now by their version of pushing religion into the public square they are doing the most un-Baptistic thing conceivable: asking "the state" to do much of "the church's" job. Wills writes in the New York Review of Books, ….

Wills says better than I could who Carter is, so I will quote from his conclusion: "Carter is a patriot. He lists all the things that Americans have to be proud of. That is why he is so concerned that we are squandering our treasures, moral even more than economic. He has come to the defense of our national values, which he finds endangered. He proves that a devout Christian does not need to be a fundamentalist or fanatic, any more than a patriotic American has to be punitive, narrow, and self-righteous. He defends the separation of church and state because he sees with nuanced precision the interactions of faith, morality, politics, and pragmatism."

Happy 25th, President Emeritus and tenured post-retirement public servant.

Martin E. Marty's biography, current projects, upcoming events, publications, and contact information can be found at www.illuminos.com.

++++++++++++++++

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Time to Organize for Constructive Alternatives in America's Foreign Policy

Reflecting on our current geo-political situation, the philosopher/theologian, John B. Cobb, recently wrote a thoughtful article in the current issue of Process Studies

http://www.ctr4process.org/publications/Articles/nuclear_iran.htm The following is from his article:

Despair can be avoided, however, if we see alternative possibilities in the longer term that are worth working for. Those of us who follow
Whitehead in wanting a world in which the role of force is reduced and that of persuasion increased bear responsibility. We are called to
articulate a different vision of how the world could be ordered. This vision should be capable of capturing not only hearts but also minds.
It needs to be worked out with some care and detail in a way that takes full account of the realities we all recognize as characterizing
human beings both as individuals and as collectives. It is important to show plausible ways in which the transition from what is now taking
place to this other world could occur. And if such a vision is to make a real difference, we will have to find ways to keep this alternative
possibility before the public so that current events can be appraised in its light.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

THOUGHTS FOR THE NEW YEAR

Architecture, for good or ill, usually reflects the soul of a culture. America’s has frequently been in search of its own identity, and still is. I owe tributes to Sarah Vowell, who pointed out that Louis Sullivan, when commenting in his autobiography on his fellow architect’s (Henry Bacon) creation of the Lincoln Memorial with its “sort-of-Greek, kind-of-Roman” and clearly inauthentic style:

In a land declaring its fervid democracy, its inventiveness, its resourcefulness, its unique daring, enterprise and progress thus did the virus of a culture, snobbish and alien to the land, perform its work of disintegration; and thus ever works the pallid academic mind, denying the real, exalting the fictitious and the false, incapable of adjusting itself to the flow of living things, to the reality and the pathos of man’s follies, to the valiant hope that ever causes him to aspire, and again to aspire, that never lifts a hand in aid because it cannot…when what the world needs is courage, common sense and human sympathy, and a moral standard that is plain, valid and livable.

YES, what we need most in 2006 is a national self consciousness that reveals courage, common sense and human sympathy, and a moral standard that is plain, valid and livable.

(When the Lincoln Memorial was dedicated in 1922 the audience was segregated into black and white sections. Robert Todd Lincoln sat in the white section.)

________________________________________

Sarah Vowell, Assassination Vacation, Simon & Schuster, New York, 2005. p. 245

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Slouching towards Bethlehem

W.B Yeats

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in the sands of the desert.

A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Honoring our Veterans?

November 11, 2005 should be remembered as one of the most infamous Memorial Days in American History. It was made so by President Bush as he castigated those who questioned our government’s motives and policies for invading Iraq. He is concerned that these critics, calling for congressional oversight of crucial administrative decisions, may “rewrite history” and in so doing “give comfort to the enemy.”

Yes, history has already been “rewritten” with tragic results. Every American interested in history needs to see the documentary film, The Power of Nightmares. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/3755686.stm It should be a required text in World History courses.

We honor those men and women who have died in wars, only when we have the courage to match theirs. It is the height of cowardice to hide behind our own mythologies and subvert efforts to seek the truth in matters of our own nation’s policies and practices. The best way to “give comfort to the enemy” is to weaken our own civil society through subversion of the truth. When we send our citizens to “fight for democracy,” we should be willing to practice it at home. To do less is to dishonor and defame the memory of both veterans and non-combatants who believed their leaders.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Facing the Truth

By the time you read this more than 2010 American and 2210 Coalition troops will have died in the Iraq conflict. More than 15,000 have been wounded. The body count of forgotten civilians is between 27,000 and 31,000.

The significance of the troop causalities is that it will soon exceed the number of Americans killed on 911. If we add the number of Americans wounded to the number killed, it will soon exceed 911 by six times. This is an eye-for-an-eye in reverse process. The numbers illustrate, in blood, the absurdity and self destructive nature of our policy in Iraq.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Can We Imagine an America Without New Orleans?

Only if you can imagine a city:

· That is not sinking into the Gulf of Mexico at a rate of a meter every ten decades, or faster

· That does not have the most corrupt police force in America

· That is not the most racially bifurcated city in America

· Whose economy is not virtually totally dependent on tourism

· Whose citizens don’t have a wider income level gap than any city in America

· With less than 57% of the homes as rentals

Sure jazz may be the most original form of American music with its roots in New Orleans, but does that mean that it and other forms of music cannot mature and flower in cities like New York, Kansas City and Seattle?

Oh, and yes, what about the Mardi Gras and the French Quarter? I’m sure that Disney would accept an outsourcing contract for a new theme park.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

KATRINA - Natural and Man Made Disasters

It was just 40 years ago that the images of racial discrimination and racism were flashed upon the global scene. Then in an ideological struggle with Russia for the hearts and minds of neutral countries, we were embarrassed with the clear hypocrisy of our national life, which Russian propaganda did not miss. That international pressure was part of the rationale for passing the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts.

The images of refugees from New Orleans has shocked not only us, but the world. How can the richest of the World, promoting human rights, tolerate and neglect such an underclass? Do we not have the competence or will to defend our honest citizens from the violence of deviant gangs? How can the strongest military machine and most technologically proficient nation in history, lose touch with tens of thousands of its own citizens and fail to come to their aid in a reasonable period of time?

Yes, the tragedy of Katrina has exposed the worst of our nation’s underbelly. The indecent historic gap between the nation’s most wealthy and poorest has been revealed for the world to see. Our national vulnerability is seen in our inability to allocate resources in terms of environmental priorities and make intergovernmental infrastructures work. Perhaps we have been living a national mythology of omni competence. It is time for reality.

The answers are not easy but we should make sure that we have honestly exposed all of the issues before we run to quick and politically expedient fixes. If we do, the next disaster may be much worse.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Remembering 911

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Will New Language Mean a Change in Policy?

Is there cause for hope in the change of "official terminology from "The Global War on Terrorism" to "A Global Struggle Against Violent Terrorism?" Certainly the new language more effectively describes our world situation and its challenges. But as George Parker reflects in his "Comment" essay in the Aug. 8 & 15 The New Yorker, "No one really knows how American influence can be used to disinfect Islamist politics of violent ideas. This is the first problem. The Second is that the Bush team has shown such bad faith, arrogance, and incompetence since September 11th that it seems unlikely to figure it out."

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

CAUSES & EFFECTS

It is true that understanding the causes of events, does not necessarily lead us to better solutions. Politics is not a "science." But clearly we have had precious little discussion of the roots of the current tensions within Islam and the roots of the struggle between the West and radical Islam.

The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone spoke out boldly with an analysis that many may not like, but we should carefully consider. Speaking of the current attacks, he argues that, “If at the end of the First World war we had done what we promised the Arabs, which was to let them be free and have their own governments, and kept out of Arab affairs and just bought their oil, rather than feeling we had to control the flow of oil, I suspect this wouldn’t have arisen.”

The Mayor noted that Western foreign policies have incited extremism. “I think you’ve just had 80 years of Western intervention into predominantly Arab lands because of the Western need for oil….we’ve propped up unsavory governments; we’ve overthrown ones we didn’t consider sympathetic.”

A careful examination of the role of BP in shaping both British and U.S. foreign policy in the Arab, especially Iran, is instructive.

If we draw any lessons from the past, it is that the West must alter its policy of thinking it should shape the destiny of the Arab world. We must give it its freedom, for better or worse, as soon as possible.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

For information about suicide bombing as an instrument of terrorism see:
Suicide Terrorism and Female suicide bombers and more about suicide bombings and the history of suicide terrorism and Suicide Terror

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Language & Reality: The “War” on Terrorism

There is no “war” on terrorism. It is time we change our language, so we can better understand and comes to grips with the international dimensions of our struggle with terrorism, world wide.

Wars are normally struggles of regimes against one another. Those regimes are represented by identifiable political leaders backed by identifiable political systems, normally working within state boundaries.

But when we began to talk of our wars on poverty, drugs, etc., we adopted the simplistic win-lose metaphor of “war” without understanding the difference. Now we have compounded the misunderstanding by assuming that the “war against terrorism” is a “war” than can be waged with the military models. And so we have been led to believe that if we “take out” Saddam and Osama, we will have “won” the war. Yet with each “insurgent” we kill, the list of volunteers to expel the occupiers increases. What is the answer? It begins by understanding the depths of our ideological struggles.

In a most sobering column, “What is making Sunni Muslim males kill in name of religion,” Thomas Friedman refers to the danger of Islam’s growing “cult of death.” But is that so hard to understand? Certainly we in the West have experienced the attraction of the “mystical” power of religious ideology and especially conversion to an absolutist belief system.

It is that larger “cult of death” that faces us all in this ideological struggle. When we feel the urge to say that we would “die for our [belief system] then we have entered that world of the struggle and know the power of the “cult of death.”

Affirming life does not mean that we must be willing to die for its principles, or does it? Perhaps it does ONLY if we believe we are in a "war." Would anything change if we truly defined ourselves as in a struggle for peace?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Lessons from London 7/7

What does the tragedy is London tell us – which we are not learning from the mass media?

	We are not safer now than we were before the invasion of Iraq; we are much less safe
	We have not contained the “war or terrorism” to Iraq
	Iraq has become a recruiting and training ground for terrorism, world-wide
	Terrorism will not diminish until we have left the occupation of Iraq and dealt with the status of Palestine
	We shall be no more successful in the occupation of Iraq than were the British after WWI
	Perhaps we have not had a major terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11 because the Iraqis do not want to do anything to increase the resolve of the US to remain on Iraqi soil

Checking the cost of the war once a week is a sobering act.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

What the War is REALLY Costing

We don’t talk much about the real “cost of the war in Iraq” because it is hard to put in perspective. With the help of http://costofwar.com/ you will be able to keep up (minute by minute) with the costs in social as well as hard currency. You can also bring it down to the scale of your own State.

More or less, as of this writing, the total cost to our federal budget was about 180 Billion dollars. But what does this mean in terms of its equivalence – what we might have done with these funds if they had been invested differently, and perhaps with far better long term results.

We could have:

	paid for 23,710,446 children to attend a year of Head Start
	insured 107,194,009 children for one year
	hired 3,102,335 additional public school teachers for one year
	provided 8,678,211 students four-year scholarships at public universities
	built 1,611,854 additional housing units
	fully funded global anti-hunger efforts for 7 years
	fully funded world-wide AIDS programs for 17 years
	ensured that every child in the world was given basic immunizations for 59 years

Checking the cost of the war once a week is a sobering act.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Standing Up Now for PBS

Congress is debating a funding resolution that may well decide the future of public broadcasting in America. Public Broadcasting reaches out with quality programming that reaches all ages, as does no other network. As the quality of programming continues to decline and banality increases, only PBS stands as a beacon for objectivity, in depth reporting and real public education.

Time is of the essence. A key subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives voted earlier this month to cut federal funding by 45 percent. The full House may vote on the issue as soon as Wednesday, June 22. The threat is serious. Your quality of life and the education of your children are at stake. Please call or write today.

Find out more about this issue and how to contact your congressional representatives at:

http://www.apts.org

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/16/1329245

The Role of Journalism in a Democratic Society

The editorial this week is Bill Moyers’ first public address since leaving PBS six month ago. His speech before the Conference on Media Reform in St. Louis, Missouri, is his response to the charge of having a liberal bias on the program, “Now,” made by Kenneth Tomlinson, the new chairman of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Moyers’ remarks will surely go down in the annals of American journalism as a landmark statement of the role of the journalist in a complex political environment. You can view the speech at:

----------------------------

Remembering Memorial Day

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Will We Learn?

As the world’s current leading empire and primary exporter of democracy there are two fundamental lessons we have not yet learned. They are vital for our survival.

Plato, in his “Republic” noted that as a form of government, democracy always teeters between anarchy and tyranny. In our brief history as a democracy we struggle to the point of paralysis with the anarchy of the conflicting voices of regionalism, special interests, race and now religion. And then the pendulum swings toward the concentration of power in the hands of one party or plutocracy, in the name of “order and safety.” We are then ruled by demagoguery and fear.

Lord Acton’s observation that a person’s sense of morality lessens as his or her power increases, must now be taken seriously. When one party seizes absolute power it is easy to forget that the essential quality of a democracy is the protection of the rights of the minority, not just the majority. Our nation was founded upon the enlightenment principle that the majority needs to hear from the minority, because in a room where all agree but one, that one may be right. Indeed, it is in the self interest of the majority to protect the rights of the minority in a well functioning democracy.

We must avoid the pitfalls of group-think and the ethic of absolute power, for they lead only toward the loss of our essential democratic freedoms of thought, speech and action.

----------------------------

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Paying Attention

We have truly entered the “post modern” world in politics and foreign affairs. Reality seems to shift with context and “realism” requires that we justify our actions only in terms of strategic consequences.

In this universe of shifting means I find the work of Jared Diamond refreshing. In his search for the largest possible context for meaning. In his most recent book, “Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed,” he traces those key factors which any society seeking to avoid collapse should put on their radar scopes:

· Habitat destruction such as deforestation

· Soil depletion through erosion, salinization, loss of fertility, etc.

· Water loss through bad management

· Excess hunting

· Over fishing

· Introduction of non native flora and fauna species

· Population growth

· Increased per capita consumption of resources

To these classical threats he adds four more modern adversaries:

· Human caused climate change

· Buildup of toxic chemicals

· Energy shortages

· Full human utilization of the Earth’s photosynthetic capacity

Diamond widens our context for public policy study and action and provides an agenda for those concerned about our future, as a nation and for the wider human society.

Added to this analysis should be our concern about the political context. Niall Ferguson in his article, “Is Globalization Doomed?” in the March/April issue of “Foreign Affairs” urges us to focus on the potential for a total economic collapse of our international economic system due to five factors that were also present with the onslaught of W.W.I:

· Imperial overreach

· Great power rivalry

· Unstable alliances

· Rogue regimes

· International terrorism

It is not time to be paralyzed by the complexity of the world in which we live. But the challenge is awesome.

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Iraq and the Sanctity of Life - Two Years Later

This weekend (March 18-20) marks the second anniversary of our invasion of Iraq. Peace events will be held in more than 765 communities, in all 50 states. This is more than twice the number that were held last year. (http://www.unitedforpeace.org)

While supporters of our unprecedented action celebrate the “march toward democracy” in Iraq, the more than 20,000 “guerrillas” launch 60-80 attacks per day, a number that increases each month.

It is a supreme irony that many of the same persons who are undaunted by the loss of civilian and military lives in this war are now fighting to keep a woman in Florida, who is clinically brain dead, alive. Those who are fighting for the life of Terri Schiavo and believe that there is sanctity to all life (born and unborn) should extend the same logic to end the killing in this and future wars. Wars fought for ideology, political or religious, are selcom worth the sacrifice of the lives of our young men and women and innocent civilians.

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

The 2006 Federal Budget

(A statement by “Let Justice Roll: Faith and Community Voices Against Poverty” sponsored by the National Council of Churches USA and the Center for Community Change, as well as a host of national, state and local religious, faith-based, and community organizations, including FaithfulAmerica.)

"The federal budget of the United States is a document that establishes the priorities for our country. It is a document that reflects our values as a nation and what we believe is important for the public and future generations. It is a moral document. Our federal budget should reflect the values of equality, opportunity, and justice that honors the poor, supports families, and builds strong, viable communities.

The Bush Administration’s FY2006 budget is morally misguided and misrepresents the true values of the American people. It suggests that we value military might and war spending more than the poor, families, and strong, viable communities. It favors permanent tax relief for the wealthy and corporations at the expense of further burdening the poor, families, and communities with economic despair. It is a budget that eats away at the heart of the American dream by eliminating funding for programs that are certain to provide us with future opportunities, progress, and security on the home front. Our nation’s future is in serious danger if cuts or caps to programs such as Medicaid, food stamps, job training, veterans’ health services, education, housing and community development grants, among many others, are used as solutions to reduce a projected $427 billion dollar deficit. Congress must act boldly and creatively to oppose budget cuts in human services.

Speaking as God’s messenger, the prophet Amos offered these words to the people because of their misplaced focus, “But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream (Amos 5:24).” To be true to our values as a nation, we strongly urge Congress to reverse the destructive course our nation is on and reject the Bush Administration’s budget. The FY2006 budget should be funded by scaling back tax relief for the wealthy, closing corporate tax loopholes, and holding military and war spending in check. We call on Congress to draft and approve a budget and policies that will provide the poor, families, and communities with the tools to meet basic needs such as access to nutritious food and quality child-care, accessible and affordable housing, comprehensive and affordable health care, high quality education at every stage of life, a fair and just tax system, job creation and a livable income to sustain their future.

This positive vision for our nation is only limited by the lack of political will to make it happen. We call on Congress to Let Justice Roll!"

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Thoughts on the Second Anniversary of our Invasion of Iraq

From: “Murder mystery in Iraq” by David Batstone in Sojourners (http://www.sojo.net/)

Kirk von Ackermann has joined the list of American casualties in Iraq. Not that long ago he was designated as "missing." He is now "presumed dead." Suspiciously so.

According to a story in last Sunday's San Francisco Chronicle, (http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/02/13/MNGSGBAGRH1.DTL) Kirk disappeared on the afternoon of Oct. 9, 2003, on a deserted road in Iraq that runs between Tikrit and Kirkuk. A tire on his car had gone flat, so he used a satellite phone to call a colleague to request a jack. When his colleague arrived about 45 minutes later, Kirk was nowhere to be found. There was no sign of struggle, not even footprints of possible assailants, which would seem to rule out a ragtag team of Iraqi resistance fighters. Robbery also is out for a motive - Kirk's satellite phone, a laptop computer, and a briefcase containing $40,000 were found left in his car, according to the article.

"It was as if he had been abducted by aliens," Ryan Manelick, another one of Kirk's colleagues in Iraq, told the Chronicle reporter. More like professional assassins, I might add. Manelick and Kirk worked for Ultra Services, a civilian contracting company that supplied U.S. troops in Iraq with essential living services (tents, toilets, etc.) and technology.

That's not the only significant observation Manelick had to make. He also shared with army investigators looking into Kirk's "disappearance" that Kirk was ready to blow the whistle on a kickback scheme that involved business operatives and a U.S. Army officer, according to the article.

Manelick voiced fears for his own safety because he also had divulged details about this scandal. "I'm in fear of my own life," he told the Chronicle reporter. "It's not Iraqis I'm worried about, either," he added. "It's people from my own country." The very next day after the interview, a car pulled up alongside Manelick's 4x4 and a gunner opened fire with a machine gun, according to the article, instantly killing him….

Kirk began to express a frustration and despair that other American military and business personnel did not share his lofty goals. On Oct. 6, three days before his disappearance, he wrote me the following e-mail:

From Kirk’s last e-mail message: "The real problem is that - not surprisingly - the [Bush] administration seems to have dramatically overestimated the willingness of corporate America to take the risks of Iraq. Other than myself, there really are no contractors operating in Tikrit, Samarra, Balad, etc.... It cannot be stressed enough that even pro-Saddam Iraqis are not anti-American. They are violently opposed to U.S. occupation forces, but not an individual American. The tribal leader in the city where Saddam was born told me, 'We have our Arab pride, we will fight, we will lose, and then we will move on. No one wanted these days, but these are what we have, although it will not forever be this way.' “

Kirk obviously could not share with me over e-mail his deeper concerns. Apparently, he was aware of a corruption scam involving U.S. military and corporate services. Perhaps he did not know what real danger he had fallen into from his own people.”

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

The Use of Religious Language and Foreign Policy
A Guest Editorial by Jim Wallis *
http://www.truthout.org/docs_05/012905B.shtml

Since the first inauguration in 1789, each president has referenced God in his inaugural address. After taking the oath of office, George Washington ad-libbed the final words, "So help me God." Every president since has done the same in the oath.

The question has never been whether religious language will be used in presidential inaugurals, but how. In perhaps the most famous, Lincoln’s second inaugural address, God was invoked not to bless the nation, or give any triumphal comfort to either side in the Civil War, but rather to call the nation to penitence.... That was missing in George W. Bush’s second inaugural, which was rather full of a religious sense of both confidence and mission.

For an evangelical Christian, George W. Bush does not seem to have a well-developed sense of sin - at least as far as the nation is concerned. In his speech, President Bush expressed a far-reaching commitment to "liberty" and "the force of human freedom" in the world - ….But his remarkable speech announced that the role of deciding if, when, and where freedom will be defended belongs to the United States of America; America is on a religious mission to protect freedom, and George Bush is freedom’s vicar.

But other words of religious wisdom were missing …. Religious leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr. pointed out that America was often on the wrong side of freedom when it supported brutal dictatorships in Latin America, Africa, and Asia during the Cold War. Theologian Reinhold Niebuhr warned against easy and often self-serving definitions of good and evil, especially when it comes to the collective morality of nations.

Most important, if the war in Iraq is the "practical" expression of George Bush’s theology of liberty and freedom, the world is in serious trouble. A war justified with falsehoods, conceived in confusion, and carried out in arrogance has now degenerated into chaos. Yet the war’s neoconservative defenders still cite Iraq as the archetypal action in America’s mission of freedom.

If Iraq is the best example of the Bush doctrine, pre-emptive and mostly unilateral war has become the preferred means of defending freedom. Many have rightly pointed out that having a mission of freedom is not a new idea in American history. But John Winthrop’s "city on a hill" points more to a strategy of leading by example. America’s slow and steady progress toward freedom and human rights for all its citizens has indeed had a profound influence on the cause of liberty around the world. In contrast to Winthrop, Bush offers a rocket launcher on a hill….

The Bush foreign policy has a different religious name than just freedom. In its prosecution of pre-emptive war, the equation of God’s purposes with U.S. interests, and the neglect of global economic justice, there are other words that come to mind - such as hypocrisy, pride, and even idolatry. And many opponents of the Bush administration’s war policies, here and abroad, will frame their dissent in the name of other religious values - words such as integrity, humility, and peacemaking.

* Jim Wallis is editor-in-chief of Sojourners, From the March 2005 issue.
http://www.sojo.net/

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

The State of our Union?

State of the Union addresses are “ritualistic pauses” in our national lives…a time for reflection and an opportunity for learning. Now that we have rushed in to “fix” the international scene, it seems clear that we are now rushing in to “fix” our domestic problems, whether the analysis and data be correct or not. Americans do love to “fix” things and take them apart, even if we cannot put them back together. We’ll just buy a new one.

While still sorting out our efforts to “fix” Iraq and the near East, it is too early to list “credits.” It is time for some honest questions about what we have learned so far. The pieces are far from back together. So let me share some questions, for which we need more discussion and perhaps even some honest answers.

1. Should we pause to ask why we think it is in America’s national self interest to export our brand of democracy throughout the world, independent of another nation’s culture, history and political stage of development?

2. Is there a univocal definition of “freedom” to which all persons in all cultures aspire equally?

3. Is it possible that issues of “security” are more basic than “freedom”?

4. To what extent is our foreign policy’s definition of “freedom” tied to a particular variety of Christian theology to which not even all Christians would agree?

5. Was our decision to remove Saddam Hussein, without international mandates or broad coalition support from other democratic world powers, wise?

6. Assuming it was wise, what other alternative means might have been used that might have achieved the same ends and resulted in far fewer U.S., Iraqi and coalition lives lost?

7. What might we learn from successful “bloodless revolutions” in eastern European states that might apply to our own foreign policy?

8. Why do we confuse winning battles with winning wars?

9. Why have we virtually left Afghanistan (the second time) and how can claim it is a “successful democracy” when its economy is dependent on its being the supplier of a majority of the worlds opium and it teeters on being a “failed state” again?

10. Were the reactions of other members of the Arab League, following the elections on January 30^th, what we expected, and how will we change our policy in light of the current situation?

11. Will we recognize the central role that the issue of Palestine and Israel plays in the near East?

12. Will we learn from our own history of backing away from democratic movements in the past (e.g., Iran) and understand why our past support of dictatorships (even in Iraq) leads to suspicion and mistrust of American motives and performance?

13. Can we learn perhaps from Iraq’s efforts to develop a coalition government, respecting ethnic and religious differences, how to govern our own democracy more effectively?

14. Will we face our own “culture of fear” openly and understand that the “war on terrorism” is never over as long as it is fueled with the psychology of fear?

15. Is it not a sign of strength, rather than weakness, personally and nationally, to admit ones mistakes and shortcomings? What might we learn from South Africa’s experience with “Trust and Reconciliation”?

16. Has our country ever had real reconciliation after the Civil War, Vietnam and now Iraq?

Finally, if you were asked to write a letter to the families of those died in this war, what would you say?

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Reflections on G.W. Bush's Second Term

I hope Secretary of State, C. Rice, has kept a copy of Plato’s, “Republic” on her desk and read it again lately. As with the Greek city states, so with the history of the Fertile Crescent, the birth place of civilization after the last ice age, democracy has been a most precarious form of government. It hangs precariously between anarchy and tyranny, as Iraq is rediscovering. Let us hope that the victory of Sparta over Athens is not repeated again.

In his second coronation speech, President Bush said, “Across the generations, we’ve proclaimed the imperative of self-government, because no one's fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave. Advancing these ideals is the mission that created our nation. It's the honorable achievement of our fathers. Now it's the urgent requirement of our national security, and the calling of our time.” Unfortunately, our President seems unaware that this assertion is historically inaccurate, theologically unsound and morally wrong.

Historically, as Gore Vidal pointed out recently, “the principle founders of the United States, from George Washington to Thomas Jefferson to Madison, were all slave holders. ….So, I don't see how the founding fathers could have committed us to the principle that ‘no man should be a slave, and every man should be a master,’ …Well, this is a country based on slavery, is also based upon the dispossession of what we miscall the Indians. They were the native Americans, at least before -- long before our arrival. So, we were not dedicated to any of these principles. We were dedicated to making as much money and stealing as much land as we could and building up a republic, not a democracy. The word democracy was hated by the founding fathers. It does not appear at any point in the constitution, nor does it appear in any pleasant sense in the Federalist Papers.” Now we are exporting “Democracy” as though it were a trade commodity. See:
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/01/25/1458238

Theologically, the notion of a “divine calling” calls forth images of a theocracy on a crusade. A leader who truly believes in a “divine right” has crossed the line from the president of a democracy to that of a religious tyrant.

Morally, the Bush doctrine denies others the basic principle of self determination, and thus personal and social autonomy. Our foreign policy is a direct contradiction of the basic moral principles of true freedom.

Operationally, we have embarked the strongest nation on earth toward a path of self destruction. This is hardly “national security.” Thinking Americans are now more insecure than they have been for many decades.

////

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Recognizing Martin Luther King

It is an irony that we continue to celebrate MLK, the man who literally gave his life for the principles of justice, freedom, economic and educational opportunity, and the right to work and learn, by taking the day off and closing our schools. For sure we will keep the malls open.

Perhaps we can share the dream that some day, on MLK day, our schools will be open, day and evening, for programs focused on the importance of diversity, conflict resolution, and economic and social justice in America. Let us open the doors of our public agencies and libraries for dialogue about the yet unresolved issues of race and prejudice in our land.

Let us plan now for an anniversary when we not just celebrate, but also recognize and implement, the real significance of MLK and the living values of the civil rights movement, for the future of our democracy.

////

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

AID FOR TSUNAMI VICTIMS

For up to date information, check the United Nations site at:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocusRel.asp?infocusID=102&Body=tsunami&Body1=

For a complete list of organizations with links to to:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/12/28/tsunami.aidsites/index.html

Following is a short list of numbers and web sites through which contributions can be made. If you have any concerns about the giving records of any not for profit organization, check with http://www.guidestar.org/

Red Cross – 1-800-435-7669 http://www.redcross.org

Care – 1-800-521-2273 http://www.care.org

Doctors /Without Borders – 1-888-392-0392 http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org (Note their recent request that donations be directed toward their work now in Africa and other crisis areas.)

Save the Children – 1-800-728-3843 http://www.savethechildren.org

Salvation Army World Service Office 1-800-725-2769

US fund for UNICEF – 1-900-367-5437 http://www.unicefusa.org

World Concern – 1-800-755-5022 http://www.worldconcern.org

Some Web sites to learn more about this tragedy:

The United Nations: http://www.un.org

Web sites for the Southeast Asia News and Indonesia and the Straits Times of Singapore: http://www.southeastasianews.net and http://www.straitstimes.asia1.com.sg

News about resources, aid, donations and volunteer efforts:
http://www.tsunamihelp.blogspot.com

Information about citizens in the affected areas:
http://www.redcross.org

For information about the health crisis brought on by the disaster go to:
http://www.who.org

DO IT NOW, PLEASE !

Editorial Comment:

The 2004 Quake and Tsunami was a sudden disaster and prompted mankind to take immediate action. Such disasters can be wake-up calls for those who listen. The quake not only devastated lives, it may have changed geography. Hundreds of small islands in the Indian Ocean may have moved as much as 20 meters once the quake subsided. In a matter of moments on December 26th, the islands were swamped, and some disappeared entirely under the water. It is possible that a few of the islands were swept away completely, and now are no more than sandbars. Probably the death tool will exceed 200,000 (as of 1/23/05 220,000) from the short and long term effects, and millions have had their lives permanently changed. For countries such as the Maldives, made up of hundreds of tiny islands that reach no more than a meter or so above sea level, the tsunami has brought to life a national nightmare.

But here is the wake-up call. For years, such island groups in the Indian Ocean have feared being inundated as global warming slowly raises ocean levels. Ten of millions of persons still are in harms way as the ocean slowly rises and policy makers debate the significance of the data (trends? blips? etc.). Subduction zone quakes produce quick disasters; ocean rising is slower, but equally deadly. Florida building codes in many Gulf communities recently raised the height levels by at least a meter, recognizing the effects of ocean warming. For many millions of persons living along the shores of the Indian Ocean, less than 7 feet above sea level, relocation to higher ground is the only long term solution

So why not take this crisis as an opportunity? We should heed the early warning and begin the more massive relocation process now, since so many of the physical and social infrastructures must be developed. It would be tragic simply to relocate the victims of this tragedy back in harms way once again.

////

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Check out the swan song for Bill Moyers on the PBS program NOW. Moyers was always more interested in facts than perception.

On Receiving Harvard Med's Global Environment Citizen Award
By Bill Moyers

Wednesday 01 December 2004

From: t r u t h o u t | Perspective: http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/120504G.shtml

Editor's Note | This week the Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard Medical School presented its fourth annual Global Environment Citizen Award to Bill Moyers. In presenting the award, Meryl Streep, a member of the Center board, said, "Through resourceful, intrepid reportage and perceptive voices from the forward edge of the debate, Moyers has examined an environment under siege with the aim of engaging citizens." Here is the text of his response to Ms. Streep's presentation of the award.

"I accept this award on behalf of all the people behind the camera whom you never see. And for all those scientists, advocates, activists, and just plain citizens whose stories we have covered in reporting on how environmental change affects our daily lives. We journalists are simply beachcombers on the shores of other people's knowledge, other people's experience, and other people's wisdom. We tell their stories.

The journalist who truly deserves this award is my friend, Bill McKibben. He enjoys the most conspicuous place in my own pantheon of journalistic heroes for his pioneer work in writing about the environment. His bestseller "The End of Nature" carried on where Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring" left off.

Writing in Mother Jones recently, Bill described how the problems we journalists routinely cover - conventional, manageable programs like budget shortfalls and pollution - may be about to convert to chaotic, unpredictable, unmanageable situations. The most unmanageable of all, he writes, could be the accelerating deterioration of the environment, creating perils with huge momentum like the greenhouse effect that is causing the melt of the arctic to release so much freshwater into the North Atlantic that even the Pentagon is growing alarmed that a weakening gulf stream could yield abrupt and overwhelming changes, the kind of changes that could radically alter civilizations.

That's one challenge we journalists face - how to tell such a story without coming across as Cassandras, without turning off the people we most want to understand what's happening, who must act on what they read and hear.

As difficult as it is, however, for journalists to fashion a readable narrative for complex issues without depressing our readers and viewers, there is an even harder challenge - to pierce the ideology that governs official policy today. One of the biggest changes in politics in my lifetime is that the delusional is no longer marginal. It has come in from the fringe, to sit in the seat of power in the oval office and in Congress. For the first time in our history, ideology and theology hold a monopoly of power in Washington. Theology asserts propositions that cannot be proven true; ideologues hold stoutly to a world view despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality. When ideology and theology couple, their offspring are not always bad but they are always blind. And there is the danger: voters and politicians alike, oblivious to the facts.

Remember James Watt, President Reagan's first Secretary of the Interior? My favorite online environmental journal, the ever engaging Grist, reminded us recently of how James Watt told the U.S. Congress that protecting natural resources was unimportant in light of the imminent return of Jesus Christ. In public testimony he said, "after the last tree is felled, Christ will come back."

Beltway elites snickered. The press corps didn't know what he was talking about. But James Watt was serious. So were his compatriots out across the country. They are the people who believe the Bible is literally true - one-third of the American electorate, if a recent Gallup poll is accurate. In this past election several million good and decent citizens went to the polls believing in the rapture index. That's right - the rapture index. Google it and you will find that the best-selling books in America today are the twelve volumes of the left-behind series written by the Christian fundamentalist and religious right warrior, Timothy LaHaye. These true believers subscribe to a fantastical theology concocted in the 19th century by a couple of immigrant preachers who took disparate passages from the Bible and wove them into a narrative that has captivated the imagination of millions of Americans.

Its outline is rather simple, if bizarre (the British writer George Monbiot recently did a brilliant dissection of it and I am indebted to him for adding to my own understanding): once Israel has occupied the rest of its "biblical lands," legions of the anti-Christ will attack it, triggering a final showdown in the valley of Armageddon. As the Jews who have not been converted are burned, the messiah will return for the rapture. True believers will be lifted out of their clothes and transported to heaven, where, seated next to the right hand of God, they will watch their political and religious opponents suffer plagues of boils, sores, locusts, and frogs during the several years of tribulation that follow.

I'm not making this up. Like Monbiot, I've read the literature. I've reported on these people, following some of them from Texas to the West Bank. They are sincere, serious, and polite as they tell you they feel called to help bring the rapture on as fulfillment of biblical prophecy. That's why they have declared solidarity with Israel and the Jewish settlements and backed up their support with money and volunteers. It's why the invasion of Iraq for them was a warm-up act, predicted in the Book of Revelation where four angels "which are bound in the great river Euphrates will be released to slay the third part of man." A war with Islam in the Middle East is not something to be feared but welcomed - an essential conflagration on the road to redemption. The last time I Googled it, the rapture index stood at 144 - just one point below the critical threshold when the whole thing will blow, the son of God will return, the righteous will enter heaven, and sinners will be condemned to eternal hellfire.

So what does this mean for public policy and the environment? Go to Grist to read a remarkable work of reporting by the journalist, Glenn Scherer - "The Road to Environmental Apocalypse." Read it and you will see how millions of Christian fundamentalists may believe that environmental destruction is not only to be disregarded but actually welcomed - even hastened - as a sign of the coming apocalypse.

As Grist makes clear, we're not talking about a handful of fringe lawmakers who hold or are beholden to these beliefs. Nearly half the U.S. Congress before the recent election - 231 legislators in total - more since the election - are backed by the religious right. Forty-five senators and 186 members of the 108th congress earned 80 to 100 percent approval ratings from the three most influential Christian right advocacy groups. They include Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Assistant Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Conference Chair Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, Policy Chair Jon Kyl of Arizona, House Speaker Dennis Hastert, and Majority Whip Roy Blunt. The only Democrat to score 100 percent with the Christian coalition was Senator Zell Miller of Georgia, who recently quoted from the biblical book of Amos on the senate floor: "the days will come, sayeth the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land.' he seemed to be relishing the thought.

And why not? There's a constituency for it. A 2002 TIME/CNN poll found that 59 percent of Americans believe that the prophecies found in the Book of Revelation are going to come true. Nearly one-quarter think the Bible predicted the 9/11 attacks. Drive across the country with your radio tuned to the more than 1,600 Christian radio stations or in the motel turn some of the 250 Christian TV stations and you can hear some of this end-time gospel. And you will come to understand why people under the spell of such potent prophecies cannot be expected, as Grist puts it, "to worry about the environment. Why care about the earth when the droughts, floods, famine and pestilence brought by ecological collapse are signs of the apocalypse foretold in the Bible? Why care about global climate change when you and yours will be rescued in the rapture? And why care about converting from oil to solar when the same God who performed the miracle of the loaves and fishes can whip up a few billion barrels of light crude with a word?"

Because these people believe that until Christ does return, the lord will provide. One of their texts is a high school history book, America's providential history. You'll find there these words: "the secular or socialist has a limited resource mentality and views the world as a pie…that needs to be cut up so everyone can get a piece." however, "[t]he Christian knows that the potential in God is unlimited and that there is no shortage of resources in God's earth...while many secularists view the world as overpopulated, Christians know that God has made the earth sufficiently large with plenty of resources to accommodate all of the people." No wonder Karl Rove goes around the White House whistling that militant hymn, "Onward Christian Soldiers." He turned out millions of the foot soldiers on November 2, including many who have made the apocalypse a powerful driving force in modern American politics.

I can see in the look on your faces just how had it is for the journalist to report a story like this with any credibility. So let me put it on a personal level. I myself don't know how to be in this world without expecting a confident future and getting up every morning to do what I can to bring it about. So I have always been an optimist. Now, however, I think of my friend on Wall Street whom I once asked: "What do you think of the market?" "I'm optimistic," he answered. "Then why do you look so worried?" And he answered: "Because I am not sure my optimism is justified."

I'm not, either. Once upon a time I agreed with the Eric Chivian and the Center for Health and the Global Environment that people will protect the natural environment when they realize its importance to their health and to the health and lives of their children. Now I am not so sure. It's not that I don't want to believe that - it's just that I read the news and connect the dots:

I read that the administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has declared the election a mandate for President Bush on the environment. This for an administration that wants to rewrite the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act protecting rare plant and animal species and their habitats, as well as the National Environmental Policy Act that requires the government to judge beforehand if actions might damage natural resources.

That wants to relax pollution limits for ozone; eliminate vehicle tailpipe inspections; and ease pollution standards for cars, sports utility vehicles and diesel-powered big trucks and heavy equipment.

That wants a new international audit law to allow corporations to keep certain information about environmental problems secret from the public.

That wants to drop all its new-source review suits against polluting coal-fired power plans and weaken consent decrees reached earlier with coal companies.

That wants to open the arctic wildlife refuge to drilling and increase drilling in Padre Island National Seashore, the longest stretch of undeveloped barrier island in the world and the last great coastal wild land in America.

I read the news just this week and learned how the Environmental Protection Agency had planned to spend nine million dollars - $2 million of it from the administration's friends at the American Chemistry Council - to pay poor families to continue to use pesticides in their homes. These pesticides have been linked to neurological damage in children, but instead of ordering an end to their use, the government and the industry were going to offer the families $970 each, as well as a camcorder and children's clothing, to serve as guinea pigs for the study.

I read all this in the news.

I read the news just last night and learned that the administration's friends at the international policy network, which is supported by ExxonMobil and others of like mind, have issued a new report that climate change is "a myth," sea levels are not rising, scientists who believe catastrophe is possible are "an embarrassment."

I not only read the news but the fine print of the recent appropriations bill passed by Congress, with the obscure (and obscene) riders attached to it: a clause removing all endangered species protections from pesticides; language prohibiting judicial review for a forest in Oregon; a waiver of environmental review for grazing permits on public lands; a rider pressed by developers to weaken protection for crucial habitats in California.

I read all this and look up at the pictures on my desk, next to the computer - pictures of my grandchildren: Henry, age 12; of Thomas, age 10; of Nancy, 7; Jassie, 3; Sara Jane, nine months. I see the future looking back at me from those photographs and I say, "Father, forgive us, for we know not what we do." And then I am stopped short by the thought: "That's not right. We do know what we are doing. We are stealing their future. Betraying their trust. Despoiling their world."

And I ask myself: Why? Is it because we don't care? Because we are greedy? Because we have lost our capacity for outrage, our ability to sustain indignation at injustice?

What has happened to our moral imagination?

On the heath Lear asks Gloucester: "How do you see the world?" And Gloucester, who is blind, answers: "I see it feelingly."

I see it feelingly.

The news is not good these days. I can tell you, though, that as a journalist, I know the news is never the end of the story. The news can be the truth that sets us free - not only to feel but to fight for the future we want. And the will to fight is the antidote to despair, the cure for cynicism, and the answer to those faces looking back at me from those photographs on my desk. What we need to match the science of human health is what the ancient Israelites called 'hocma' - the science of the heart...the capacity to see...to feel...and then to act...as if the future depended on you.

Believe me, it does.

////

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

Toward Solution-Discovery: A Rational Approach to Serving the Public Good

The following guest opinion by Bill Cutler* appeared in the Palo Alto Weekly, Palo Alto, CA , September 1, 2004. (Note: While Palo Alto has not yet accepted this challenge, perhaps the seed has been sown for its application in other areas. We need to broaden the discussion of how we can achieve an informed social-political consensus, using our communication technology.)

I have a challenge for both citizens and government of Palo Alto: We can make a breakthrough, getting beyond the fumbling, muddling, wrangling and bungling that so typify governance in our great nation. The fact is our old way of debating issues is obsolete -- in the face of contemporary complexity it actually causes polarization and harm.

The tragedy is that methods to deal with complex, contentious issues are available, but they are not widely known, not even on the radar scopes of most people.

The new approach is not mysterious. When they first hear about it, people usually agree it would be the better way to go, if … Yet somehow they can't make the leap. Those "other people" won't go along, and there isn't time to convince them.

Imagine you've taken a job digging a ditch, in the old days when all you've got is a pick and shovel. I show up, offering a modern backhoe. Clearly it would be faster, better and take less effort, but it's unfamiliar. You don't know how to use it. Under a deadline, you can't risk taking time to learn. So you finish in the same old pick-and-shovel way -- then another short-deadline job to dig another ditch comes along.

Perhaps this analogy is a bit extreme, but failing to shift our civic approach now is like sticking with the pick and shovel. A little disruption now will yield a big payoff in smoother, quicker and better resolution of the endless stream of complex, contentious issues we seem to come up with in Palo Alto.

Most local issues run into two deadly barriers: which experts in this field have termed plunging and lunging. When faced with complex, often ambiguous situations, most of us plunge past them straight into details before ever grasping the big picture.

Then, surrounded by details, we try to avoid getting lost by lunging at the first plausible-looking solution. We never take time to truly understand the problem or explore the range of possible solutions.

So here’s the backhoe: the principles of sound solution-discovery.

1) Engage all stakeholders as partners in the solution-discovery process. Empower them, and elicit the expression of their values, interests and priorities.

2) Create a Definition of Success, agreeable to all stakeholders, that defines both the problem and the qualities of a resolution. Resolve inconsistencies and conflicts later in the process.

3) Set up a strategy, agreeable to all stakeholders, for exploring the full range of possible solutions -- ensuring that no good possibilities are overlooked.

4) Set up an evaluation method, agreeable to all stakeholders, that will select and validate the better solution. This is the stage where resolution of conflicting interests happens.

5) THEN AND ONLY THEN, undertake consideration of possible solutions.

Of course it's not that cut-and-dried. There will be back-and-forth moves, exploring dead ends and re-defining the problem to chase a moving target.

Just keep in mind the general direction. Build later steps on earlier work, as initial problem awareness (and almost total ignorance) evolves to understanding the solution and why it is the best that can be done.

Will these principles work? They got us to the Moon and created a myriad of other wonders in military, space and commercial spheres. They are used in fields as diverse as architecture and mediation.

We've had some close approaches to success in Palo Alto -- creation of the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority to resolve watershed problems, the Municipal Waste Water Treatment Goals Project to start planning for future upgrades of the treatment plant, and the Charleston-Arastradero Corridor study to resolve traffic, safety, and neighborhood tranquility issues. The leaders of those efforts had an intuitive feel for the principles, and to the extent the principles were used the results were good

So who will take the first step out of the pick-and-shovel rut? Any public official can direct its use in her or his area. Any developer could take this route to a better-planned project, enjoying quick and painless approval, yielding more profit, sooner.

The City Council can mandate it for all complex, contentious issues under city jurisdiction. A group of civic leaders could demand its use, and institute an educational process to introduce it to the public and train practitioners.

The current hot-button issue is the Environmental Services Center, an opportunity for a world-class resources recovery plan -- and it's not too late to bring better tools to that job. The routing of the Dumbarton Bridge southern approach is looming on the horizon, and we'd better start preparing to tie down that 800-pound gorilla.

* Bill Cutler is a retired aerospace system engineer exploring how to apply system-based solution-discovery approaches to complex civic issues. He can be e-mailed at bigbillcutler@aol.com.

////

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

http://www.weeklyplanet.com/2004-11-10/news2.html

The Sodom Strategy
The Republicans' Southern Strategy gets a homophobic twist

A guest editorial by DAVID BRAMER david.bramer@weeklyplanet.com *

The postmortem on Bush vs. Kerry was given 40 years ago by LBJ. After signing the Voting Rights Act in 1965, Johnson reportedly told confidants that the racist backlash would be so intense Democrats would lose the South for a generation. LBJ was not only prophetic, he was optimistic. Here we are in 2004, and the Republican hold on the South is more solid than ever. The biggest difference between then and now is that the racist backlash against Democrats lacks the widespread passion it once had, and the GOP has had to alter its strategy somewhat to keep the party's good thing going.

Either because changing demographics have forced them to abandon the old race-baiting strategy (the cynical view) or because too many formerly racist Southerners have become enlightened (the more hopeful view), Rove and Co. have had to add a new wrinkle to the GOP's game plan -- to find a new "nigger," so to speak.

Gays.

….........

The parallels between the original Southern Strategy and the new Sodom version are both discouraging and heartening. Discouraging because the Democrats' (sometimes half-hearted) support for gay rights could shift a large number of voters to the Republican column for years to come. Heartening because, like racism, homophobia is a disease that, little by little, will be wrung from the body politic -- and at that point, the Republicans will have not one but two chapters of vile opportunism and bigotry to answer for.

For the full text see:

· Weekly Planet, November 10-16, 2004, Volume 17, Number 34, p.13

For those pondering the results, here is an excellent source for election return data.

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

http://www.johnkerry.com/petition/everychild.php

Moving Forward.....

We have all analyzed the election results ad--nausea, so perhaps it is time to move forward again. There is no better way than to watch this video clip from John Kerry. Perhaps, given the impending disaster in Iraq and the worsening economy, it is good that Kerry was not put into the impossible task of repairing what cannot be “fixed”. If you want to have an option about where to go from here, play this video clip!

For those pondering the results, here is an excellent source for election return data.

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Post-November 2, 2004 Thoughts

The following is taken from the final paragraph of Hendrik Hertzberg's column, Blues,"in the November 15th The New Yorker.

"The red-blue split has not changed since 2000. This is not a center-right country. It is a center-right country and a center-left country, but the center has not held. The winner-take-all aspects of our system have converged into a perfect storm that has given virtually all the political power to the right. Conservative Republicans will now control the Presidency, the House of Representatives, and the Senate so firmly that the Supreme Court, which is also in conservative hands, has abruptly become the most moderate of the four centers of federal power. The system of checks and balances has broken down, but the country remains divided—right down the nonexistent, powerless middle."

Keep track, minute-by-minutes of the cost of the war in Iraq. http://www.costofwar.com

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

History - Regionalism & the Future of the Democratic Party

It has been an eon since Nov. 2, and it is not easy to get a grip on the larger perspective of the 2004 election - its meaning for both the Nation and the Democratic Party. These thoughts are devoted to both issues.

As a nation, the election merely exemplified a cultural divide that has been more than 150 years old. Robert Wiebe, in his insightful work, "The Search for Order: 1877-1920," (1967) traced the conflicts between the modernizing nationalizing culture, centered in the northeast and Pacific coast, and "island communities," centered in the rural and small town areas of the Midwest and South. The former were characterized by urbanization, economic and cultural progress, changing moral values, social and religious pluralism, and ethnic diversity. The latter was characterized by traditional values, ethnic and religious homogeneity (white, Anglo-Saxon Protestant) and cultural isolation. This cultural conflict has been continuous and politically important at many times, such as post-reconstruction, post-WWI, the 1960's and today. The demographics of our country will not change overnight.

So what are the options for the Democratic Party as it gears up for the mid-term elections just two years away? As I see it:

2004 could be read as a close election, so just suck it up and try again with the same strategies, but dumb down the message a bit. This option would be a disaster for the democracy.
Get into conversation about values, acknowledging that religion is deeply ingrained in our public life. It may begin with warming up to people like Jim Wallis, editor of the Sojourners Magazine. The movement, known as "Progressive Christianity," has much in common with the old "social gospel that was core to the ethics of the Democratic Party decades ago. Listen to the words of Jim Wallis"

            "We've now begun a real debate in this country over what the most important "religious issues" are in politics, and that discussion
             will continue far beyond this election. The Religious Right fought to keep the focus on gay marriage and abortion and even said
             that good Christians and Jews could only vote for the president. But many moderate and progressive Christians disagreed. We
             insisted that poverty is also a religious issue, pointing to thousands of verses in the Bible on the poor. The environment -
             protection of God's creation - is also one of our religious concerns. And millions of Christians in America believe the war in Iraq
             was not a "just war." http://go.sojo.net/ct/t11aeQp1djV_/

Another groups to take seriously is "Faithful America."

Keep talking about religion of the Sermon on the Mount and the Beatitudes.

   3.    Coupled with the above, reach out for the hearts and minds of diverse religious groups and young people. The number of Muslims in
          America is growing rapidly and already outnumbers the Presbyterians and Episcopalians combined. They voted heavily for the
          Democratic ticket in November. Young people voted in record numbers for both parties. Today's youth, while not necessarily affiliated
          with traditional denominations and religious organizations, will quickly note their keen interest in issues related to spirituality, the
          environment and service learning. These are value issues.

    4.   While holding the president and majority party in Congress accountable, offer positive proposals to end the war in Iraq, seek
          international cooperation with the fight against terrorism world wide, revamp our national intelligence system, improve the quality of
          our educational system, preserve the environment against further damage, and revamp social security and health care. Democrats need
          to be more proactive on these issues.

5. Be vigilant and strong about the upcoming Supreme Court appointments. Let your Congressional representatives know where you stand
on each nominee.

6. Build new alliances with groups with whom there may not be total agreement on every issue (e.g., the religious progressives), but
open the dialogue.

7. Recognize that if our political system is worth saving, then it must be built upon the values of honesty, fairness, justice and freedom
from fear.

8. Send your ideas to http://www.democrats.org/feedback/ and don't be shy.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

From John Kerry
November 3, 2004

Earlier today I spoke to President Bush, and offered him and Laura our congratulations on their victory. We had a good conversation, and we talked about the danger of division in our country and the need, the desperate need, for unity for finding the common ground, coming together. Today, I hope that we can begin the healing.

In America, it is vital that every vote counts, and that every vote be counted. But the outcome should be decided by voters, not a protracted legal process. I would not give up this fight if there was a chance that we would prevail. But it is now clear that even when all the provisional ballots are counted, which they will be, there won't be enough outstanding votes for our campaign to be able to win Ohio. And therefore, we cannot win this election.

It was a privilege and a gift to spend two years traveling this country, coming to know so many of you. I wish I could just wrap you in my arms and embrace each and every one of you individually all across this nation. I thank you from the bottom of my heart. Thank you.

To all of you, my volunteers and online supporters, all across this country who gave so much of themselves, thank you. Thanks to William Field, a six-year-old who collected $680, a quarter and a dollar at a time selling bracelets during the summer to help change America. Thanks to Michael Benson from Florida who I spied in a rope line holding a container of money. It turned out he raided his piggy bank and wanted to contribute. And thanks to Alana Wexler, who at 11 years old and started Kids for Kerry.

I thank all of you, who took time to travel, time off from work, and their own vacation time to work in states far and wide. You braved the hot days of summer and the cold days of the fall and the winter to knock on doors because you were determined to open the doors of opportunity to all Americans. You worked your hearts out, and I say, don't lose faith. What you did made a difference, and building on itself, we will go on to make a difference another day. I promise you, that time will come -- the election will come when your work and your ballots will change the world, and it's worth fighting for.

I'm proud of what we stood for in this campaign, and of what we accomplished. When we began, no one thought it was possible to even make this a close race, but we stood for real change, change that would make a real difference in the life of our nation, the lives of our families, and we defined that choice to America. I'll never forget the wonderful people who came to our rallies, who stood in our rope lines, who put their hopes in our hands, who invested in each and every one of us. I saw in them the truth that America is not only great, but it is good.

So here -- with a grateful heart, I leave this campaign with a prayer that has even greater meaning to me now that I've come to know our vast country so much better and that prayer is very simple: God bless America.

Thank you,

John Kerry

The Choice and a Response

This week's editorial is "The Choice" from the current issue of The New Yorker. It is by far one of the most thoughtful editorials of the season of rhetoric which we have experienced. Whatever your persuasion, it is worth your time to read this editorial and pass it on to friends. http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/?041101ta_talk_editors

A response from Rob Haskell:*

Merle. I just read the New Yorker editorial you suggested; indeed, a powerful piece.

My take on politics is perhaps just a little oblique from most others on either political side.

First, I need to preface this with the fact that I am no more qualified to judge economic policy than are most Americans. After all there are Nobels and others on both sides of the issues with more expertise than I have. Second, most of the issues are incredibly complex, often with counterintuitive results and thus not subject to simple logics.

I intensely dislike knee jerk, True Believer, self righteous, arguments of any persuasion (except my own on science, logic, and reason where applicable).

I both like and dislike much of both party platforms including all 4 below.

Third, given the above, analyses of issues need to be clearly understood as being based various levels or perspectives: (1) perspectives based on ideal states---which seldom exist, (2) ideological perspectives (values including religious), (3) factual perspective (questions of fact/science), and (4) pragmatic and political perspectives (the way things actually work).

With this said, for me the clear danger of Bush, et al stems not so much from specific economic policies, but from (a) his born-again-evangelical set of values, i.e., # 2 above----with the goal of being imposed on all Americans) and which excludes #3 above.

The real danger is the opportunity he may have of loading the US Supreme Court with justices who would like to dismantle the freedoms that we have acquired over the last hundred years (my core values here)----as the editorial noted, Bush has already loaded the federal judicial level.

So I am forced to vote against Bush (not for Kerry). That's my take, Merle.

Best,

Rob Haskell

*Note: Rob Haskell served as Founder and Director of the TransLearn Associates, specializing in the design of business training and educational courses. He also served as Professor of Psychology at the University of New England and as the Associate Editor of The Journal of Mind and Behavior. He is the author of the insightful book, Reengineering Corporate Training: Intellectual Capital and Transfer of Learning.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Are We Ready for the Truth?

Is the U.S. ready for a President like Vaclav Havel? As the new President of a democratic Czechoslovakia, he began his 1990 New Year's Inaugural Address with the words: "My dear fellow citizens, …you have heard my predecessors give different variations of the same theme: how our country flourished, how happy we all were, how we trusted our government, and what bright perspectives were unfolding in front of us. I assume you did not propose me for this office so that I too, would lie to you."

The world waits to see if we are willing to have the courage to face the truth. That would be a true new beginning for the U.S. and the world.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Don't Surrender Without a Fight

On October 12^th Lou Dobbs (CNN) posed the question, “Do you believe it is possible to successfully prosecute the war on radical Islamist terrorists without sacrificing at least some of the U.S. civil liberties?” The question is based upon the wrong assumption that our security depends upon giving up our freedoms.

Giving up our civil liberties by an extension of the Patriot Act II would give the Islamist radical right exactly what they want. The Cold War was won without a bullet being fired. In Czechoslovakia the “velvet revolution” against totalitarianism was won without a life being lost. This “war” is also about ideas.

Paul Berman in his book, Terror and Liberalism, calls for a politics beyond traditional ideologies of the right and left. He calls it the Third Force, “devoted to a politics of human rights, across the Muslim world; a politics of human rights and especially women’s rights, across the Muslim world; a politics of ethnic and religious tolerance; a politics against racism and anti-Semitism, no matter how inconvenient that might seem to the Egyptian media and the House of Saud; a politics against the manias of the ultra-right in Israel, too, no matter how much that might enrage the Likud and its supporters; a politics of secular education, of pluralism, and law across the Muslim world; a politics against obscurantism and superstition; a politics to out-compete the Islamists and Baathi on their left; a politics to fight against poverty and oppression; a politics of authentic solidarity for the Muslim world, instead of the demagogy of cosmic hatreds. A politics, in a word, of liberalism, a ‘new birth of freedom’ – the kind of thing that could be glimpsed, in its early stages, in the liberation of Kabul.” (pp. 189f.)

Thomas Friedman has it right in his column on 10-10-04, The Other Intelligence Failure, “What is required on America’s part now, quoting Yitzhak Nakash, ‘is a strategic decision to come to terms with the reality on the ground’ – to accept the notion that not all Muslim clerics are alike, and actively engage the moderate Islamists as part of the solution in Iraq. We clearly need a broad strategy for Iraq, and the Middle East that will give Islamists a chance to prove that Islamic democracy could not only stop the suicide bombers, but also genuinely promote accommodation between Islam and the West.”

Lou Dobbs should have known better. Civil Liberties is what this war of ideas is all about, yet more than a third of the responding were willing to surrender without a fight.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

http://www.iconoclast-texas.com/Columns/Editorial/editorial39.htm

////

Kerry Will Restore American Dignity
2004 Iconoclast Presidential Endorsement
A Guest Editorial

The publishers of The Iconoclast President Bush’s hometown newspaper, endorsed Bush four years ago, based on the things he promised, not on this smoke-screened agenda.

”Today, we are endorsing his opponent, John Kerry, based not only on the things that Bush has delivered, but also on the vision of a return to normality that Kerry says our country needs.”

”Four items trouble us the most about the Bush administration: his initiatives to disable the Social Security system, the deteriorating state of the American economy, a dangerous shift away from the basic freedoms established by our founding fathers, and his continuous mistakes regarding terrorism and Iraq.”

“Kerry has a positive vision for America, plus the proven intelligence, good sense, and guts to make it happen. That’s why The Iconoclast urges Texans not to rate the candidate by his hometown or even his political party, but instead by where he intends to take the country.”

”The Iconoclast wholeheartedly endorses John Kerry.”

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

The "Global Test" for a Just War

What’s all the fuss about a “global test” for going to war? It is shocking, but to be expected, that the Bush administration does not understand what it means. It is short hand for the traditional “just war theory”.

For centuries, in the civilized world, just-war theory has prescribed the justification of how and why wars are fought. The justification can be either theoretical or historical. The theoretical aspect is concerned with ethically justifying war and forms of warfare. The historical aspect, or the “just war tradition” deals with the historical body of rules or agreements applied (or at least existing) in various wars across the ages. For instance international agreements such as the Geneva and Hague conventions are historical rules aimed at limiting certain kinds of warfare. Following are the key points for the “test”.

· A just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified. (Bush did not meet this criterion and deceived Congress regarding the "urgency" for a preemptive strike.)

	A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority. Thus terrorism can never be justified. However, the Bush administration has consistently resisted widening the “legitimate authority” to include a broader coalition.)
	A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause (although the justice of the cause is not sufficient--see next point). Further, a just war can only be fought with "right" intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury. (It has never been shown that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with the 9-11 attack on the U.S.)
	A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable. (It has been clear that Bush had no plan for “winning the war” in its political dimensions. The chaos in Iraq today was predictable and the result of miscalculation.)
	The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. More specifically, the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought. (It could be argued that the average Iraqi will be better off in the future, but the jury is still out – perhaps for a very long time.)
	The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered. (We have now killed almost four times the number Iraqis than persons killed on 9-11. If the war drags on we will soon has lost more American troops than persons lost on 9-11. Already the number of Americans injured is more than three times the 9-11 number.) http://icasualties.org/oif/
	The weapons used in war must discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Civilians are never permissible targets of war, and every effort must be taken to avoid killing civilians. The deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target. To date about 13,000 civilians have died in the “Freedom Iraq” war. http://www.iraqbodycount.net/background.htm

It is not surprising that Bush was confused about the “global test.” He never took it.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Presidents and Empires

Political empires seem to develop their own psyches of self destruction. The nation state becomes a collective of the hubris of its individual citizens. One feeds upon the other until there is a frenzy of self deception. The American Empire has ventured into this self deception with two disastrous wars, Vietnam and Iraq. We did not learn from the former, and I fear we shall not from the latter.

Those who are “angry” with the current administration are frustrated by their own inabilities to effect change within the psyche of the Empire. They long for the time when the Empire will invest its resources in the human good. They wonder what the billions spent upon the instruments of killing might have accomplished in the building of hospitals, libraries, schools, transportation and communication systems, etc. What happened to the vision of a Pax Americana? Will it ever be possible again?

Just as there are International Courts to deal with War Crimes, so there should be International Courts to deal with Peace Crimes. A Peace Crime is committed by those who, while in a position of responsibility, refused to take those actions, or open those possibilities, that lead to increased international understanding and peace. Punishment for such crimes should bar such persons from ever serving in public office again. Such a system would result in true political and civic accountability. We have none now.

Finally, we must seek a system more adequate than our current form of “democracy”. As Plato knew, democracy is always on the precipice of tyranny.

Note: For an up-to-date accounting of U.S. military, coalition, contractors, etc. killed, MIA, and wounded see http://icasualties.org/oif/ For a current count on Iraqi civilian deaths go to http://www.iraqbodycount.net/background.htm

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Dear Number 1000: What does it mean?

Dan Rather reported on September 8^th that: “In a war where the human costs have generally been kept offstage, we are instead given statistics. So understanding these numbers properly is no small matter. One all-too-common confusion seen these days is the misunderstanding of the term "casualties" to mean "troops killed." A casualty is one who is killed or wounded. Official Department of Defense figures place the number of military personnel wounded in Iraq at more than 7,000, of which slightly more than half have returned to duty. Therefore, the casualty figure for Iraq stands at more than 8,000 men and women in uniform…. These are not abstract concerns, not so long as U.S. troops still fight in Iraq, and still die. They are concerns that suggest questions we might ask our candidates for president, such as: What will U.S. "victory" in Iraq look like? Do we have an "exit strategy" for when that moment arrives? And for how long, at the outside, are we willing to commit U.S. forces to Iraq "nation-building"? For the full Rather report go to:
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/editorial/outlook/2785367

Ironically, in western culture the number 1000 has a positive symbolism:

· a multitude.

· an indefinite quantity.

· the Fathers of the Church saw in the number 1000 "the totality of the generations and the perfection of the life".

· the immortality of happiness

· according to the Talmudic tradition, a thousand is the symbol of the imperishable doctrine.

Dear Number 1000:

I cannot find your name….
Did you know you may be more special than 999 or 1001?
Who are you? he or she? mother or father? son or daughter? Lover? Loved one?
Soldier? Non-combatant? Citizen? Alien seeking to be an American?
What was your rank? Serial Number?
Where were you stationed? Your unit?
Where was home?
Did you suffer?
What were your dreams?
Who is grieving for you ?
What did “Iraqi Freedom” mean to you?
Did you die in vain?
Did you have a last wish?

When will we stop counting?
Only when we feel your pain…..as our pain.

Note: For an up-to-date accounting of U.S. military, coalition, contractors, etc. killed, MIA, and wounded see http://icasualties.org/oif/ For a current count on Iraqi civilian deaths go to http://www.iraqbodycount.net/background.htm

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

We're Not in Lake Wobegon Anymore
by Garrison Keillor

Excerpt from the following article: http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/979/

"This year, as in the past, Republicans will portray us Democrats as embittered academics, desiccated Unitarians, whacked-out hippies and communards, people who talk to telephone poles, the party of the Deadheads. They will wave enormous flags and wow over and over the footage of firemen in the wreckage of the World Trade Center and bodies being carried out and they will lie about their economic policies with astonishing enthusiasm.

The Union is what needs defending this year. Government of Enron and by Halliburton and for the Southern Baptists is not the same as what Lincoln spoke of. This gang of Pithecanthropus Republicanii has humbugged us to death on terrorism and tax cuts for the comfy and school prayer and flag burning and claimed the right to know what books we read and to dump their sewage upstream from the town and clear-cut the forests and gut the IRS and mark up the constitution on behalf of intolerance and promote the corporate takeover of the public airwaves and to hell with anybody who opposes them.

This is a great country, and it wasn’t made so by angry people. We have a sacred duty to bequeath it to our grandchildren in better shape than however we found it. We have a long way to go and we’re not getting any younger.

Dante said that the hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who in time of crisis remain neutral, so I have spoken my piece, and thank you, dear reader. It’s a beautiful world, rain or shine, and there is more to life than winning."

Note: For an up-to-date accounting of U.S. military, coalition, contractors, etc. killed, MIA, and wounded see http://icasualties.org/oif/ For a current count on Iraqi civilian deaths go to http://www.iraqbodycount.net/background.htm

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Second Thoughts

U.S. Representative Doug Bereuter, Republican, first district of Nebraska retires on August 31 to become president of the Asian Foundation. He is a senior member of the House International Relations Committee and the vice chair of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. He originally supported the war in Iraq, and now feels the war was unjustified and a costly mistake. Here is an excerpt from a letter to his constituents:

“Was the pre-emptive military strike to remove Saddam in America’s best interest? That is a question that receives a sharply divided response in our country with the trend being against the pre-emptive military action we launched. I’ve reached the conclusion, retrospectively, now that the inadequate intelligence and faulty conclusions are being revealed. That all things being considered, it was a mistake to launch that military action, especially without a broad and engaged international coalition. The cost in casualties is already large and growing, and the immediate and long-term financial costs are incredible. Our country’s reputation around the world has never been lower and our alliances are weakened. From the beginning of the conflict it was doubtful that we for long would be seen as liberators, but instead increasingly as an occupying force. Now we are immersed in a dangerous, costly mess and there is no easy and quick way to end our responsibilities in Iraq without creating bigger future problems in the region and, in general, in the Muslim world.”

It is important for our representatives to know that many Americans urged, in letters and phone calls to their representatives, that the US not engage in this conflict. Given the history of the region, the lack of credible evidence for WMD, the reluctance of the administration to seek international support, and the weak to non-existent evidence for any relationship between Osama and Saddam, those Congressmen who supported the preemptive war should now acknowledge their errors. We applaud Congressman Bereuter and hope he will serve as an example for his colleagues.

Note: For an up-to-date accounting of U.S. military, coalition, contractors, etc. killed, MIA, and wounded see http://icasualties.org/oif/ For a current count on Iraqi civilian deaths go to http://www.iraqbodycount.net/background.htm

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Wars, Absolutes and Circles of Ethical Concern

A Guest Editorial by George Sherman*

Teachers find it surprisingly difficult to teach war to young children. Not only do young children find the idea of killing other people incomprehensible, they know intuitively that war violates the very human structures of their brains.

Empathy shows up in children as early as four hours after birth. Extensive research on children across the globe that shows young children resist hitting another child even if an adult in a position of power says that hitting is OK. This is because children feel empathy biologically. This hard-wired feeling is the basis for ethics and fairness in interactions. Then Society takes over.

Society does not teach kids to become unethical. Rather, society through adults and parents teaches children that there is a circle of ethical concern (CEC), and that only those inside that circle are worthy of ethical treatment. For some children, that circle is very small, extending only to a few close family members. Some kids have larger circles, perhaps extending to those of their religion, region, or color. Kids who have the largest circle of concern have a universal empathy that extends to all humans.

Yet even kids with the largest circles can see that some people put themselves outside the (CEC) by their behavior. People can exile themselves by being a bully, stealing stuff, or flying an airplane into the World Trade Center. The key point is that such people are not kicked out, but remove themselves from the (CEC).

Unfortunately, the leaders of some countries remove themselves, by virtue of their behavior, from the (CEC). War happens when this leadership group enlists the ordinary people to carry out the leadership group's agenda, be it economic, religious, ideological, or egotistical. The first step to war is to kick the citizens of the "enemy" country out of the circle of ethical concern. Suddenly two groups of people, both worthy of ethical concern, are engaged in a war, a killing of innocent people by innocent people, in the name of unethical exiles.

We do not need to teach children about war. What we need to teach to children is how to isolate these unethical exiles without the necessity of ethically worthy people having to kill one another.

In a word, we must widen the circle.

* George Sherman is a retired public school behavior specialist, residing in Saint Petersburg, Florida. He teaches part time in the ethics department of Saint Petersburg College, and he has been involved in ethics and character education since 1969.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

What Are The Real Costs of the Iraq War?

The most important foreign policy monograph of the year is a MUST READ. "Paying the Price: The Mounting Costs of the Iraq War" http://www.ips-dc.org/Iraq/costsofwar/costsofwar.pdf was published last month as a joint research project of the Institute for Policy Studies http://www.ips-dc.org/ and Foreign Policy in Focus http://www.fpif.org/.

This first comprehensive accounting of the costs of the war on the US, Iraq and the World should be required reading for all thinking world citizens. The study carefully details the costs to the U.S., Iraq and the World in terms of Human Lives, Security, Economics, Social Systems, Human Rights, and Iraq’s Sovereignty. In terms of the implications for the larger world it examines the disabling of international law, the undermining of the U.N., the global security, international coalitions, disarmament, and human rights and the costs to the global economy and environment.

Caution: This reported is already dated. For an up-to-date accounting of U.S. military, coalition, contractors, etc. killed, MIA, and wounded see http://icasualties.org/oif/ For a current count on Iraqi civilian deaths go to http://www.iraqbodycount.net/background.htm

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Responding to a humanitarian crisis?

As you have heard, "a grave humanitarian crisis has been unfolding in the East African country of Sudan. As many as one million people have left their homes, fleeing ongoing fighting. The UN says two million people could now be affected by the conflict and up to 200,000 have fled into neighboring Chad."

Most of us feel inept to respond to such reports. Most of us just don't. But how can we not? Clearly much of our international response to humanitarian crises is well meaning, but results in making the problem worse.

Fred Cuny had a different approach. We cannot all be like him, but there is one way in which we can participate and help in a meaningful way. Inside Sudan, Oxfam is working in makeshift camps, providing household necessities and much-needed sanitation for those who have been displaced. Across the border in Chad, Oxfam is providing support to the local organizations running three refugee camps.

Most aid groups predict that the situation will only worsen. Crops have not been planted, so already dwindling food stocks will quickly disappear. And the annual rains will further weaken supply lines and increase the risk of diseases such as cholera and malaria.

If you want to help, start by learning more about Oxfam right here.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

One More Dot to Connect

One more dot needs to be added before they are all connected. The School of the Americas (SOA), renamed the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHISC) in 2001, is a US Army training school that trains soldiers and military personnel from Latin American countries in subjects like counter-insurgency, infantry tactics, military intelligence, counter-narcotics operations, and commando operations. More than 60,000 members of Latin American militaries have attended the SOA since its inception in 1946. The SOA manuals, now a matter of public record, recommended interrogation techniques like torture, execution, blackmail and arresting the relatives of those being questioned. The dots can connect from these Fort Benning manuals, via the White House and Department of Defense to Afghanistan, Guantanamo, and Abu Ghraib, with numerous web connections in between.

SOA graduates have led military coups and are responsible for massacres of hundreds of persons. Among the SOA's notorious graduates include dictators Manuel Noriega and Omar Torrijos of Panama, Leopoldo Galtieri and Roberto Viola of Argentina, Juan Velasco Alvarado of Peru, Guillermo Rodriguez of Ecuador, and Hugo Banzer Suarez of Bolivia. SOA graduates were responsible for the Uraba massacre in Colombia, the El Mozote massacre of 900 civilians in El Salvador, the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero, and the Jesuit massacre in El Salvador, the La Cantuta massacre in Peru, the torture and murder of a UN worker in Chile, and hundreds of other human rights abuses.

Yes, as Edmund Burke noted, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men (and women) do nothing." The silent majority prefers not to connect the dots.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Preparing for July 1, 2004

As reported on June 13^th, "A group of 26 former senior diplomats and military officials, several appointed to key positions by Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, plans to issue a joint statement this week arguing that President George W. Bush has damaged America's national security and should be defeated in November." The group includes persons such as Jack Matlock Jr., former ambassador to the Soviet Union, Ret. Adm. Stansfied Turner, former director of the CIA, Ret. Air Force Gen. William Y. Smith, deputy commander in chief of the US European Command, Phyllis Oakley, asst. sec. of state for intelligence and research. The article linked about has a full list of the signatories. Check the news for their statement.

Meanwhile, back at the United Nations:

The U.N. Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1546 endorsing the formation of a sovereign interim government in Iraq. Every American should read it carefully. The remarks of the French and German delegates are worth noting.

Jean-Marc de la Sabliere commented on what may be the Achilles heel of the agreement, "However, regarding the implementation of the mandate of the force [coalition], in particular the conditions of engagement in the event of sensitive offensive operations, the resolution stated that the interim government and the force would have to reach an agreement. But it did not spell out what would happen in the event of disagreement. That was why France would have preferred the text to mention that the final say in that case would fall to the Iraqi government. As that provision was not explicitly requested by the Iraqi leaders, he was satisfied at the final adjustment made to the paragraph regarding the arrangements."

Gunter Pleuger noted, "Only time will tell whether the adoption of the resolution will mark a turnaround for Iraq. Much will depend on whether Iraqis themselves sense a transformation from occupation to full sovereignty. The resolution will help pool the efforts of the international community for a real settlement of Iraq, which remains a bleeding wound in the region and in the world."

Perhaps we will end this war only by the Iraqi government asking us to leave.

What do you think? Please let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

A National Catharsis?

For most Americans this week’s nostalgic "feel good" journey with President Ronald Reagan has been a welcome respite from the Iraq debacle. But there is still no excuse for the way in which the press lionized a man who, frankly, would have been embarrassed with the over-the-top tributes. Eric Deegan’s article from the St. Petersburg Times, gives some balance to this event which has taken on mythical proportions. A few minutes spent with "Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting" will help provide some sanity and perhaps give us some glimpse into how history will actually record the Reagan era.

The following letter to the editor of the St. Petersburg Times on June12th says it well:

As we mourn, be clear about Reagan's record

It's a difficult time for those who loved Ronald Reagan and, in a different way, it is a difficult time for those of us who, while extending our condolences, are troubled by a lack of balance in assessing his legacy.

On the one hand, Ronald Reagan embodied what every American should be. He was strong, bold and clear. He was able to forcibly stand his ground and, at the same time, reach out to embrace enemies with warmth and affection. He enjoyed a buoyant love affair with everything he touched and shook the negativity out of everything around him.

Yet, unlike Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin D. Roosevelt, who also immensely enjoyed their presidencies and bolstered the national mood, Reagan didn't use his position of strength to reach down and assist those left behind. He went the other way and emboldened the powerful as had never been done before.

Who out there can point to a single program or policy Reagan instituted that (1) didn't benefit the rich or (2) lent assistance to the poor? We can't because there aren't any. He closed mental hospitals and tossed patients on the streets, told hungry children that ketchup was a vegetable and stalled HIV research for years, even though the disease had reached pandemic proportions.

Reagan made us feel good about ourselves by giving us permission to abandon all vestiges of social responsibility and give way to an unbridled selfishness that has lessened our ability to empathize and deadened our spirits. He duped us into believing our greatest strength is our military might while previously it was the benevolence of our convictions. Reagan took full credit for ending the Cold War when the real hero of the day was Mikhail Gorbachev, without whom it never could have happened. He was the one who had the courage to "tear down this wall," even though it meant the end of his political career.

My condolences go out to Mrs. Reagan and to all who mourn for him. I only hope they follow his example and are magnanimous to those of us who see past Ronald Reagan's charm to the record of his actions."
-- Will Archibald, Tampa

It was telling that no minorities, with the exception of Colin Powell, participated in the funeral service. So join me in inviting Ray Charles to the occasion, and listen to some of his sound clips, in absentia.

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Political Navigation

"Staying the Course" makes sense if one has a reliable compass and accurate coordinates. Neither of these conditions prevailed from the outset of our misadventure to Iraq. The shoals await.

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Getting Political

If you have missed passion in this "pre-campaign" foreplay between President Bush and Senator Kerry, then you must go to this site where you can read and hear audio clips of Al Gore's speech last Wednesday evening. It is the Gore that we all hoped would appear in the 2000 campaign. Perhaps Senator Kerry will now consider Al Gore as a running mate, even though Al may say he has "been there-done that". We need his energy and passion now as never before.

I offer Tom Friedman's May 27^th piece, "Shouda, Woulda, Can" as our second "guest editorial". To get the Friedman article, you will have to register for the N.Y. Times on line edition, and it is FREE. Friedman, with less passion, but just as much conviction offers five policy suggestions that can only be achieved with a regime change in Washington.

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

The Real Quagmire

Our nation is in a more serious "precarious position" than just Iraq. The most serious quagmire is that the majority of our citizens seem unconscious about, and our leaders unwilling to admit, the hypocrisy of our own national values. "Staying the course" is a mantra for self-destruction, especially when "the course" was given the wrong coordinates to start with.

Toward the end of Martin Luther's King's experience with the civil rights movement, he wrote these sobering words that can be taken to heart today:

"If we look honestly at the realities of our national life, it is clear that we are not marching forward: we are groping and stumbling; we are divided and confused. Our moral values and our spiritual confidence sink, even as our material wealth ascends. In these trying circumstances, the black revolution is much more than a struggle for the rights of Negroes. It is forcing America to face all its interrelated flaws of racism, poverty, militarism and materialism. It is exposing evils that are deeply rooted in the whole structure of our society. It reveals systemic rather than superficial flaws and suggests that radical reconstruction of society itself is the real issue to be faced."

(Steven Lawson and Charles Payne, "Debating the Civil Rights Movement", Roman and Littlefield, 1998, pp. 132f.)

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

The Future of Democracy & Brown v. Board of Education

On the 50^th Anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education the words of Chief Justice Earl Warren are more relevant than ever: "In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right that must be made available on equal terms."

Since 1991 our nation has experienced a rapid re-segregation of our schools. Courts have turned against desegregation plans, beginning in the 1980's, denying new petitions to desegregate schools and ending previous court imposed plans and even striking down voluntary plans created by local school districts. Federal agencies have shown no aggressive interest in enforcing the Brown decision or the Civil Rights Act. The momentum of the 60's and 70's is gone and reversed. At the same time the economic class structure has become more scud with a greater gap between the wealthy and the poor than at any time in American history. In higher education, while gains have been made, eleven states are still awaiting federal declarations that their systems are fully integrated.

Fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education made it clear that in our democracy segregated education means inherently unequal opportunity, the nation must confront a growing crisis of separate and unequal education. Millions of students are not getting the basic education they need to survive and compete in the 21st century.

Before we spread our version of democracy too far, we need to do some serious soul searching about our own record. Brown v. Board of Education is a good place to begin.

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

The Dark Side Within

From: The New York Times Editorial: May 7, 2004 "Donald Rumsfeld Should Go":
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/07/opinion/07FRI1.html

"It is time now for Mr. Rumsfeld to go, and not only because he bears personal responsibility for the scandal of Abu Ghraib. That would certainly have been enough. The United States has been humiliated to a point where government officials could not release this year's international human rights report this week for fear of being scoffed at by the rest of the world. The reputation of its brave soldiers has been tarred, and the job of its diplomats made immeasurably harder because members of the American military tortured and humiliated Arab prisoners in ways guaranteed to inflame Muslim hearts everywhere. And this abuse was not an isolated event, as we know now and as Mr. Rumsfeld should have known, given the flood of complaints and reports directed to his office over the last year."

"This page has argued that the United States, having toppled Saddam Hussein, has an obligation to do everything it can to usher in a stable Iraqi government. But the country is not obliged to continue struggling through this quagmire with the secretary of defense who took us into the swamp. Mr. Rumsfeld's second in command, Paul Wolfowitz, is certainly not an acceptable replacement because he was one of the prime architects of the invasion strategy. It is long past time for a new team and new thinking at the Department of Defense.

From Tom Friedman’s column, "Restoring Our Honor", May 7, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/06/opinion/06FRIE.html

"We are in danger of losing something much more important than just the war in Iraq. We are in danger of losing America as an instrument of moral authority and inspiration in the world. I have never known a time in my life when America and its president were more hated around the world than today….This administration needs to undertake a total overhaul of its Iraq policy; otherwise, it is courting a total disaster for us all….That overhaul needs to begin with President Bush firing Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld — today, not tomorrow or next month, today….Let's not lose sight of something — as bad as things look in Iraq, it is not yet lost, for one big reason: America's aspirations for Iraq and those of the Iraqi silent majority, particularly Shiites and Kurds, are still aligned. We both want Iraqi self-rule and then free elections. That overlap of interests, however clouded, can still salvage something decent from this war — if the Bush team can finally screw up the courage to admit its failures and dramatically change course…."

The forever optimist Friedman, concludes, "Yes, the hour is late, but as long as there's a glimmer of hope that this Bush team will do the right thing, we must insist on it, because America's role in the world is too precious — to America and to the rest of the world — to be squandered like this."

******

What is inadequate about this line of argument? Not that a change in leadership and policy is inappropriate, but that we continue to believe the dangerous mythology that:

	America has a kind of innate moral superiority over other nations and cultures and that the cancer within is limited to a few "bad people."
	The "dark side" of war, politics and human nature is not part of our own culture, and each one of us personally.
	By keeping the "war against terrorism" on foreign territory, we keep "terrorism" from our own soil, and that terrorism is not part of our own national soul.
	That "God is on our side" and given us the right to rewrite the rules.

Indeed, the first battle each of us must wage against terrorism is the dark enemy within each of us, viz., the capacity to play God while serving the Devil of violence, and our own ideological absolutes.

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

The Supreme Sacrifices

The soldiers:

The civilians:

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Mistakes?

In his April 13^th, News Conference, President Bush could not think of any "mistakes" he may have made relative to the war in Iraq. Well, let me suggest a few for him to consider:

Lying to the American people and the United Nations about the existence of WMD in Iraq;
Stating that America was in "imminent danger from Saddam Hussein";
Failure to let the UN inspectors finish their job;
Discounting the importance of international cooperation and support via the U.N.;
Failure to plan for the occupation of Iraq;
Inaccurate assessment of the numerical requirements for troop deployment;
A naive belief in the "universal love of freedom" and the "welcome" the US would receive as "liberators";
Inaccurate assessment of the cost of the war – in lives and in money;
Inaccurate assessment of the time required for the "mission"’;
Lack of awareness of the international diplomatic consequences of the unilateral action and negative foreign opinion;
Failure to understand that both the US and the world is now less safe from terrorism than it was before the invasion of Iraq.
"Bring 'em on"
"Mission Accomplished"

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Theocracy vs Democracy?

In his press conference on April 13^th, President G.W. Bush said, "freedom is the Almighty’s gift to every man and woman in this world. And as the greatest power on the face of the Earth, we have an obligation to help the spread of freedom." This has been a consistent theme of this President. He went on to say that, "We’re changing the world, and the world will be better off."

This would make sense if the U.S. were a theocracy, not a democracy. Our nation has no divine right or mission to require our version of "freedom" as a value for other sovereign nations. Yes, this administration has embarked upon a course of engagements in the mid-East that will change the world for decades, if not centuries, ahead. But the world may be worse, not better, off for it.

Perhaps the most frightening part of the Bush theocratic talk is his confusion of a personal religious belief with national policy and America’s self-interest. With about forty percent of the Bush Bible belt support coming from the evangelical wing that believes literally the "Left Behind" literature, our President may well believe that he is in a Holy War. With the recent publication of the twelfth volume in the series, "The Cosmic Battle of the Ages", there may be good reason for the Arab world to be alarmed. We should be too. It is even more frightening to consider that the pro Sharon U.S. policy has the full support of the "Left Behind" evangelicals. Indeed, we have a religious war of the fundamentalists - Christian vs Muslim.

It is time for the sane ones in America to wake up and end this tragedy.

Those military and civilians killed and wounded in Iraq speak for themselves. To keep up with the "body count" each day use these objective sources:
The soldiers:
The civilians:

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Sacrifice without Resurrection - Easter 2004

For many Christians Easter symbolizes the sacrifice-passion/resurrection story - the supreme metaphor of what makes human sacrifice for the freedom of others meaningful. But today we have irony upon irony -- a "Christian nation" invading an Islamic culture, ready to sacrifice human lives for an illusive ideology (freedom and democracy). But there is no resurrection to this story, only the sacrifice of thousands of lives, without a clear purpose.

Today marks a little more than one year since our invasion of Iraq in 2003. How does it add up in terms of the number of soldiers killed and wounded, the number of civilians killed, and finally, the accomplishment of our objectives?

The soldiers: The latest count of soldiers killed are U.S. 659: other 103 for a total of 762. Wounded are U.S. 3022; other 444, for a total of 3,466. The families of more than 4,228 persons, one third more than those killed in the attack of 9-11, have felt the consequences. And there is more to come.

The civilians: Somewhere between 8865 and 10,705 Iraqi civilians have been killed thus far, with more every passing day. Have we not extracted an eye-for-an-eye, with the vengeance of 4 or 5 times from the civilian deaths of 9-11?

Our objectives:

Have we developed an international alliance against world terrorism, thus making the world safer? According to the just released Pew Foundation Report on Global Attitudes: "Perceptions of American unilateralism remain widespread in European and Muslim nations, and the war in Iraq has undermined America's credibility abroad. Doubts about the motives behind the U.S.-led war on terrorism abound, and a growing percentage of Europeans want foreign policy and security arrangements independent from the United States."
Have we found Weapons of Mass Destruction?
Have we been welcomed with open arms, liberated Iraq and brought democracy to a nation yearning for freedom?
Does the average Iraqi citizen feel more secure today than a year ago?
Is Iraq on the way to building a self sustaining economy and a better standard of living for its own people?
Is our action in Iraq creating the kind of example for the Middle East that will lead to a resolution of the Palestine/Israel conflict?
Are there any signs that our actions in Iraq will lead to a domino effect of support in the Middle East for the U.S.?
Is there any possible positive outcome to this tragedy and imperial misadventure?

Christians believe Jesus died for their freedom. For whose freedom are these men and women dying?

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

As we celebrate and recognize this critical 50 year anniversary of the Brown vs Board of Education decision, Jim Carrier's new book, A Travelers Guide to the Civil Rights Movement, Harcourt, 2004, is a must. With this work as a guide, one can travel, with Carrier, to those often unmarked and unnoticed sites that marked turning points in America's quest for civil rights. This is a guidebook, a civil rights primer and a sad but sobering commentary on how America is still struggling with race, its memories and its future. If one travels throughout Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and Washington, DC it will be difficult to find markers or any public notice of some of our most important "moments" in the civil rights struggle. If you have ever visited a Jim Crow cemetery, you will understand. The civil rights movement did not begin with M.L. King or end with his "Dream" speech at the Lincoln Memorial. We still have a national amnesia about not only slavery but much of what happened over the last half century. Look for Rosewood in Florida, and notice what is not there.

Perhaps we lack monuments and markers because we are still in transition. Gains that have not yet been secured cannot be set in granite. We seldom have monuments to moments of transformation until the process has ended. For many African Americans there has also been a period of denial, as there was after Rosewood. The best way to raise a child with hope for the future may be to not remember all of the past, lest it ride like an anchor. But it is time we began in America to build monuments to men and women who have shown courage and valor with ideas, ideals and values, not just guns and weapons.

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse

////

Ralph Nader’s nadir, in political history, may not be the alleged democratic vote spoiler of the 2000 election or even in 2004, but rather the blackening of the image for all non two party candidates in the future. In our democracy every voice should have a right be heard. The obligation of the majority is to protect the rights of the minority. That is what the Constitution and Bill Of Rights are all about. Yet, our political system, partly due to the recent role of expensive media image promotion, has made it virtually impossible for “third party” candidates to be heard, unless they have massive personal wealth to finance their own candidacies.

Ralph Nader’s campaign platform in 2000 was founded on the fact that both of the major parties had virtually no differences in their major policy positions. He argued Americans were not being given a choice. A vote for Nader was a vote for “choice” if one believed that Gore and Bush did not represent a “choice”. Many have made the point that if only .5% of those 97,000 who voted for Nader in Florida had voted for Gore, Florida’s recorded vote would not have been for Bush. But that overlooks the point that Nader was not the only third party candidate running in Florida in 2000, and even a few of those votes that were taken from Gore might have made the difference too. But what of the future?

This year Nader cannot make the case that there is not a choice between the two major parties. They clearly represent major differences on issues such as the war, national security, civil liberties, health care, jobs, the deficit, the environment, etc. It is not clear that Nader represents any major difference from the Democratic Party's views this year. Take a look at his platform. Since it is highly unlikely that someone voting for Nader this year would have Bush as the second choice, it is obvious that he will be taking potential votes from the democratic candidate. That is a worry, but should it be our major concern about Nader? No, and here is why.

Nader’s candidacy now will tar all third party candidates in the future as being motivated by blind ego and “spoiler” motives. They will all be taken less seriously, at a time when we need to hear from more diverse voices than those in the two major parties. What positive steps can be taken?

1) Provide a Third Party political fund by setting aside 10% of every dollar contributed to one of the two major parties (both hard and soft money).

2) Establish eligibility for the Third Party funding pool based on criteria that will not favor those with personal wealth.

3) Lower the petition requirements for ballot eligibility, but require that all signers be registered as Independents – to discourage major party members who try to encourage Third Party candidates to be “spoilers” for the opposition – e.g., the Republican funders who finance Nader.

4) Conduct campaigns to register voters as Independents. The national percentages of Independent registrants is increasing – a good sign.

5) Require media outlets to include third party candidates in major coverage, such as debates.

6) Undertake a national discussion, promoted by CNN and NPR of the role of third parties in our democracy.

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse
(return to top of page)

////

More than 60 prominent scientists, educators and Nobel Laureates were signatories to a statement calling on Congress to "restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking." The Union of Concerned Scientists, which released this report, is a nonprofit partnership of scientists and citizens combining rigorous scientific analysis, innovative policy development and effective citizen advocacy to achieve practical environmental solutions. The recent controversial report, "Restoring Scientific Integrity" asserts that the Bush White House has:

1. "Placed people who are either unqualified or who have clear conflicts of interest in official posts and on
      scientific advisory committees;
2.   Censored and suppressed reports by the government's own scientists; and
3.   Declined to seek independent scientific advice."

The report alleges that the White House distorted and suppressed results of climate-change research, censored information on air quality, and a distorted the Centers for Disease Control's science-based performance measures for determining the efficacy of abstinence-only sex education.

We could add to the list of distortions the unwillingness of the White House to take the advice of the science advisors to the State Department whose reports made it clear that there was no evidence of WMD in Iraq at the time we initiated the recent war.

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse
(return to top of page)

////

Iraq II - War of “choice” or “necessity”? In his “Meet the Press” interview on Sunday, February 8th, President George Bush made it clear that he views the war in Iraq as one of "necessity", not "choice." He is wrong. Leaders and governments that take their states to war have always been involved in making critical judgments, involving choices. with momentous consequences. To deny our choices in these matters is to refuse to accept any responsibility under the shield of some kind of blind “necessity.”

After the fact, societies, including our own, usually find ways to remember their choices in terms of absolute necessity. When the death of loved ones must be justified, it is natural to believe in the necessity of the sacrifice. How else can one endure the pain?

It is difficult to view any war "in perspective". The emotions run strong and deep, and after the fact speculation is cheap. But consider our war of independence? We are taught to view it as a matter of “necessity.” But perhaps we really did not have to spend four years of killing one another to achieve political independence. Life for European Americans would have been much better if we had chosen to be more patient and negotiate further with the British monarchy.

What of our civil war? Lincoln really had a choice. Surely the abolitionists were a politically strong minority of the nation, but if the southern slave holding states would have been permitted to step aside the two societies would have worked out a modus vivendi and more than 500,000 young men would have not been slaughtered.

Did Pearl Harbor eliminate our “choice” about entering WWII? Not really. Historians are more convinced that FDR was looking for a reason to engage the nation. The Japanese attacked an island that was not a state of the US and there was no apparent threat to the US mainland at the time. Our nation was asleep in isolationism and quite willing to let the endless wars among European states continue. But FDR had a larger vision of a new Europe in alliance with the United States. The choice was not without risk, but the alternatives were clearly much worse.
Pearl Harbor moved "choice" to "necessity" in the public mind. Was our dropping of the two atomic bombs a matter of choice or necessity? We chose to believe that the second bomb would ultimately “save lives” and force the surrender of Japan. Historians still are trying to sort out that equation.

No, President Bush cannot absolve himself, his colleagues, and congress from the consequences of the “choice” to attack Iraq. Discussion about the reasons for that choice are not only necessary but it is an important way in which we can exercise our democratic rights and responsibilities. Unlike WWII we have no moral mandate, despite administration efforts to equate Saddam with Adolph. The Bush argument that we are "safer" because the killing is going on there, and not here, is hardly a moral justification. No, thinking and informed Americans will never view this war as one of "necessity."

Our most recent war in Vietnam began as logistical support for the last vestiges of the failed French presence. President Johnson then chose to use the alleged "Bay of Tonkin" incident for further expansion of the war, a decision that haunted him forever. We see no such remorse (acceptance of responsibility for choices) in President Bush.

So what were the elements of the “choice” for the Bush team?

1. The neo-cons ideologically wanted “finish” the Gulf I war, from which they argued we “retreated” and failed
to “take out” Saddam. That was a choice.
2. I heard James Woosley, former CIA director, argue that it was important for the US, after 9-11 to “make a
strong statement” to the Arab world that we would not “take it anymore.” That was a choice.
3. They say they did not need the "permission slip" form the U.N. That was a choice.
4. They were not interested in keeping the WMD inspectors on the ground in Iraq. That was a choice.
5. They did not listen to those who advised caution and predicted the consequences we see today. That was a choice.

This is clearly a war of "choice" and it is no wonder that President Bush appeared to stumble over his response to the question in the interview. It is time to examine these choices in the light of day, while still honoring the lives of those who are paying such a supreme sacrifice for their country. The least we can do for them, so they do not die in vain, is to learn from these choices, so that it will not happen again. Thank goodness we will have a choice in November.

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse
(return to top of page)
////

Beyond the current raging political tempest a revolution is occurring that will change the nature of learning, globally. The January 30th Review issue of The Chronicle of Higher Education is devoted to a comprehensive analysis of the IT issues of the decade ahead and the implications of open source technology for how we learn and do research. The new topic listed in the the table below, Open Courseware and Global Education, will take you to some of the most important sites and topics in this revolution.

As for the ten most important challenges we face during the next decade in IT, here is the list, not necessarily in order of importance:

1. Collaboration: Seeking tools that are easy to use
2. Wireless networking: The search for reliability
3. Managing bandwidth: Pocket shapers controlling the flow
4. Distance Education: The expanding demand
5. Fund Raising-Development: Managing data
6. Big Systems: Less customization
7. Course Management: The push for the open approach
8. Security: It will be getting worse and harder
9. Digital archiving: Space and access
10. Intellectual property: Digital copyright is ripe for revision

////

Since when has ignorance become an acceptable excuse, especially for a U.S. President entrusted with our national security and well being? Here is a list of things about which the current administration claims to have been "ignorant":

1. Our international intelligence network was deeply flawed, depending too much on electronic technology and not enough on direct ground contact;
2. The post 1991 war policy of containment and Iraqi weapons inspection and destruction was working;"
3. By 2001 Iraq had no WMD capability;
4. A sophisticated plan was necessary for the post war occupation and development of Iraq;
5. The Iraqi population was not eager to welcome the U.S. presence with open arms and a rush to western style democracy;
6. The international reaction to the U.S. preemptive strike and hostile reaction to the United Nations;
7. The long term economic costs of the war, the occupation, and the rebuilding of the nation; and
8. The cost of human lives - U.S. and Iraqi dead and injured.

No, it is not "ignorance" alone that has led us to this point, but rather a combination of ignorance, arrogance and self- interest.

Ignorance? Yes. We should have a list of "required reading" for every U.S. president that includes the history of international political geography, culture, economics and religion.

Arrogance? The Bush team was not ignorant about the inadequacies of the intelligence system. Burton Hersh's classic book, "The Old Boys" had been out for over a decade and was well noted, even cited as recommended reading by the C.I.A., after first being "banned". Certainly George Bush, Sr., as Director of the C.I.A. knew its weaknesses and must have talked with his son. No, it was "arrogance" that the good old boy system and political plutocracy was really working, despite the evidence to the contrary.

Self-interest? If you think otherwise, then you need to read Kevin Phillips' newest work: "American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush" (see below).

If the American public accepts the argument that the Bush senior administration was "misled" or "ignorant" of the facts, then it is WE who will fail our obligation as citizens in a democracy to be well informed. Let us hope that future generations do not have reason to see us as naive and pliant, for "ignorance" cannot be our excuse too. In a mature democracy we must hold our leaders accountable.

What do you think? Let me know. Merle F. Allshouse
(return to top of page)
////

Kevin Phillips has once again exposed, with care of a scholar and the clarity of a responsible journalist, a serious weakness in the fabric of our democracy. His latest book, "American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush" is a marvelous sequel to "Wealth and Democracy" and a testimony to the length of his political journey from the first book, "The Emerging Republican Majority" in 1969. The shocking truth may be that we have become an economic plutocracy ruled by a political aristocracy, with a multi-generational web of relationships with middle east oil interests. This is not a book about ideology. It is about the history of a family with enormous economic resources that has used politics as its leverage and now tragically taken the world's most promising democracy into a war to preserve the economic self interests at the expense of us all. The facts may be too shocking and complex for the news media to follow, but every thinking American should become familiar with this dark side of American economic and political history.
Check here for Bill Moyers' interview with Kevin Philips re: "Wealth and Democracy"
Check here for the NPR site for more details about the Bushes and the "American Dynasty"
Order "American Dynasty" here.

////

Science - Technology - Man - Robots? Although it is difficult to separate politics from policy with the current administration, let us take President Bush's proposals for manned exploration seriously, and not just a ruse to scuttle the shuttle. This is one of those times when it is more important to ask the right questions than to have the right answers. Let me suggest a few that I think are critical at this juncture, three decades after we landed men on the moon.

1. Is exploration of space critical for the survival of the human species? Why?
2. Has our federal support for pure science lagged behind our fascination with technology, which is derivative from theoretical science? In funding technology are we really advancing science?
3. At this stage of exploration, what can we learn from manned missions that we cannot learn from robots? If we had men on Mars today, what would we learn that we cannot learn from the Spirit robot?
4. What is the cost/benefit analysis of robot vs. manned missions?
5. What is the cost/benefit analysis of investing in space exploration over the next two decades vs. investments in the social/political/economic infrastructure of other regions of the earth vital to our security?
6. If the future of the Homo Sapien depends upon our knowledge of the solar system, then why do we not lead a true international scientific expedition?
7. Should not space exploration require a new paradigm of political organization beyond that of the earth bound notion of national sovereignty?

Check the lastest on the Mars rovers: http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/home/index.html

////

Logic and Politics? It is often said that logic has nothing to do with politics. Unfortunately, especially in these post 9/11 times, we suffer from the consequences of this truism. The public’s increasing acceptance of the policies of “homeland security” and the color code system is a marvelous illustration of fallacious public policy based upon the two common logical fallacies:

1) the appeal of the consequences of a belief: It is fallaciously argued that if we did not go to color-code (let us say, orange) then we would be less safe from terrorism. So, X is true because if people did not accept X as being true then there would be negative consequences.

2) confusing cause and effect: It is fallaciously argued that our homeland security program results in a safer
     nation, that we are safer because of our homeland security. Confusing the cause and the effect, or
     assuming that because A and B always occur together, then A is the cause of B is a classic fallacy, but so
     useful politically. We should never listen to a political speech without keeping the post hoc fallacy in
     mind. Just because B normally follows A does not mean that A is the cause of B.

The more we follow the fallacy of this public policy the more we become convinced that our own safety is in the government's protection. Perhaps we are being slowly seduced by the psychology of the abducted who feel their only safety is in the protection of the abductors. This is how the terrorists are winning the war on our own soil.

The columnist, Paul Krugman, has some wise resolutions for journalists (and those who read them) for the year ahead:

"During the 2000 election, many journalists deluded themselves and their audience into believing that there weren't many policy differences between the major candidates, and focused on personalities (or, rather, perceptions of personalities) instead. This time there can be no illusions: President Bush has turned this country sharply to the right, and this election will determine whether the right's takeover is complete."
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/26/opinion/26KRUG.html

It is time for us all to join UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in his appeal to world leaders to make 2004 " the year when we begin to turn the tide" against ills that kill millions annually" through poverty, disease and war.
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=9318&Cr=annan&Cr1=

The Museum of the Seam, http://www.coexistence.art.museum/eng/exhibitions/traveling.htm,
is an international art project making the point that through creative imaging we can transcend divisions of race, creed and religion. The large outdoor display, pictured on this site, has been traveling around the world and is now in St. Petersburg, Fl., where a few days ago it was defaced, after having survived being shown in European and Middle Eastern cities, without incident. It will not be repaired but travel on as a testimony that beneath the thin epidermal layer of civility in many American communities resides the cancer of terrorism. There is no antiseptic word for the irrational anger, ignorance and violence demonstrated by the defacing of the "Coexistence" exhibit. We must be moved beyond mere indifferent tolerance to active engagement for peace in our communities and the world.

In a speech at Tubingen Univ. on Dec. 12^th, Secretary-General Kofi Annan that reminded us there are universal values enshrined in the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These include the rights to peace, freedom, social progress, equal rights and human dignity. The Charter affirms that everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services”. http://www.un.org/apps/sg/sgstats.asp?nid=697

In our hegemonic world state we are facing a serious coIntradiction between our language and our actions, especially though the effects of "globalization." When "free trade" is not "fair trade", especially for third world farmers, the backlash must be taken seriously. The defect is not in our goals of universal human rights, but in our policies of self protection.

While the web can provide us with perspectives of international events on a global perspective, it is often difficult to find non partisan objective sources for critical analysis. One of the best is the Brookings Institution, an "independent, nonpartisan organization devoted to research, analysis, education, and publication focused on public policy issues in the areas of economics, foreign policy, and governance. The goal of Brookings activities is to improve the performance of American institutions and the quality of public policy by using social science to analyze emerging issues and to offer practical approaches to those issues in language aimed at the general public"

President Bush's Remarks at the 20^th Anniversary of the National Endowment for Democracy on November 6^th is perhaps the most extensive articulation of the new conservative ideology. Most revealing, and problematic, is the transparency of the theology, theory of human nature, and philosophy of history, especially in the last four paragraphs. In intellectual terms, it is clearly a pre-modern doctrine, and one that will separate us even further from post-modern European democratic thinking. But for those who know little or nothing about the differences between American foreign policy and American foreign involvements and have never been aware of what has been happening in the Middle East since the end of WWII, this speech will be a sounding board for the justification of American exceptionalism. ...

For the full text of my editorial, in pdf format click here: 11-28-03 Editorial

Click on image for Adobe Reader download

////

This administration, in catering to industries that put America's health and natural heritage at risk, threatens to do more damage to our environmental protections than any other in U.S. history. Here is Natural Resources Defense Council's account of what the Bush administration has done and is doing on air quality and global warming environmental matters. [Last Update: 01.16.2004]

"For two years, since the attacks of 9/11, the administration has operated virtually without legal constraint, asserting that the rule of law can be disregarded when defending the nation against terrorism. But it is at those very moments of heightened national anxiety that mistakes are most often made and innocents are caught in the glare of suspicion. Standing up for the principles of due process - procedures that allow mistakes to be uncovered - is more vital at these times than any other.

The court has a duty to bring some balance to the civil liberties side of the freedom-versus-security equation. In a recent speech, President Bush, speaking on another issue, said: '(I)n the long run, stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty.' How true, and we hope the court is listening."
For the full editorial, "Security vs Liberty", see the Nov. 14, 2003 St. Petersburg Times.

Does anyone know what happened to the http://www.Ashcroft-watch.org web site? I'm not paranoid, but it is curious how it disappeared. But fear not, you can keep up with what is happening at http://www.patriotwatch.org or http://www.bushwatch.com/ashcroft.htm

More than 70 American companies and individuals have won up to $8 billion in contracts for work in postwar Iraq and Afghanistan over the last two years, according to a new study by the Center for Public Integrity. The Center found those companies contributed more money to the presidential campaign of George W. Bush—more than $500,000—than to any other politician over the last dozen years.

///
(return to top of page)

Following are the perspectives of James McPherson, president of he American Historical Association, in the Sept. issue of Association's professional journal regarding the efforts of the G.W. Bush administration to rewrite American and World history. "This summer the Bush administration thought it had discovered a surefire tactic to discredit critics of its Iraq adventure. President Bush followed the lead of his national security adviser Condoleeza Rice to accuse such critics of practicing 'revisionist history.' Neither Bush nor Rice offered a definition of this phrase, but their body language and tone of voice appeared to suggest that they wanted listeners to understand 'revisionist history' to be a consciously falsified or distorted interpretation of the past to serve partisan or ideological purposes in the present…..Whatever Bush and Rice meant by 'revisionist historians,' it is safe to say that they did not mean it favorably. The 14,000 members of this Association, however, know that revision is the lifeblood of historical scholarship. History is a continuing dialogue between the present and the past. Interpretations of the past are subject to change in response to new evidence, new questions asked of the evidence, new perspectives gained by the passage of time. There is no single, eternal, and immutable 'truth' about past events and their meaning."

Revisionist Historians, James McPherson, President, The American Historical Association, Perspectives, Sept. 2003.
(return to top of page)

////

The Women of Iraq Tour Fall 2003 In October, two Iraqi women scholars, AMAL AL-KHEDAIRY and NERMIN AL-MUFTI, sponsored by the Fellowship For Reconciliation began a remarkable tour of the United States, offering the American public a rare opportunity to listen to and interact with informed Iraqi women who passionately want to dispel the assumptions about Iraq, by sharing their personal experiences and extensive knowledge of Iraq’s culture and people. Check the link for their current schedule.

Link here for a transcript of a fascinating interview between Bill Moyers and Joe Hough, President of Union Theological Seminary in New York. Hough calls for a new national awareness of the lack of social/economic justice in American society. Don’t forget that this is the Seminary at which Reinhold Niebuhr served on the faculty. http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_hough.html

Environmental Defense is dedicated to protecting the environmental rights (clean air and water, healthy and nourishing food, and a flourishing ecosystem) of all people. A vote is imminent on the most comprehensive bill in Congress aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions: the McClain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act. The time for us to "act" is now! Connect at http://www.environmentaldefense.org/home.cfm

////
(return to top of page)

The following guest editorial underscores the urgency of our nation's foreign policy crisis. But even more significant is the domestic crisis represented by the most recent Gallup poll that reported a 56% approval rating on President Bush's performance. The survey reported that 53% of Americans believe he deserves a second term, whereas only 43% do not. The dummying down of America must not continue, and this editorial page will be devoted to the urgent need for a "wake up" call.

Merle F. Allshouse
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Washington Post: Sunday, October 12, 2003; Page B03

Retired Marine Gen. Joseph Hoar, a former commander of U.S. Central Command, and retired Air Force Col. Richard Klass are independent national security consultants.

President Bush's address to the United Nations last month echoed his administration's two-pronged justification for the Iraq war: Iraq is better off, he suggested, and the rest of the world, including the United States, is safer with Saddam Hussein gone. The Iraqi people will render judgment on the first point after the coalition forces have departed and their new political course is set.

But the president does not have a constitutional duty to make Iraq a better place. He does have a constitutional duty to protect and defend the United States. So, regardless of the final outcome in Iraq, the administration's case for going to war -- and now, for how it deals with the aftermath of "major combat operations" -- must rest on whether Americans are more secure. In our judgment, we are not.

The argument that America is safer rests on two premises: first, that Iraq posed a threat to this country that has now been eliminated; second, that the war did not increase or create other threats. We believe both are incorrect.

The administration's primary justifications for the war were the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons, and its links to al Qaeda. Neither claim has been borne out. Saddam, it is increasingly clear, was safely in a box and was being kept there. But the case that America is less safe today does not rest solely on the argument that Iraq posed no near-term threat. The Iraq war itself has made this country less safe. There are six reasons why.

• The U.S. military, especially the Army, has been stretched to the breaking point and has very limited capability to respond to a crisis on the Korean Peninsula or elsewhere. This situation is likely to last several years and be compounded by declining enlistment, which is already affecting the National Guard and Reserve forces.

• The Iraq war has diverted resources from the effort to combat terrorism, the primary threat to our security. With our intelligence, military and economic resources concentrated in Iraq, the Taliban has reconstituted itself in Afghanistan and is challenging the Kabul government. The diversion of resources has also given Osama bin Laden's organization the opportunity to regroup.

• The drain on the national budget is pulling money away from critical homeland security needs. The $87 billion requested for Iraq and Afghanistan next year is almost the exact amount recommended in vain by an outside panel to fund port security, first-responder training and equipment and other needs for the next five years.

• If Saddam did have some WMD, they are now loose in a dangerous part of the world where many groups and nations do not wish us well.

• We have created a failed state in Iraq. There is currently no effective control of its borders. Radical Arabs from outside Iraq have answered Bush's call to "bring 'em on" and entered the shooting gallery. They do not speak English. They do not have passports or flight training. They were unlikely, before the war, to be able to attack us here. But they can take their AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades and attack our troops next door in Iraq. This may also have opened up a fertile recruiting and training ground for al Qaeda.

• Finally, our unilateralism has weakened and embittered our allies and undercut the United Nations. The United States cannot defeat terrorism or successfully conclude the Iraqi campaign without them.

The threat to the United States posed by Saddam was greatly overstated. The reasons for that are not yet clear. What is clear is that the dangers created by the president's decision to go to war must be addressed. We cannot cut and run.

The most urgent task is to relieve the heavy burden on the U.S. Army, the troops and their families. They are virtually the only Americans now sacrificing in this war. The new Iraqi army will help but not soon enough. If we are unable or unwilling to make the political compromises to secure a U.N. mandate that will allow substantial international participation, we will have to call up more National Guard and Reserve units in the short run and expand the Army as soon as possible. We simply must reduce deployment rates and end "stop loss" orders that keep service men and women in the military involuntarily, to the detriment of their family life and their jobs. If we do not act soon, we may not be able to achieve recruitment levels to sustain the Army's current size, let alone expand it.

Equally urgent is accounting for the weapons of mass destruction. We need an honest appraisal of what was there and, if the weapons still exist, where they went. They may well be the most lethal legacy of the war.

The task in Iraq is to transfer decision making at the local and national levels to Iraqis, to reduce the visibility of the U.S. presence and dampen hostility. This will be easier if the United Nations is engaged and troops from countries acceptable to the Iraqi authorities participate. Reconstruction assistance must be speeded up and key infrastructure projects must be offered to non-U.S. countries and companies.

There are two other overarching imperatives in the war on terrorism. We must refocus, no longer viewing Iraq as its "central front." Iraq is more Gallipoli than Normandy. And we must stop trying to conduct the war on the cheap without asking for sacrifices from anyone but military members and families. Our long-term safety also depends on paying for operations abroad and security at home and not passing the bill to our children.

Authors' e-mails:jpha@att.net

dickklass@kininc.com

Threatened a Bang, but Delivered Only a Whimper

Al-Arian Editorials in PDF format

In Al-Arian's Wake

Click on image for Adobe Reader download