Back Boris Johnson for Mayor of London and annoy the Bemerded  British Muslim Institute. From the absurd site Islamophobia Watch, an unwitting source of sensible comment about Islam:

British Muslim Initiative views the Conservative choice of Boris Johnson as the mayoral candidate as an affront to the sensitivities and beliefs of London Muslims. In a city in which one in eight of its population is Muslim, Johnson has demonstrated an antipathy to the Quran that borders on the realm of the bigotry. ["the population" not "its population" - M.J.]

During the debate on the religious hatred bill Johnson is recorded as saying "if this bill makes any sense at all it must mean banning the reading in public or in private of a great many passages of the Quran itself". He also wrote in one of his articles "the Koran is full of stuff that plainly falls into that category (religious hatred)".

Mohammad Sawalha Chair of BMI said: "In the light of such invective BMI affirms any individual aspiring to represent the people of London must demonstrate respect for all its communities. Mr Johnson is on the hostile path with the religious and ethnic minorities and he would destroy the great harmony enjoyed in London."

Mr Sawalha further added: "What is required at this juncture is a Mayor who has the understanding of the needs of the great many communities in London and unite them, unfortunately Mr Johnson does not fit that bill. Boris Johnson's record of hostilities and disdain for the sacred book of Muslims must automatically disqualify him from their support, to the same degree that his public offence and disrespect for black and ethnic minority communities should equally render him unworthy of their support."

Another good reason to back Boris Johnson is that he would be fun. Just look at his picture.

It is not often that I disagree with Dot Wordsworth; in fact this may be the first time. The cause of my displeasure is that she fails to regard with sufficient horror a website called No Fear Shakespeare, which purports to translate Shakespeare “into English”:

No Fear Shakespeare puts Shakespeare's language side-by-side with a facing-page translation into modern English—the kind of English people actually speak today.

Speak for yourself. This very aim, or “mission” as it would probably be termed, is absurd. Shakespeare is English. Much of what is written today is not English. From The Spectator:

New York - Malaysia's Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi called Friday for increasing dialogue to repair misunderstandings by the West about Islam. -- from this news item

Seven Questions for Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Prime Minister of Malaysia:

1. At independence, Malaysia (or, as it was then known, Malaya) did not have a Muslim majority. There has been a steady rise in the percentage of Muslims, compared to the indigenous tribes, the Hindus, and the Chinese. What explains this demographic shift?

2. Singapore broke off from Malaysia and established a separate state. What were the main reasons the Chinese of Singapore so desperately sought to be independent of Malaysia?

3. The Bumiputra system, was established to favor in education and in the economy, supposedly, the "sons of the soil" or the indigenes. The "sons of the soil" tribes, however, are mostly Christian. Yet the Bumiputra system, as every Chinese and Hindu in Malaysia knows, favors only one group: Muslims. Why is that, and do you now believe it is time to assure all citizens of Malaysia equality before the law by ending the Bumiputra preferments for Muslims in Malaysia?

4. Your predecessor, Mahathir Mohamed, famously gave an address to the Organization of Islamic Conference, in which he told a crowd of enthusiastic delegates that Muslims must learn to rival the West in their scientific attainments, but the only attainments to which he made reference were those of military technology. There was no mention of any encouragement of Muslim study of the nature of the atom, or of the structure of DNA, or of fractals, or how the brain works, or anything at all that might be described as science for its own sake. There was only mention of military technology, of weaponry. Why do you think that was?

5. Chok Tok On, Prime Minister of Singapore, in a speech he gave in Washington a few years ago, said this:

“Terrorism is a generic term. Terrorist organisations such as the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka or ETA in Spain are only of local concern. The virulent strain of Islamic terrorism is another matter altogether. It is driven by religion. Its ideological vision is global. It is most dangerous. The communists fought to live, whereas the jihadi terrorists fight to die and live in the next world.

My perspective is formed by our own experiences in Southeast Asia, which post 9/11 has emerged as a major theatre for terrorist operations. In December 2001, Singapore arrested 15 people belonging to a radical Islamic group called the Jemaah Islamiyah [JI]. They were plotting even before 9/11 to attack American and other Western interests in Singapore. In August 2002, we arrested another 21 members of this group. Malaysia, the Philippines, Indonesia, and Thailand have also made many arrests of terrorists.

The JI regional leadership spanned Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, and the southern Philippines. Its tentacles even probed into Australia. JI’s objective was to create a Daulah Islamiyah, an Islamic state in Southeast Asia. This was to be centred in Indonesia but would include Malaysia, southern Thailand, Southern Philippines, and, inevitably, Singapore and Brunei.

But the most crucial conclusion our investigations revealed was this: the existence of a transregional terrorist brotherhood of disparate Southeast Asian groups linked by a militant Islamic ideology to each other and to al Qaeda. Whatever their specific goals, these groups were committed to mutual help in the pursuit of their common ideology: they helped each other with funds and support services, in training, and in joint operations.

In 1999, JI formed a secret caucus called the Rabitatul Mujahadeen, meaning Mujahadeen Coalition, to bring together various militant Southeast Asian Islamic groups. Between 1999 and 2000, Rabitatul Mujahadeen met three times in Kuala Lumpur. It was responsible for the bombing attack against the Philippine ambassador to Indonesia in Jakarta in August 2000. The brain behind the attack was Hambali, the link man between Southeast Asian terrorism and al Qaeda. Fortunately, he is now under arrest.

But the threat remains. It stems from a religious ideology that is infused with an implacable hostility to all secular governments, especially the West, and in particular the U.S. Their followers want to recreate the Islam of seventh century Arabia, which they regard as the golden age. Their ultimate goal is to bring about a caliphate linking all Muslim communities. Their means is jihad, which they narrowly define as a holy war against all non Muslims, whom they call “infidels.”

The Arabs call this religious ideology salafi. Our experience in Southeast Asia is not without wider relevance because of what the salafis themselves believe. This is what one of them, an Algerian named Abu Ibrahim Mustafa, has said:

“The war in Palestine, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Algeria, in Chechnya, and in the Philippines is one war. This is a war between the camp of Islam and the camp of the Cross, to which the Americans, the Zionists, Jews, their apostate allies, and others belong. The goal of this war, which they falsely called a war on terror, is to prevent the Muslims from establishing an Islamic state...”

Likewise, JI’s ultimate goal is a caliphate, by definition not confined to Southeast Asia. The dream of a caliphate may seem absurd to the secular mind. But it will be a serious mistake to dismiss its appeal to many in the Islamic world, though the majority do not believe in killing and dying for it.

But there are radicals and militants who do. The terrorist brotherhood in Southeast Asia and its links to al Qaeda were first forged through the struggle against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Ibrahim Maidin, the leader of the Singapore JI cell, underwent military training in Afghanistan in the early 1990s. His encounters with the mujahadeen deeply impressed him. Maidin wrote several letters to the Taliban Supreme Leader Mullah Mohammed Omar and to Osama bin Laden. He asked whether Mullah Omar was to be regarded as the caliph of the Islamic World. After returning to Singapore, Maidin arranged for JI members to visit Afghanistan and to undergo training there.

When one of those convicted of the October 2002 Bali bombings was sentenced to death, he thanked the prosecutors and said that this would bring him closer to God and “the death penalty would mean nothing except strengthening my faith.”

Islamic militancy is not new to Southeast Asia. But what is new is this type of fanatical global ideology (including the phenomenon of suicide bombers) that has been able to unite different groups and lead Southeast Asian groups to subordinate local interests to the broader struggle.

Ibrahim Maidin has confessed to a senior Singapore intelligence officer that, in retrospect, he had made the mistake of moving too quickly and should have waited for Malaysia, Indonesia, the southern Philippines, and Singapore to become an Islamic state before acting against U.S. interests. But he still believes that his side would ultimately win. He also said that as long as the U.S. was “doing things against the Muslims”, the JI would continue to attack the U.S.

From our experience in Southeast Asia, I draw three principal conclusions that I believe have a wider relevance.

First, the goals of these terrorists make the struggle a zero sum game for them. There is no room for compromise except as a tactical expedient. America may be the main enemy, but it is not the only one. What Osama bin Laden offered Europe was only a “truce,” not a lasting peace. The war against terrorism today is a war against a specific strain of militant Islamic terrorism that wants, in effect, a “clash of civilizations” or, in the words of the Algerian I earlier quoted, “a war between the camp of the Islam and the camp of the Cross.”

The JI has tried to create the conditions for Christians and Muslims in Southeast Asia to set against one another. In December 2000, it attacked churches in Indonesia, including one church in an Indonesian island off Singapore. It has sent its members to fight and stir up trouble in Ambon against Christians. At the trial of those responsible for the Bali bombing of October 2002, one of the defendants, Amrozi, dubbed by the media as the “smiling terrorist,” said that he was not sorry for the Westerners killed in the Bali attacks. He said, “How can I feel sorry? I am very happy, because they attack Muslims and are inhuman.” In fact, he wished “there were more American casualties.” What was most chilling is that this hatred is impersonal.

One of those we detained in Singapore was a service engineer with an American company. He confessed that he actually liked his American friends and bosses. He was nevertheless involved in targeting American interests. We have a sense that he had struggled with this. He eventually decided to testify against the spiritual leader of JI, Abu Bakar Bashir, but only because he felt betrayed by Bashir’s denial of the very existence of the JI organization which Bashir headed and to whom he and other members had sworn allegiance.

And just as Osama bin Laden is trying to drive a wedge between Europe and America, in Southeast Asia, JI was plotting to do the same thing by blowing up the pipelines that supply water from Malaysia to Singapore. The JI knew that water from Malaysia is a matter of life and death for Singapore. They knew that race and religion have historically been the major fault lines within and between both countries. The JI’s intention was to provoke a conflict between Singapore and Malaysia and portray a “Chinese Singapore” as threatening a “Muslim Malaysia,” and use the ensuing confusion to try and overthrow the Malaysian government and establish an Islamic state in Malaysia.

That particular plot failed. The governments of Singapore and Malaysia could not have allowed it to succeed. We know only too well what is at stake.

The favorite tactic of terrorists of all stripes has always been to try to provoke a backlash to serve their cause. When news of the JI arrests broke, my immediate concern was to maintain social cohesion in Singapore. Singapore is a multi-racial society with a 15 percent Muslim population. They are well integrated in our schools, housing estates and the workplace. Nevertheless, misunderstandings could easily arise. We met with Muslim leaders in a number of closed door sessions to share details of the investigations and to explain that the arrests were not targeted against the Singapore Muslim community or Islam.”

Would you agree with the assessment of Prime Minister Chok Tong On?

6. Singapore has a very rigorous legal regime covering Da’wa ,with strict requirements that all new converts to Islam be immediately reported to the government . Why do you suppose that is? Do you understand what concerns prompted the democratic government of Singapore to enact such legislation?

7. Your name is “Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.” Would you find strange if the Prime Minister of the Congo were named Anthony Ashley Cooper, or possibly Lord Palmerston? Do you find anything of note, as a Malay, that you bear an Arab name? Or do you find nothing strange in the linguistic and cultural pressures for arabization that accompany, and have always accompanied, islamization?

IHT: KADENA AIR BASE, Japan: While the U.S. has been tied up fighting the war in Iraq, China has made huge gains toward modernizing its military and improving its equipment, and its air defenses are now nearly impenetrable to all but the newest of American fighters, the senior U.S. military official in Japan said.

Lt. Gen. Bruce Wright, commander of the roughly 50,000 U.S. forces in Japan, Washington's biggest ally in Asia, said in an interview this week the Iraq war is reducing the availability of U.S. troops and equipment to meet other contingencies and eating up funds that might be used to replace or upgrade planes that are being pushed to their operational limits.

China, meanwhile, is rapidly filling the skies with newer, Russian-made Sukhoi Su-27 "Flankers" and Su-30s, along with the domestically built J-10, a state-of-the-art fighter that Beijing just rolled out in January. China has also improved its ballistic missile defenses and its ability to take the fight into space — as it proved by shooting down an old weather satellite at an orbital height similar to that used by the U.S. military.

"smear campaign...."
-- from Esam Omeish's description of the charges made against him

Please list the "smears" in this "smear campaign" which, you charge, is being conducted against you. Tell us exactly who charged what, and when, and where, and why such a charge is untrue, and therefore constitutes a "smear."

Start with Robert Spencer's description of you, on a show hosted by Laura Ingraham, claiming that there is no capital punishment for apostasy in Islam. Then explain why, in a second appearance with Spencer on the same show, you claimed that Shari'a in the United States would be a Good Thing.

[Far more damning than the video on YouTube are the two recorded encounters with Robert Spencer on the Laura Ingraham show. On the first, Omeish practices taqiyya -- that is "lying" to non-Muslims -- when he asserts that apostasy in Islam is not punishable by death. On the second, he says he looks forward to the imposition of Shari'a in the United States. If what that means is clearly understood, he wishes that you and I and even Governor Kaine, and all the non-Muslim members of that Commission on Immigration to which he was almost appointed, and all the non-Muslim doctors and nurses and orderlies in the hospital he works at, and all the non-Muslim patients he sees, to be relegated to the status of dhimmis, a status that for 1350 years has clearly meant, for those non-Muslims under Muslim rule, humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity.

What could Omeish have possibly meant, when he said he favored Shari'a in America? How was he taken "out of context"? What else would a sensible and well-informed Infidel be expected to make of that remark?

Forget the video. Listen to the tapes.

Please explain, Mr. Omeish. Take as much time as you need. But remember: those programs have been taped. They can be played over the Internet.

WASHINGTON — The US Senate has called for Iran’s Revolutionary Guards to be officially designated a “foreign terrorist organisation,” a day after the House of Representatives passed a similar measure.

The Senate on Wednesday voted 76-22 for the non-binding amendment sponsored by Republican Jon Kyl and independent Joseph Lieberman to place the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, or Pasdaran, on the US terrorist blacklist. --from this news article

The rationale apparently given for voting against this resolution does not withstand scrutiny. Unless it can be shown that the Pasdaran is not as described, is not a "terrorist group," then it should be labelled as such. That may permit the government to take measures against the group, and its supporters in this country, that it can not take without such a declaration. It is not, that is, a merely symbolic act, but has useful consequences.

Those who say that this "is one step toward attacking Iran" have not made, but merely asserted, their case. If such a measure makes it easier to go after the sources of financial and other support of the Pasdaran, and thereby more effectively put pressure on the Islamic Republic, this might lessen the likelihood of a military attack if the nuclear program can be stopped through other, less violent, means.

Yes, two can play this game.

A determined secret group, with nothing to lose should now engage in its own version of performance art, as a way of wreaking vengeance on the well-paid con men of this age and those magnates who fall for the con, because they have been told This Is Art. Really Really Great "Art."  Not only Leonardo and Vermeer, but Balthus and Whistler and Morandi will turn over, quite contentedly, in their graves, upon hearing that  at long last something is being done. And there will be many silent supporters among those who, right now, continue, with as much serenity as they can muster (it can't be easy, it sometimes must madden, to hear of the sums raked in by the unworthy, of all the Tracey Emins and Damien Hirsts, and the "performance artists" and the "video artists" and all the rest of those carefully avoiding, because incapable of producing, the artifact in pencil or paint, or carved from wood or sculpted from stone) but given prizes and earning millions that they do not deserve.

At least, a century ago, one could be sure that the rich were a bit more willing to take tuition, and seek advise, from those who had cultivated tastes. If Berenson overvalued Sassetta, at least he did not advise his rich (whether nouveau or vieux) clients and friends to throw millions into whatever then was the equivalent of Hirst's dimidiated cow, and the same gawkers who make it " the most popular" item in the museum in which it is now proudly displayed (by madmen) are descendants of those country bumpkins who would go to the local fair to gawk at the spectacle of a two-headed calf, also preserved in the same kind of formaldehyde.

Education in art, as in so much else, is a mess, with less Shearman and more Nochlin. And so too, therefore, is the education of taste, especially the taste of those who will go on to form collections.  The rich can no longer be assured of attending certain select universities, and even in those universities, no can be sure what they will be getting into. The head of Visual Studies at Harvard, for example, is a Shakespeare "scholar" who was written books on real estate, dogs, and, oh yes, cross-dressing in Shakespeare. The most recent hire has been of somone given a professorship, and tenure, whose special field is Hip Hop Studies.

And sudden-wealth-syndrome , on an unprecedented scale, means that there must be many collectors of "art" who, not possessing even the unjustified self-assurance of those who have attended so-called good schools, and who are not about to take time to study the history of art or visit museums, but want not My Last Duchess hanging on the wall, but intallation art, with lots of lovely blood or urine or dirty underswear, and lights flashing, and rube-goldberg movements, which is exactly what Lorenzo de' Medici, doncha know, would be buying and puttin' up in the palace if he were alive today. So the advsisers today, those "art consultants," far outnumber the few who might recognizably descend from the line of Berenson, Duveen, or Eugene Thaw, for that matter, the kind of people who still exist, here and there, in the nooks and endangered crannies of what is called, deplorably,  "The Art World."

The time for talk, in The New Criterion or elsewhere, is over. Time to take to the streets, to the museums, to the private collections of those hedge-fund operators and real-estate, computer, advertising magnates.

Tracy Emin can be done in by hospital corners. Others will require something more drastic.

Scott Ott writes: (2007-09-25) — Producers of the new BravoTV series “Queer Eye for the Iranian Guy” said they’re close to inking a deal with Islamic Republic President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to appear in the season opener.

While it’s a well-known fact that there are no homosexuals in Iran, the network plans to import them to Tehran from the United States in order to give Mr. Ahmadinejad “a radical, extremist makeover.”

During the course of the show, the Iranian leader will be “fundamentally transformed head-to-toe” by a group of homosexual men known as the Fab Five — an interior designer, a fashion stylist, a chef, a beauty guru and a ‘concierge of cool’....

From an interview with Professor Timur Kuran, who despite sitting, for a year, in the "King Faisal Chair"  at USC has done his own work on Islam and Economics, and without paying attention to the desires of his funders, quite unlike so many other recipients of the same Saudi or Arab largesse:

AE: One of your recent publications is “Islam and Mammon.” What is it about?

TK: This is a book on the subject that got me into the study of economics and religion. It offers a critique of the modern doctrine of “Islamic economics” and evaluates its practical achievements. Its most visible practical achievement has been the establishment of Islamic banks meant to avoid interest. Islamic economics has also promoted Islamic norms of economic behavior and founded redistribution systems modeled after early Islamic fiscal practices. I argue that the doctrine of Islamic economics is simplistic, incoherent and largely irrelevant to present economic challenges. Few Muslims take it seriously, and its practical applications have had no discernible effects on efficiency, growth or poverty reduction. You might wonder, if this is so, why Islamic economics has enjoyed any appeal at all. The real purpose of Islamic economics has not been economic improvement but cultivation of a distinct Islamic identity to resist cultural globalization. It has served the cause of global Islamism, known also as “Islamic fundamentalism,” by fueling the illusion that Muslim societies have lived, or can live, by distinct economic rules.
___________________________________

Nota Bene:

The real purpose of Islamic economics has not been economic improvement but cultivation of a distinct Islamic identity to resist cultural globalization. It has served the cause of global Islamism, known also as “Islamic fundamentalism,”

From Fred Kagan's My Weekly Standard article:

"The takfiris insist that anyone who obeys a human government is a polytheist and therefore violates the first premise of Islam, the shahada (the assertion that "There is no god but God"), even though Muslims have lived in states with temporal rulers for most of their history. The chief reason al Qaeda has limited support in the Muslim world is that the global Muslim community overwhelmingly rejects the premise that anyone obeying a temporal ruler is ipso facto an unbeliever."

A demonstration of severe mental confusion. Kagan appears to believe that Al Qaeda, because it preaches obedience to the Holy Law of Islam, argues that "anyone who obeys a human (!) government is a polytheist" -- that is, guilty of shirk. This is not what preaching against rulers deemed to be bad Muslims means. Rulers, ideally a single Caliph, who is true to Islam, heads a "human" government that can be obeyed. Indeed, the duty of a good Muslim is to obey any ruler who is himself a good Muslim, however -- to our eyes - cruel and despotic he might seem to be.

Furthermore, when Kagan writes in the same My Weekly Standard piece that "Muslims have lived in states with temporal rulers for most of their history" what should one make of it? The observation is banal. We all know that ayatollahs have not ruled over Iran, nor muftis in Egypt and Arabia. So what? The distinction between "temporal" and "spiritual" that is made in Christianity is not made in Islam. It is misleading to call the rulers of Muslim lands (and Kagan's use of the word "states" also worries, for it evokes misleading thoughts of the non-Muslim nation-state -- "lands" is better at keeping out such notions -- "temporal rulers" for it sets up a temporal-spiritual opposition that does not exist in Islam, but that Kagan apparently believes does so, and means something. It doesn't. Since the Muslim ruler of a Muslim land is always more than merely a "temporal ruler" the only requirement he must fulfill is to be a good Muslim.

Kagan needs to spend six months reading. But he doesn't have time. He's too busy advising Senator McCain and writing his articles for My Weekly Standard and The Wall Street Journal, on why and how America, if it only stays the course, is surely "winning in Iraq." That he never feels the obligation -- never -- to describe exactly what constitutes "winning in Iraq" and how it would help with efforts to stem the world-wide Jihad, and its many instruments, shows the frivolousness and ignorance  to be so widespread as to serve as a universal protection against the appearance of the kind of criticism that matters -- the kind that appears here, and at Jihad Watch, and very few other places.

It's disheartening. And frightening. As if Jay Leno's Jaywalkers had all acquired Ph.D.s and were installed in think-tanks all over Washington. Which has, indeed, happened.

RICHMOND, Va. - A member of the state's Commission of Immigration resigned Thursday, a few hours after Gov. Timothy M. Kaine was told about online videos showing the appointee condemning Israel and advocating "the jihad way."

Kaine learned of the videos from a caller to his live monthly radio program and accepted the resignation of Dr. Esam S. Omeish about three hours later. --from this news article

One small step for mankind.

But the moral of the tale is this: in order to avoid a misstep that will come to haunt you, if you are a political figure, that will undoubtedly be used, at this point -- and with full justification -- by your political opponents as an example of your naiveté, or failure to exercise due diligence, do not meet with, do not have smiling photographs taken with, do not endorse in any way, and certainly do not appoint to any office, someone who believes in Jihad as a central duty, Jihad through whatever means. That includes almost every Believer. And do not accept, ever, either someone's claim to be a "moderate" or someone else's description of someone -- especially if that someone is in the hopelessly naive Interfaith Dialogue racket -- as a "great guy, no problem, he's really on our side."

Use your head. Enough running from all those in positions of political or academic or other power running around like candidates for Jay Leno's Jaywalkers.

Take, for example, the supposedly "tough" performance of Columbia University President Lee Bollinger, who still has yet to inform himself about Islam. Despite the tongue-lashing he inflicted on Ahmadinejad (and here fortiter in re, suaviter in modo, might have been just the ticket) he became helpless, nearly tongue-tied, when it came to answering back Ahmadinejad when he made his absurd remarks about, for example, Israel. Was it a surprise to Bollinger that that would have been raised? Was he unable to rise to the occasion, and to show up the idiocy of the claim, one so common as Bollinger should have fully anticipated it, that "the poor 'Palestinians' should not have to pay for the Holocaust." For god's sake. Someone well-informed, particularly dealing with the theme of the rights of non-Arabs -- Jews and Persians and Armenians and Copts to start with -- in the Middle East, and also who was given, on a platter, a chance to discuss Persian history and the successful Persian effort to prevent the arabization, and cultural and linguistic imperialism of the Arabs, that has been such a feature of islamization world-wide (and that would have amazed not just Ahmadinejad, but deeply shaken up Iranians back in Iran, and caused them to think). But Bollinger seems only interested in protecting himself, and no doubt preserving the loyalty of alumni. Has he lost the ability to study and think, in the heady rise to the top? Perhaps he can re-acquire that skill. It may inspire some of the undergraduates.

And now Virginia Governor Kaine has had to re-think, and so too has the man he was about to appoint, a man whom Robert Spencer has debated, has tapes of those debates, and can easily show that Esam Omeish lies (denying that death is the punishment prescribed for apostasy in Islam, with textual authority) and also has admitted that he looks forward to the extension of Shari'a across the United States. Had he been appointed, and that information come out and been widely distributed -- and it would have been -- it would have inflicted severe political damage, rightly, on Governor Kaine. There is no need for this, anymore than there was a need for Mayor Menino, without knowing a thing about Islam, a few years ago to enthusiastically support the building of that deplorable mosque, with all the behind-the-scenes below-market sale of city land and the Saudi connection and the BRA employee who, as far as is known, may still be on the BRA payroll. I know many people who have because of that permanently lost any enthusiasm they might have had for Mayor Menino.

For god's sake, did no one think to do a little googling? Or to check, say, with "The Investigative Project" or with "Jihad Watch" to see if there was anything about Mr. X that might, just might, be the kind of thing the governor or mayor or Congressman deciding whom to hire for his staff, would have liked to have known in advance? Or if not those sources, then others -- just something so that one is fully alerted to the real views, not the feigned ones that may be expressed, or the evasions of taqiyya-and-tu-quoque that by now we are all getting so used to, and that must be seen right through, and if not by the Great and Good of this earth themselves, then by members of their staffs, whose duty it is to guide and protect them from such blunders that, in the end, might prove fatal for those who commit them, in one way, and fatal, in quite another, much grimmer way, for those who those in brief (or not so brief) authority presume to instruct and protect.

Do your homework, for god's sake. Do it.

Iraq is one thing. The misunderstanding of Islam and of Iraq, the dreamy belief in the possibility, and benefit to Infidels, of bringing "freedom" and "democracy" to "ordinary moms and dads," the inability to recognize that Iraq is only one, and hardly the very important, theatre in the counter-Jihad (Western Europe is far more important, and the instruments are the Money Weapon, Da'wa, and demographic conquest, and seldom terrorism), and to work toward a result that weakens the Camp of Islam, the timidity and sentimentalism that prevents policy-makers even from hinting that such a result is best achieved through withdrawal because Sunnis will never acquiesce in their new diminished role and Shi'a never give the Sunnis quite what they demand, and this continued, possibly low-level battle, will affect Sunni-Shi'a relations in Pakistan, Lebanon, Yemen, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia, and that whatever further squandering of men, money, and matériel takes place inside Iraq, it will be not that of America but of various Muslim neighbors.

But Iran is quite another. The experience in Iraq has insured, thank god, that there will not be any more "bringing of democracy" to a Muslim state (but it could be brought to Myanmar, it could be brought to the southern Sudan). No land invasion is needed. There are ways to inflict great damage on Iran's nuclear project from on high.

And such an attack is best achieved during a Time of Troubles in Iraq, not a period of calm, when Iran will have its hands full worrying about spillover effects, in Khuzistan (where the Arabs can get restless, or have their restlessness increased), in the Kurdish areas of northern Iraq, and among the Baluchis and even Azeris.

Observing the fissiparousness next door, these non-Persians, who constitute half the population of present-day Iran, could permanently unsettle the Islamic Republic. The constant threat of dimidiation, in population and land area, followed by demise, may be enough to cause Iranians to view the nuclear project not as a source of national pride but a grave danger to the continued existence of their country, especially if the Arabs of Khuzistan (containing most of Iran's oil), Baluchis, Kurds, and even Azeris start to ActUp, start to MoveOn.

New Duranty: BAGHDAD, Sept. 27 — A senior State Department official in Baghdad acknowledged Thursday that the first American oil contract in Iraq, that of the Hunt Oil Company of Dallas with the Kurdistan Regional Government, was at cross purposes with the stated United States foreign policy of strengthening the country’s central government.

“We believe these contracts have needlessly elevated tensions between the K.R.G. and the national government of Iraq,” the official said, referring to the Kurdistan Regional Government. The official was not authorized to speak for attribution on the oil contract.

The tensions between Kurdistan and the central government go well beyond the oil law. Already a semiautonomous region for more than 15 years, Kurdistan in many respects functions as independent state and wants as much latitude as possible to run its region. Recently, the Kurdistan government has pushed to extend its borders to include nearby areas that have sizable Kurdish populations.

Hunt Oil, a closely held company, signed a production-sharing agreement with the Kurdistan Regional Government this month. The company’s chief executive and president, Ray L. Hunt, is a close political ally of President Bush and serves on the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board...

Putting aside the question of why a Dallas oil executive is on the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, this seems to be an indication the administration may be bowing to the inevitable and will allow Iraq to break up.

Frederick Kagan's latest effort to convince Americans that his strategy, the "surge," is not only working for now, but should be continued indefinitely is in the WSJ this morning:

...Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the consensus of American strategists has been that the best way to fight a cellular terrorist organization like al Qaeda is through a combination of targeted strikes against key leaders and efforts to discredit al Qaeda's takfiri ideology in the Muslim community. Precision-guided munitions and special forces have been touted as the ideal weapons against this sort of group, because they require a minimal presence on the ground and therefore do not create the image of American invasion or occupation of a Muslim country...

This strategy failed in Iraq for four years--skilled U.S. special-forces teams killed a succession of al Qaeda in Iraq leaders, but the organization was able to replace them faster than we could kill them. A counterterrorism strategy that did not secure the population from terrorist attacks led to consistent increases in terrorist violence and exposed Sunni leaders disenchanted with the terrorists to brutal death whenever they tried to resist. It emerged that "winning the hearts and minds" of the local population is not enough when the terrorists are able to torture and kill anyone who tries to stand up against them...

What lessons does this example hold for future fights in the War on Terror? First, defeating al Qaeda in Iraq requires continuing an effective counterinsurgency strategy that involves American conventional forces helping Iraqi Security Forces to protect the population in conjunction with targeted strikes. Reverting to a strategy relying only on targeted raids will allow al Qaeda to re-establish itself in Iraq and begin once again to gain strength. In the longer term, we must fundamentally re-evaluate the consensus strategy for fighting the war on terror. Success against al Qaeda in Iraq obviously does not show that the solution to problems in Waziristan, Baluchistan or elsewhere lies in an American-led invasion. Each situation is unique, each al-Qaeda franchise is unique, and responses must be tailored appropriately.

But one thing is clear from the Iraqi experience. It is not enough to persuade a Muslim population to reject al Qaeda's ideology and practice. Someone must also be willing and able to protect that population against the terrorists they had been harboring, something that special forces and long-range missiles alone can't do.

"not enough to persuade a Muslim population to reject al Qaeda's ideology and practice"? So Kagan is telling us the ideological end of the war is already won. Islam is under control. Now all we need to do now is to protect these people from themselves and each other...forever.

From The Telegraph:

Damien Hirst has established a permanent place in the annals of art history. But some of his work is proving to be less long-lasting.

One of his bisected and pickled cows has sprung a leak and is undergoing emergency repairs amid growing worries about the integrity of the work produced by modern artists, The Art Newspaper revealed yesterday.

Staff at Oslo’s Museum of Modern Art were alarmed when formaldehyde started dripping out of one of the four glass tanks containing parts of sliced cow and calf that make up one of his most famous works, Mother and Child Divided (1993), a piece that helped him win the Turner Prize.

All four glass cases have had to be returned to Hirst’s studio in this country and Oslo, which says that Mother and Child Divided is its most popular work with visitors, does not expect repairs to be complete until next year.

Last year Hirst’s famous preserved shark - which goes under the title The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living - was found to be rotting soon after it was bought by the billionaire American hedge fund investor Steve Cohen from Charles Saatchi for a reported £6.5 million.

Perhaps such accidents are an occupational hazard for conceptual artists. Unlike paint or clay, your material can turn against you: a light can stay off in a power cut; a well-intentioned cleaner can make the bed; or a tank can leak. But do not despair, Damien - simply make the leak part of the art. The leaky tank and rotting meat can conceptualise man's failure to conceptualise within his own conceptual framework. You can charge double for it.

News just in: someone threw up all over Jackson Pollock's "drip" picture, which was bought for $140 million last year. It's now worth $280 million.

 Wont.

Shant.

Not no how.

Loveable mop-head and wit Boris Johnson spreads good tidings of great joy on the bemerded streets of London: Red Ken's days are numbered. From the Evening Standard:

 

 

 

 

Boris Johnson today won the Tory nomination to take on Ken Livingstone and promised to restore "common sense government" to London.

He taunted the Mayor with the warning that "King Newt's days are numbered" - a reference to Mr Livingstone's love of amphibians - and vowed to work constructively with the boroughs to solve the capital's problems.

He was hailed by Conservative leader David Cameron as a "great and inspiring candidate" after winning almost 80 per cent of the 20,000 votes cast for the Tory nomination.

Mr Cameron said: "I have known Boris for a couple of years and underneath that sometimes dishevelled exterior is someone with real drive, real passion, real commitment, who really understands the problems that Londoners have.

"Boris, I think, has a huge chance to give the people of London the sort of inspiring leadership they want and need and, above all, to bring people together in London."

"The Security Service is particularly worried about the possibility of extreme right-wing elements attacking Muslim compatriots, and that we will have a polarized population attacking and losing confidence in each other."
-- from this Norwegian news article

Tiens. Not merely "elements" but "right-wing elements." Not merely "right-wing elements" but "extreme right-wing elements" who will attack Muslim "compatriots" (a curious, and inapt, word).

The gullibility of the Norwegian Security Services continues to amaze. Aren't the Norwegians supposed to know about Lie Groups? Islam is the biggest Lie Group of them all.

SADDAM Hussein was prepared to take $1 billion and go into exile before the Iraq war, George Bush, the United States president, is said to have told José WMaria Aznar, the then prime minister of Spain, a month before the 2003 invasion. --from this news item

It is easy to see why this possibility would have appealed to the Al-Saud. While happy to see Saddam Hussein removed, they could not have been happy, knowing perfectly well what the Americans never understood -- that unless he were to be promptly replaced by another Sunni, with the Iraqi army intact, in the manner of the coup against Qassem, then the Shi'a, having suffered so recently and so violently, would surely take control of Iraq (especially if head-counting "democracy" was transplanted by those crazy Americans) or, with the Kurds, if not of all of Iraq at least of all those part of Iraq worth having. And fabled Baghdad, al-madinat al-salaam, capital of the Abbasid Caliphate for 400 years, would then be in the hands of Shi'a -- "Persian" Shi'a -- and the offense to Sunni historical memories would be rank.

But to think that the trillion dollars might have been saved, and for $1 billion Saddam Hussein removed from the scene and presumably, his Sunni successor willing to reveal everything about WMD (for that would be the price of his being the successor), and handing whatever there was over to the Americans (as it turned out, the whole thing was blague, intended to scare not the Americans, but the Iranians -- and so Saddam Hussein, misperceiving the American misperception in this comedy-tragedy-tragicomedy of errors -- became hoist by his own pretend-WMD petard.

Fantastic. The historians simply will not be able to grasp the many different kinds of folly: folly by Iraq, folly by America, folly by Iran, folly by Saudi Arabia, folly by Bush and his loyalists, folly by the Democrats and their loyalists; folly, folly, folly. Everyone and his brother, stooping not to conquer, but to folly.