Wesley Clark - caught in a time warp?
If so, it might be one of his own making. Bill Hobbs records that Clark has - drumroll, please - actually said on the campaign trial that he thinks that time travel is possible and that it will be accomplished. And he strongly implied that as president he will allocate federal money to develop it.

Now, a small word in Clark's defense (but not a defense of time travel notions). I have seen only the news story of his remarks, have not seen a transcript. What Clark is actually quoted as saying is,

"I still believe in e=mc², but I can't believe that in all of human history, we'll never ever be able to go beyond the speed of light to reach where we want to go," said Clark. "I happen to believe that mankind can do it.

"I've argued with physicists about it, I've argued with best friends about it. I just have to believe it. It's my only faith-based initiative." Clark's comment prompted laughter and applause from the gathering.

In science fiction and the popular conception, faster-than-light (FTL) travel would result in moving back in time; hence Bill Hobbs played it that way.

But not so fast. Is there actually any hard theoretical physics behind that notion? I don't know but I suspect not. While the speed of light is a cosmic constant, it's not clear that exceeding it would result in actual time reversal.

(Actually, a close physicist friend of mine told me that once you start working the formulas for speeds of a significant fraction of C (C=speed of light) then nothing at all is either clear or simple.)

As I recall, theory holds that if an object approaches C, weird things start happening to its mass-volume ratio. At any rate, a physicist consulted for the article was Gary Melnick, "a senior astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, [who] said Clark's faith in the possibility of faster-than-light, or FTL, travel was "probably based more on his imagination than on physics."

While Clark's belief may stem from his knowledge of sophisticated military projects, there's no evidence to suggest that humans can exceed the speed of light, said Melnick. In fact, considerable evidence posits that FTL travel is impossible, he said.

"Even if Clark becomes president, I doubt it would be within his powers to repeal the powers of physics," said Melnick ...

And if he tries, we should call for an Independent Counsel! Yeah!

by Donald Sensing, 9/30/2003 10:20:46 PM. Permalink |   

Iraq casualties by monthly graph
Dale Amon at Samizdata has graphed the figures of deaths of American personnel in Iraq. He concludes,

1. March and April are clearly the period of major combat.

2. May is a postcombat month. Remnants of the regime are dispersed and disorganized. There are a lot of dangerous ordinance laying about. Soldiers are tired, ease up slightly and have more accidents because of it.

3. June through the present is a period of low intensity conflict. One can read the state of the opposing forces in the short-lived secondary peak followed by a long tail off. That tail-off is their journey into oblivion.

That seems about right to me. Deaths by hostile action have been dropping since the beginning of July. Nothing succeeds like success, and as the masses of Iraqi men and women are persuaded that we are there to win, they will increasingly give us their support against the dead-enders and al Qaeda terrorists who have come there (also see here) from other countries.

by Donald Sensing, 9/30/2003 09:32:12 PM. Permalink |   

Resurrect the Independent Counsel?
That is exactly what Sen. Tom Daschle (D-SD) persistently called for on Paula Zahn’s show on CNN tonight. He said that only an independent counsel could investigate fairly the allegations regarding the Valerie Plame affair. I am going to presume that by now everyone knows what that issue is about, and won’t waste space re-describing it.)

The office of independent counsel was abolished in 1999 when the Congress refused to renew its establishing legislation. The legislation expired and the authority for the IC expired along with it.

Here is what was said about the independent counsel at the time:

"For 180 years, we had a good system. It can work. It can work again. We don't need this independent counsel statute." Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Connecticut)

This law has been a noble experiment - an experiment that has been tried, and that has failed. It deserves a peaceful demise and an honorable burial.

This statute is doing immense damage - to the constitution’s critical checks and balances, to respect for the rule of law, to respect for the ideal of public service, and to the reputations of individuals who seek to serve in high-level government positions.

This law has not simply been ineffectual. It has had an effect directly contrary to its lofty purposes. Instead of restoring public trust, it has sewn cynicism. Instead of taking politics out investigations, it has politicized the criminal law enforcement process. Instead of improving political discourse, it has criminalized the political process. Senator Dodd Statement on Independent Counsel Act, February 23, 1999

"The time has come for us to close the books and try to find another way within the Justice Department itself to handle these responsibilities." Sen. Daschle

"But the independent counsel law, while working most of the time, has also been abused by a few overzealous prosecutors. These prosecutors have made it apparent that before we reauthorize an independent counsel law, it needs to be dramatically revised to prevent a reoccurrence of the abuses we've seen." Sen. Carl Levin, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Thursday, June 29, 1999

"In a system based on checks and balances, the independent counsel has on too many occasions become a tyrant," Durbin said. "Once created, these prosecutors can continue indefinitely — investigating far afield, spending tax dollars without accountability, engaging in outrageous tactics, playing politics and ruining the lives of innocent people." Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), February 23, 1999

by Donald Sensing, 9/30/2003 07:39:37 PM. Permalink |   

Ouch!
A $20 bill and a $1 bill were recovered by the Federal Reserve and wound up next to each other on the conveyor to the incinerator.

As they were lying there side by side the $1 bill said to the $20 bill, "Hey. where have you been. I haven't seen you in a long time!"

The $20 bill replied, "Man I have been having a ball! I been traveling to distant countries, going to the finest restaurants, to the biggest and best casinos, numerous boutiques, the mall uptown, the mall downtown, the mall across town and even a new mall.

"In fact, just this week I've been to Europe, a professional NBA game, Rodeo Drive, the all-day retreat spa, the top-notch hair salon and the new casino! I have done it all!!!"

After describing his great travels, the $20 bill asked the $1 bill, "What about you? Where have you been?"

The $1 replied, "Well, I've been to the Baptist church, the Methodist church, the Presbyterian church, the Episcopalian church, the Church of God in Christ, the Catholic church, the Mormon church, the church of the Latter Day Saints, the A.M.E. church, the Disciple of Christ church, the..."

"WAIT A MINUTE! WAIT A MINUTE!!" shouted the $20 dollar bill to the $1 bill. "What's a church?"

Update: Jim Trolinger emails: Reading the story about the $20 bill and the $1 bill on your blog today was an interesting coincidence. Earlier today I was moving money from one bank to another and one of the bills had been stamped with a rubber stamp that said “Track this note at www.wheresgeorge.com” The interesting website has tracking information for currency notes entered by users. Perhaps you could use this information to “prove” the difference your story suggests between $1 bills and $20.

by Donald Sensing, 9/30/2003 07:12:43 PM. Permalink |   

Thanks to all contest entrants!
Thanks to all who entered my essay contest. I will evaluate entries and post the winner as soon as possible. Stay tuned!

by Donald Sensing, 9/30/2003 08:07:12 AM. Permalink |   

The Plame affair - a manufactured scandal?
As you may recall, I initially gave high credibility to former Ambassador Joseph Wilson in his charges against the Bush administration that it had informed journalist Robert Novak that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was a covert CIA operative.

It's time for me to beat a fast retreat.

As it turns out, Novak said that not did two administration officials named her as an employee, so did the CIA itself when he asked.

Now the WaPo reports that

... numerous Democratic leaders demanded the administration appoint a special counsel to investigate the charges that a CIA operative's name was divulged in an effort to discredit her husband, a prominent critic of Bush's Iraq policy.

This fact is almost convincing in itself, IMO, that the entire affair has been contrived by Bush opponents from the beginning. First, it is not at all clear that federal law was violated in naming Plame as a CIA employee. The law concerned makes it a crime to reveal the identity of a "covert agent ... [whom] the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States. ..." The law does not criminalize naming those who are not so protected. No evidence has been offered, by Wilson or anyone else, that Plame's employment fits into the protected category. The fact that Novak says the CIA itself confirmed her identity and employment to him decisively proves, again in my opinion, that her identity was not legally protected.

The call for special counsel comes almost immediately on the heels of Wilson's complaints. Gee, that seems fast for "numerous Democratic leaders" to get their heads together on a matter so foggy. It almost seems like it was planned that way all along.

Bill Hobbs has been all over this issue, and Stryker agrees that the whole thing was manufactured to embarrass the administration, and that "Mr. Wilson has a major problem keeping his lies straight," which he documents.

by Donald Sensing, 9/30/2003 08:03:10 AM. Permalink |   

Terrorist connection to military Muslim chaplains?
I posted two days ago how the military has decided to review the way it recruits Muslim chaplains. Presently, only two Muslim organizations may nominate a Muslim as a chaplain: the Islamic Society of North America and the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council.

Now a founder of the Veterans Affairs Council has been arrested for violating federal law regarding travel to terrorism-sponsoring states. Abdul Rahman al-Amoudi, 51, a naturalized American citizen of Falls Church, Va.,

... is accused in a criminal complaint unsealed yesterday of failing to notify U.S. officials of numerous trips to Libya. Notification is required under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act since the United States considers Libya an international sponsor of terrorism.

An ICE affidavit filed in the case said authorities had established numerous ties between Mr. al-Amoudi and Libyan entities. The affidavit said Mr. al-Amoudi made at least 10 trips to Libya using one Yemeni and two U.S. passports.

He is also accused of illegally accepting more than $10,000 from the Libyan mission to the UN. The Veterans Affairs Council vetted Muslim Chaplain (Capt.) James Yee to the US Army. Yee, who served at the detention facility for unlawful combatants as a chaplain for the prisoners, was arrrested earlier this month on charges of espionage, spying and aiding the enemy, among others.

by Donald Sensing, 9/30/2003 07:42:31 AM. Permalink |   

Dangerous headlight flashers must be stopped!
The stupid item of the day sadly comes from my own city. A Franklin, Tenn. policeman issued a $75 ticket to a motorist who flashed his headlights to warn oncoming traffic that said cop was behind him.

Walker, 75, was fined $10 and had to pay an additional $65 in court costs for violating a city ordinance that says people can't knowingly ''interfere with or attempt to interfere'' with a police officer who is performing or ''attempting to perform'' his duties.

He said he was driving on Downs Boulevard at approximately 7:30 p.m. on Aug. 14 when he noticed a Franklin Police car pull behind him. Walker made sure he wasn't speeding and saw the police car turn into a driveway.

''I thought I'd better warn others to slow down because they might get a ticket, so I flashed my lights,'' Walker said. ''I guess (the officer) saw me because he stopped me and said I was interfering with an officer.''

There is no state law against flashing lights or warning others of a speed trap. Funny thing is, a spokeswoman for the State Patrol who was contacted by the reporter said that they're just fine with drivers flashing their lights. They see their mission as getting people to slow down, and whatever helps that cause is welcome as long as it isn't hazardous itself.

The sheriff of Williamson County (wherein Franklin sits) said that the law Walker was found to have violated is intended to punish those who physically interfere with an officer. He said he "would not condone one of his deputies writing a citation to a person who flashed their lights."

I predict that Franklin will now become a city of flashers. And should.

by Donald Sensing, 9/30/2003 07:28:05 AM. Permalink |   

Muslim father hacks daughter to death
In England, an Iraqi expatriate father hacked and stabbed his 18-year-old daughter to death for becoming too westernized and for dating a young Christian man. He then attempted suicide. He has been sentenced to life in prison as the UK has no death penalty.

The confession of Abdalla Yones was the first for "honor killings" in Britain. The law enforcers in England have made it clear that no toleration will be extended to such acts. "Commander Andy Baker, warned anyone who carried out a similar murder - whatever religion they were - would suffer the severest penalties."

Mr Baker said after the case: "Let this conviction be a message, loud and clear, to those who misrepresent their own communities and condone or stay silent over the treatment of women in their midst.

"'Honour killing' is murder and the police and the justice system will come down on you like a ton of bricks if you are found to be guilty of, or an accomplice to, such so-called 'crimes of honour'."

I am sympathetic to the claim that honor killings are really rooted in Bedouin culture rather than Islam per se, but such killings take place in Islamic, non-Arabic Iran and Pakistan, too. The article linked above gives details of other "honor" murders in Britain.

by Donald Sensing, 9/29/2003 09:54:22 PM. Permalink |   

Novak: "'Nobody in the Bush administration" asked him to ID Plame
The top story on Drudge right now is that journalist Robert Novak has said today that no one in the Bush administration asked him to finger former Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, as a CIA operative.

'Nobody in the Bush administration called me to leak this. In July I was interviewing a senior administration official on Ambassador Wilson's report when he told me the trip was inspired by his wife, a CIA employee working on weapons of mass destruction. Another senior official told me the same thing. As a professional journalist with 46 years experience in Washington I do not reveal confidential sources. When I called the CIA in July to confirm Mrs. Wilson's involvement in the mission for her husband -- he is a former Clinton administration official -- they asked me not to use her name, but never indicated it would endanger her or anybody else. According to a confidential source at the CIA, Mrs. Wilson was an analyst, not a spy, not a covert operator, and not in charge of undercover operatives'...

Note that Novak today identified Plame as an "employee," not an operative. It is prima facie a violation of federal law to reveal the names of CIA operatives, meaning CIA employees who conduct covert duties in foreign countries. But there is no law against naming someone as a non-covert employee. An "analyst" is not an operative.

by Donald Sensing, 9/29/2003 05:54:14 PM. Permalink |   

More arguments against federal agricultural subsidies
Steven Den Beste examines the topic with his usual thoroughness, writing, "subsidies have created a situation where a lot of farmers in the third world can no longer make a living, and have caused indirect economic effects which are not to our benefit." And a lot more. (hat tip, Rick Ballard via email)

I have written about this topic before. See:

The lethality of political poverty

Domestic and environmental protectionism - recipe for famine

by Donald Sensing, 9/29/2003 04:21:19 PM. Permalink |   

". . . perfidy and malfeasance by a member of the Baghdad press corps . . ."
Bill Hobbs is all over the story about how the Western media deliberately turned a blind eye to the horrors of Saddam's regime in order to protect their access to personages, assistance and sites. And today the coverup continues, but is fortunately getting some heavy-hitter attention from respected journalists. read the whole thing.

by Donald Sensing, 9/29/2003 03:52:25 PM. Permalink |   

Gun control
Someone once said that the real objective of groups urging more gun control isn't the guns, it's the control.

That seems to be the message of, "Should there be stricter gun control? Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, responds." Says Ms. Glass:

Rosie O'Donnell and a host of other vocal liberals fight for stricter gun control. I know you've heard this a time or two, but people kill people. Guns are inanimate objects. For anyone who watched "Bowling for Columbine," the award winning documentary by the uber-liberal Michael Moore, in between the chuckles, one message stood out loud and clear: gun homicides in the U.S. aren't a gun control problem; they're a citizen problem. ... The problem is us.

On which the conservative columnist seems to agree:

I also believe we have seen the need for stricter measures to prevent gun violence. Not all states exercise the gun-control precautions that Georgia does. We should never prohibit the right to bear arms, but it is a reasonable tradeoff to ask everyone to wait a few days and go through a criminal background check before exercising that right. It is a reasonable tradeoff to ask anyone who wants to bear AK-47 or Uzi sub-machine guns to go through a much more stringent system.

Well, anyone who wants to beat an AK-47 or an Uzi already has to go through a much more stringent system of checks and fees whether they live in Georgia on elsewhere; that's federal law. So it's not clear to me what Ms. Feldhahn means.

If the state is to refrain from abridging the right to bear arms, as both columnists say it should, then at what point does fulfilling state-imposed mandates prior to acquisition of a firearm become unconstitutional abridgement? Background check? Waiting period? Mandatory training?

I don't think the answer is easy, but together, the columnists may be foretelling the shape of things to come in the gun-control movement: people control. Load gun dealers and buyers with additional regulations. Just make it harder and more inconvenient to obtain a firearm.

Make that, obtain a firearm legally. For Ms. Glass cogently observes,

The only people who won't be able to get guns will be law-abiding citizens who have no knowledge of underground networks. Those aren't the people committing crimes.

And the people committing crimes aren't the people who will obey even more stringent acquisition laws. They are already obtaining guns illegally; more paperwork won't stop them.

Being retired military, I certainly agree that anyone who possesses a firearm should know how to use it properly. And I agree that anyone seeking a carry permit should first complete a gun-safety course. But I am unable to define exactly where such acquisition regulations become unduly burdensome.

But it does seem to me that Ms. Glass, the purported liberal here, does see at least a glimmer of the light that the way to decrease the deaths and injuries from criminals' use of illegal firearms is to protect the right of the law-abiding to bear legal firearms.

by Donald Sensing, 9/29/2003 03:03:00 PM. Permalink |   

Ted Turner shows why no one takes him seriously
Be honest, now: when you need advice on any subject other than how to build a TV empire, oh, say about the future of the human race, would you ever in your most besotted moments ask Ted Turner?

"If I had to predict, the way things are going, I'd say the chances are about 50-50 that humanity will be extinct or nearly extinct within 50 years," Turner said. "Weapons of mass destruction, disease, I mean this global warming is scaring the living daylights out of me."

Well, I don't know about humanity itself, but If I had to predict, the way things are going, I'd say the chances are about certain that Ted Turner will be extinct within 50 years.

Sorry, couldn't resist. What makes Ted an immensely rich-but-unserious person is the way he universalizes his own insecurities into a global threat. First, the litany: WMDs, sickness, global warming. Then the diagnosis: those things scare Ted to death a whole lot. Then the prognosis: humanity is doomed (okay, he gave the prognosis first).

His entire position is based on his feelings. He feels scared. Ergo, humankind is going to perish. And this gets several column inches in the AJC. My, my.

by Donald Sensing, 9/29/2003 02:27:29 PM. Permalink |   

Did PowerPoint help kill Columbia?
"When the bullets are flying, no one is safe," writes John Schwartz in the NYT. But he means PowerPoint bullets, not lead.

Before the fatal end of the shuttle Columbia's mission last January, with the craft still orbiting the earth, NASA engineers used a PowerPoint presentation to describe their investigation into whether a piece of foam that struck the shuttle's wing during launching had caused serious damage. Edward Tufte, a Yale professor who is an influential expert on the presentation of visual information, published a critique of that presentation on the World Wide Web last March. A key slide, he said, was "a PowerPoint festival of bureaucratic hyper-rationalism."

Among other problems, Mr. Tufte said, a crucial piece of information — that the chunk of foam was hundreds of times larger than anything that had ever been tested — was relegated to the last point on the slide, squeezed into insignificance on a frame that suggested damage to the wing was minor.

The independent board that investigated the Columbia disaster devoted an entire page of its final report last month to Mr. Tufte's analysis. The board wrote that "it is easy to understand how a senior manager might read this PowerPoint slide and not realize that it addresses a life-threatening situation."

PowerPoint has become sort of like kudzu – it’s everywhere, and you can’t kill it.

Update: If you missed it the last time I linked to it, here is the PowerPoint version of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address. Ugh!

by Donald Sensing, 9/29/2003 06:56:22 AM. Permalink |   

Pardon me, your bias is showing
Robert Dallek wrote in yesterday’s WaPo that,

Six months after U.S. and British forces decisively defeated Saddam Hussein's hapless armies, Iraqis are grumbling about the occupation and demanding that we provide an estimate of when they will realize self-governance.

Except they’re not grumbling. Even in Najaf, site of the infamous and highly deadly Imam Ali Mosque bombing that killed 120 souls. The mosque is the holiest site in all Iraq. Reports Eric Knapp, who was there:

Not one violent act or anti-American demonstration occurred in the wake of the bombing. Quite the opposite: Mourners just outside the Imam Ali Mosque cheered when two suspects in the bombing were handed over to coalition forces. ...

... a survey a few days after the tragedy [found] that only 43 percent of those surveyed felt safe and secure in Najaf.

But in a survey just a week later, 72 percent felt safe and secure, while 86 percent felt that Najaf was doing better than neighboring provinces.

The surveys also gauged our performance: In the earlier one, only 53 percent thought the coalition was doing a good job in Najaf. But in the later one, 61 percent felt the coalition was doing a good job and 75 percent believed it was doing all it could to make things better.

These kinds of results are not isolated. The WSJ and Zogby last month reported the results of the first scientifically sound poll done of Iraqis since the invasion:

• Iraqis are optimistic. Seven out of 10 say they expect their country and their personal lives will be better five years from now. On both fronts, 32% say things will become much better. • The toughest part of reconstructing their nation, Iraqis say by 3 to 1, will be politics, not economics. ... • Asked to name one country they would most like Iraq to model its new government on from five possibilities--neighboring, Baathist Syria; neighbor and Islamic monarchy Saudi Arabia; neighbor and Islamist republic Iran; Arab lodestar Egypt; or the U.S.--the most popular model by far was the U.S.

As for Dallek’s assurance that "Iraqis are grumbling about the occupation and demanding that we provide an estimate of when they will realize self-governance," the poll last month showed that, "Two thirds of those [Iraqis] with an opinion urged that the coalition troops should stick around for at least another year."

by Donald Sensing, 9/29/2003 06:54:55 AM. Permalink |   

Indianapolis may be team to beat this year
I don't actually follow the NFL standings or various teams' W-L records. I just like to watch the games and cheer for, in order, the Tennessee Titans (who melted the Steelers again today for the third time in less than a year) and the Washington Redskins, who sneaked by the Pats today and for whom I still cheer from living in the DC metro area for five years.

But with barely more than three-quarters of the game between the Colts and the Saints on Sunday Night Football as I write this, the Colts lead 55-13. That's not a football game, it's a reenactment of the Little Big Horn.

The Colts seem to me to be the league's leader so far this season. They sure took the Titans to school two Sundays ago. They now stand at 4-0 (the fact that more than 10 minutes remain for the Saints to writhe in agony as I write this means nothing for the Colts).

I am not a fan of Colts QB Peyton Manning. I don't dislike him, I just never fell victim to the Peytonmania that infected most people I knew in the Nashville area when Peyton was finishing his collegiate career at the University of Tennessee a few years back. And it was a very serious infection: during his first season with the Colts, many Titans season-ticket holders said that would cheer for the Colts that year versus the Titans because - sigh - Peyton deserved it. And of course, they'd never met him.

Fortunately, that kind of nonsense has abated.

Peyton's successor as UT’s QB, T. Martin, led the school to national championship (Peyton never did) and was conceded by many UT fans I knew and some commentati to be a better overall quarterback. But he never achieved anything like the personal adulation that Peyton enjoyed, and nothing like the laudatory media coverage that Peyton had received.

The reason? IMHO, and that of many truly diehard, Peytonmanaical UT fans I know, it was the fact that T. Martin’s ancestors were too southern - that is, from way down yonder where the equator runs across Africa.

This is not to detract from Peyton’s true skills. But as an NFL QB, he’s simply high average. However, the total package of the team he leads is far from merely average, so far this season.

BTW, I still think that the Titans’ Eddie George is seriously overrated. Today he had 21 rushing yards on 11 carries. Don’t give me any rot about how he needs a fullback to block for him. The Titans don’t have one on the roster and they aren’t paying Eddie his millions to make sniveling excuses (which is fact he is not doing). The fact is that Eddie seems unable to find the other side of the line of scrimmage.

And that’s the way it is. Now you know why I never was a sports writer.

by Donald Sensing, 9/29/2003 06:51:37 AM. Permalink |   

Army to review chaplain selection and training
Nomination process of Muslims for chaplaincy to be scrutinized

In the wake of the arrest of Chaplain (Capt.) James Yee as espionage and spying charges against him are investigated, The US Army has decided to review the way it accepts and approves Muslim clerics nominated for the chaplaincy.

Whether the chaplains are Christian or Jewish, Muslim or Buddhist, the military relies on religious groups themselves to recommend and to educate their own candidates. The military says that because of the constitutional provisions that govern the division of church and state, only churches and religious organizations can ordain or appoint their own clergy.

With Muslim chaplains, however, this has proved particularly problematic, especially since Islam has no centralized hierarchy. Most other faiths and denominations have a single authority responsible for chaplains, like the Roman Catholic Archdiocese for the Military Services. But in the absence of such an equivalent Islamic authority, the military has relied on grass-roots Muslim groups.

But many Muslim grassroots groups are pretty loose. And in Islam, unlike almost all Christian denominations, no special schooling is needed to be recognized as a Muslim cleric. Mosques decide on their own whom serves as an imam. There are no ordination orders, there is simply recognition by the Muslim community as they are needed. There is no Islam-wide standard by which Muslim clerics are trained or selected.

There are American Christian denominations that do much the same thing. I have worshiped in churches in Appalachia, for example who have no ordained clergy. They have elders and preachers and worship leaders, all selected by the congregation on the basis of their leadership, religious devotion, abilities and whatever other criteria just seem appropriate at the time.

But none of those denominations have a billion adherents worldwide, or have a presence among the members of the armed forces significant enough to justify sending someone to military chaplaincy.

(My denomination, the UMC, requires all chaplains to be ordained as elders, a process that takes at least seven years, requires the award of a Master of Divinity from designated seminaries, and involves denominational written and oral exams lasting two days on two occasions, three years apart.)

The Army says Chaplain Yee’s arrest did not prompt the review, and it probably didn’t. But it certainly puts it in the spotlight. Besides,

Two senators — Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, and Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona — have begun a Senate investigation into how the government chooses Muslim clerics, or imams. Mr. Schumer has been saying for at least six months that the Muslim groups now responsible for choosing and training chaplains are all affiliated with a militant form of Islam popular in Saudi Arabia that some call Wahhabism.

But experts on Islam in America say that the senators are way off base. (There are only 12 Muslim chaplains in all the armed forces.) No matter how a Muslim is recognized as an imam in his home mosque, only two organizations currently may nominate him as a chaplain:

... the Islamic Society of North America, a large umbrella group based in Plainfield, Ind., [and] the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council, which is based in Virginia. ...

The chaplain candidates are also vetted by the military: they must meet age, height and weight requirements, pass a physical and a background check to qualify them for a security clearance.

They must also have a bachelor's degree and at least 72 hours of graduate education in religious studies and related disciplines. For Muslims, this has proved an obstacle. There are no well-established and fully accredited graduate schools or seminaries devoted to Islamic learning in the United States. Many imams in the United States are trained overseas, and in mosques without a cleric, laypeople often lead the prayers.

Meanwhile the Army faces a shortage of Catholic chaplains, which has continued for four years now.

by Donald Sensing, 9/28/2003 09:18:56 PM. Permalink |   

Iraqi Toy Drive update
I have added a hyperlinked button that Chief Wiggles linked to on Medic Mom's site.

If you don't yet know about the Iraqi Toy Drive being run and sponsored by US Army soldiers in Iraq, click the button for details.

I am a member of the Council on Ministries of the Tennessee Conference of the UMC. I publicized the toy drive at last Thursday's meeting.

The other ministers and the laypersons were enthusiastic about sending toys and school supplies to Iraqi children, and many of us will send you a box on our own; my family's box goes out this coming week. I have also advised my congregation of the toy drive.

The decision was taken by vote at the Council meeting to determine whether the toy drive should gain official sponsorship of the Tennessee Conference. If so, our Children's Council will endorse it as an official ministry of the Conference and distribute the necessary information to every Methodist church in Middle Tennessee, asking them to support the toy drive.

In order for this to happen, I emailed Chief Wiggles asking for answers to some brief questions:

Please describe how the donations are handled once the package arrives.

Does the Chief and his fellow soldiers make sure donations are culturally appropriate before distributing them?

The Council wanted assurance that all our gifts do indeed wind up in the hands of needy kids, not used as bargaining chips in favoritism exercises among local leaders, or perhaps sometimes retained by Americans for their own use. So I asked the Chief to explain his safeguards.

Here is the answer I received from the Chief:

Thanks so much for your willingness to help and make this happen. I really appreciate your support for this cause, insuring that Iraqi kids get the toys they desperately need. Yes we will personally insure that all the toys are in good taste and are not offensive in any way.

The chaplains here have agreed to work on this project, so they will insure that each and every toy get into the hands of the Iraqi kids. This is not part of any other program and will not be used in any other way than just distributing them to the kids. I am going to be involved personally with managing the program and working with the Chaplains. Some of the school supplies will be going to other area schools up north where I have friends, who are in the process of building new schools. I actually appreciated you asking the questions you asked.

thanks
Wiggles

Which is pretty much what I expected the answers would be. I had advised the Chief that I myself am entirely satisfied with his integrity and that of your charitable operation, but I hope he would dispassionately see the need to allay concerns of persons unfamiliar with the code of honor soldiers live by. And of course, he did understand. So I hope that the Council will adopt the Toy Drive very soon.

by Donald Sensing, 9/28/2003 02:05:54 PM. Permalink |   

Nick Kristof: God on the side of American Evangelical missionaries
The famed NYT writer says,

... the wave of activity abroad by U.S. evangelicals is one of the most important — and welcome — trends in our foreign relations. I disagree strongly with most evangelical Christians, theologically and politically. But I tip my hat to them abroad. ...

... we should all celebrate the big evangelical push into Africa because the bottom line is that it will mean more orphanages, more schools and, above all, more clinics and hospitals. Particularly when AIDS is ravaging Africa, those church hospitals are lifesavers.

"In most of Africa, these are the cornerstone of the health system," said Helene Gayle, who directs AIDS work for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. "In some countries, they serve more people than the government health system." ...

Yet while it sounds strange to say so, evangelicals may be Africa's most important feminist influence today.

I am glad to say that my denomination, the United Methodist Church, has a strong presence in Africa, even founding Africa University. See also the page for Africa links of the UMC's General Board of Global Ministries.

by Donald Sensing, 9/27/2003 10:09:56 PM. Permalink |   

Condemning Haitians to poverty
That's what the proposed economic policies of Howard Dean and Dick Gephardt would do - along with the people of Uganda, Lesotho, Madagascar and other Third World countries around the world.

Who says that? Other Democrats, that's who, and they are not the other candidates. Their critique is scathing. Geitner Simmons has details, and as long as you're there, check out his post relevant to al Qaeda as an Islamist equivalent of the Sopranos.

by Donald Sensing, 9/27/2003 09:43:29 PM. Permalink |   

When it hits the fan, it splatters
Diplomat Joseph C. Wilson IV, sent by President Bush in 2002 to Niger to investigate whether Saddam Hussein was trying to obtain uranium there, has accused the White House of violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. It seems that someone fingered Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, as a covert CIA operative specializing in WMD matters. Wilson specifically blames Karl Rove.

Wilson will not confirm that his wife is CIA, of course, but his insinuations that "if" she is then serious damage has been done by identifying her leave little room for doubt of what he means.

Wilson discredited the report by British intelligence that Saddam was trying to buy uranium from Niger, but Bush included the report in January's State of the Union message anyway. Since then, the administration has had to back pedal.

The administration has since had to repudiate the claim. CIA Director George Tenet said the 16-word sentence should not have been included in Bush's Jan. 28 speech and publicly accepted responsibility for allowing it to remain in the president's text.

Wilson published an article in July alleging, however, that the White House recklessly made the charge knowing it was false. "We spend billions of dollars on intelligence," Wilson wrote. "But we end up putting something in the State of the Union address, something we got from another intelligence agency, something we cannot independently verify, in an area of Africa where the British have no on-the-ground presence."

And the identification of Wilson's wife as an intelligence officer, if such she is, is interpreted as retaliation for Wilson's denial of the uranium plot.

Wilson was the ambassador to Iraq who immediately preceded the hapless Amb. April Glaspie, who has been blamed for inavertantly giving Saddam the green light to invade Kuwait in 1990. (She didn't, but that's another story.) I happen to have been a seminar attendee in 1993 in which Wilson was a speaker one day. There were only about two dozen attendees, some of us military and others civilian government factotums from all branches of government. So we had very informal and engaging discussions with the daily speakers.

I found Wilson to be expertly knowledgeable on the Middle East and quite sober-minded. I rate his credibility extremely high, so I find the charges he has made very credible and very disturbing.

Update: Alan of Petrified Truth emails:

While Mr. Wilson is obviously experienced and knowledgeable, he may not be exactly unbiased about the Bush administration and the policy towards Iraq. NRO published an article in July that offered information about his background -- the author outright called him: "a pro-Saudi, leftist partisan with an ax to grind."

The Slate article itself is pegged around remarks made by Wilson at at "a forum about intelligence failures on Iraq held by Rep. Jay Inslee, a fervently anti-war Democrat."

And according to Wilson's NYT article, he wasn't sent to Niger "by President Bush" but rather by the unnamed officials at the CIA.

My point is not to argue with your post, but to ask your opinion, as an experienced observer of national security issues, if you consider this other information to have weight when assessing the seriousness of Wilson's charges. Is it likely that Wilson is making an unfair accusation, or more likely that the WH would "out" his wife?

I freely confess that I have no personal experience with Amb. Wilson apart from the day I spent in conversation with him 10 years ago. And whatever his personal politics are, they weren't on the agenda that day.

Is it credible that he is way off base here, and politically motivated? Sure. But the information about his wife came from somewhere, and it does not strike me at this time as unreasonable that the White House is the source. But even if it did, I don't think that Karl Rove is stupid or inexperienced enough to have been the leak. We can only wait and see. Now, having said that, I will also say that it is quite possible that Wilson is an arabist at heart, too.

Update: Bill Hobbs posts that Plame's "secret identity" probably wasn't ever really secret to begin with, and that Wilson is less balanced and sober-minded than he seemed to me to be 10 years ago, writing quoting John LeCarre in The Nation that under Bush, "America has entered one of it periods of historical madness." So now I am starting to think that the whole doth stinketh of manufactured scandal.
Update: Mike Forester points out that the "historical madness" quote is actually from John LeCarre (hebnce the correction above), which is true; Wilson cited it in his March 3, 2003 article, "Empire or Republic?"

by Donald Sensing, 9/27/2003 11:34:42 AM. Permalink |   

It's a great shot, but it's not Hurricane Isabel
Begging to Differ has a compelling photograph of Hurricane Isabel, "purportedly taken just off Virginia Beach by a Coast Guard employee."

It's a great shot, but it's not Isabel. Hurricanes, especially one so gigantic as Isabel, don't have such a clearly defined storm front. Stormy weather and winds and clouds extend hundreds of miles from the hurricane's center, while the photo shows blue sky almost all the way to the storm's front. As a hurricane approaches, the seas get steadily choppier until the water is positively tempestuous, while the water in the photo is glassy smooth.

But it's still a neat shot. And, BTW, a tanker would be headed away from a hurricane, not toward it as is the one in the shot. (hat tip: Bill Hobbs)

by Donald Sensing, 9/27/2003 11:11:58 AM. Permalink |   

Should Bush drop Cheney for 2004?
Dean Esmay says yes, and offers reasons.

by Donald Sensing, 9/27/2003 10:51:28 AM. Permalink |   

Lieberman: Wes Clark is a "convenience" Democrat
I said a week ago that the other Democratic candidates (I mentioned Kerry and Dean) would have to turn their guns on Clark, who will come under a special kind of fire he hasn't experienced before. They have no choice, I said, and since then Clark has taken a polling lead.

But it was Joe Lieberman who fired the first volley.

. . . Joe Lieberman on Friday accused presidential rival Wesley Clark of joining the Democratic Party for ``political convenience, not conviction'' as the retired general came under increased scrutiny. ...

``I was fighting (Bush's) reckless economic strategy while Wes Clark was working to forward the Republican agenda by raising money for the Republican Party,'' the Connecticut senator said.

Democratic National Committee member Anita Freedman, who supports Dick Gephardt, predicted more "incoming" for Clark. Referring to Clark’s 2001 speeches supporting the Bush administration and criticizing the Clinton administration (link may be perishable), Freedman said,

"I think they'll nab him on all that stuff, including being a Republican. The honeymoon will soon be over for Clark.''

The retired general better put on his flak jacket, because it will come pretty quickly now. It will be interesting to see whether he will give as good as he gets.

by Donald Sensing, 9/26/2003 05:23:58 PM. Permalink |   

Bremer: US has taken 19 al Qaeda members prisoner inside Iraq
American adminsitrator of Iraq Paul Bremer said today at the Pentagon that the United States holds 19 members of al Qaeda prisoner inside Iraq.

"The number is 19 to be precise," Paul Bremer told reporters. The United States has said that foreign fighters moving into Iraq to oppose U.S.-led coalition forces there have become a major "terrorist" problem.

The US also holds a total of 248 unlawful combatants, aboutn half of whom are Syrians; many are Yemenis and Iranians. He gave no informatuion about the nationalities of the al Qaeda prisoners.

I wonder why the WaPo used scare quotes for "terrorist" problem. That is what Bremer called them, but a single-word quote is odd.

by Donald Sensing, 9/26/2003 05:10:57 PM. Permalink |   

Iraqi opposition might be bigger than thought
The Financial Times, a sober-minded British publication, advises that bedrock Saddam supporters may constitute up to one-fifth of the Iraqi population. But how many people of the Sunni Triangle, where are located almost all such folks, are actively fighting American forces is another thing altogether. hat tip: AlphaPatriot

by Donald Sensing, 9/26/2003 04:54:22 PM. Permalink |   

Still more on blogging as journalism
Jeff Jarvis and Jay Rosen, head of the journalism department at NYU, and a blogging advocate, interview each other.

Bill Hobbs explains why traditional editing of blogs - that is, second-party editing before publication - is contradiction in terms.

by Donald Sensing, 9/26/2003 01:08:42 PM. Permalink |   

The economic basket case called the European Union
Why it cannot hope to challenge American supremacy

Glenn Reynolds calls attention to an essay by respected historian Paul Johnson, "Europe's Utopian Hangover." Prof. Johnson points out that the EU’s main members, France and Germany, don’t really have the economic power to match their political or military aspirations:

The EU is a French concept and is still largely run according to French ideas. And France is the archetypal EU country. If you have a regular job in France, your life is, in theory, lyrical. You work 35 hours a week. You generally get four weeks of holiday in August, plus a further three weeks throughout the year, in addition to 11 state holidays. Full medical care is provided, even in retirement. Retirement age varies, but it is now typically 55. Pensions may be two-thirds to three-quarters of a person's salary at the time of retirement. ...

But Johnson observes that the welfare society there can’t be sustained by shrinking national economies. Hence,

The EU has discovered, since the autumn of 2001, that it has little ability to determine events because its armed forces are small, underfunded, obsolete and ill-trained. Apart from making trouble at the UN, France and Germany--those two former military giants that once made the world tremble--have been mere spectators.

I would add that the European welfare states are having to confront some demographic realities:

One study by William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution in Washington, predicts that the median age in the United States in 2050 will be 35.4, only a very slight increase from what it is now. In Europe, by contrast, it is expected to rise to 52.3 from 37.7.

The likely meaning of this "stunning difference," as the British weekly The Economist called the growing demographic disparity between Europe and the United States, is that American power — economic and military — will continue to grow relative to Europe's, which will also decline in comparison with other parts of the world like China, India and Latin America.

In case you haven't read WOC's post on 12 under-rated global trends, do so. One of the 12 is Europe's looming pension crisis, where we find the following tidbit from the UK Independent:

The implications of ageing on the European social welfare model, where the current generation of working people pay the benefits of the current generation of retirees, have been so widely recognised that there is a danger of "pension fatigue" overtaking electorates. The core problem is that welfare systems that were developed at a time when there were more than four workers for every pensioner cannot function when there are fewer than two. (In the case of Spain and Italy, there will actually be fewer workers than pensioners when the present 20-somethings retire.)

But that's not all. Not only is Europe's population aging, it is growing smaller. Either Europeans need to increase their own birth rate (perhaps, as it has increased in France recently) or they will need to increase immigration. But anti-immigrant sentiment is rising there.

Governments' suggestions to raise the pension-eligibility age are strongly resisted.

"In reality, a legal retirement age of 80 is what we should aim at," Erich Streissler, an Austrian economist, wrote in a newspaper article.

Fat chance. In fact, more than half of men across Europe stop working between age 55-65.

These facts are worth remembering when discussing whether the United States should woo Old Europe into providing substantial assistance to nation building in Iraq. Plainly put, Germany and France have neither the economic nor military power to back up their diplomatic desires.

Remember that last Spring France, Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg announced that they will form a new combined armed forces with its own command structure and headquarters.

France, Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg . . . vowed to press ahead with a full-fledged defence union, brushing aside warnings that the move would entrench the European Union's bitter divisions over Iraq and could lead to the break-up of Nato.

Increasingly, we are seeing that American security interests are more and more divergent from those of France and Germany. Luxembourg and Belgium are militarily irrelevant.) Meantime, the US and UK find that their common security interests are as strong as ever, and maybe stronger than anytime since World War II.

France and Germany cannot hope to mount a credibly serious competitive challenge to the US alone, much less the US and UK together. In fact, the formation of this new combined army is almost a purely political act, not really a truly defense-oriented one (assuming that the force is ever actually formed at all).

There is no common enemy facing France and Germany that makes such an arrangement useful. In fact, France and Germany really face no military threat at all. The USSR is gone and the only other significant land power in Europe in Britain, which is certainly no military threat to the continent.

The announcement of the new combined armed force was really a propaganda ploy against the United States. Of course we have no military designs against the continent, but the point is that Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schroder want to form a power pole in opposition to the US. They want to be perceived as major players, not aligned with the US, on the world-power scene.

But knowledgeable people aren’t fooled. All four countries of the new alliance together cannot hope to match American military spending or manning; they have neither the will to do so nor, as Prof. Johnson shows, the economic capacity. Together they have exactly one aircraft carrier, very little airlift (none of it strategic quality), no heavy bombers and land forces much less resourced and poorly trained compared to the US. Technologically their militaries are at least a generation behind the United States with no hope of catching up.

The entire defense picture in Europe is very confused, though. NATO is politically stressed as never before. It entire raison d'etre, the USSR and Warsaw Pact, is gone, leaving NATO a defense alliance with no meaningful enemy. Besides, NATO almost was fractured earlier this year when France, Belgium and Germany vetoed delivery of Patriot missiles to Turkey, a NATO member that requested the assistance as a defense against potential Iraqi missile attack when the Iraq war started.

The European Union has set up a military command structure that basically duplicates NATO’s except that America, Canada and European non-EU states are not included. Last February, England and France announced they would form a combined aircraft carrier battle group to be permanently available for offensive military action worldwide. However, England’s Tory politicos accused Prime Minister Tony Blair of using the scheme as a deal maker to convince French President Jacques Chirac to back upcoming offensive action against Iraq. France opposed the Iraq war anyway and since then nothing more has been heard of the combined carrier group idea.

My analysis: The United States will continue to prop up NATO with words and money, while in deed disentangling itself from it. A review of American basing in Europe is already underway, but will become quite serious before long. Philip Carter wrote that not only will the location of US bases in Europe change, so will the nature of the bases themselves.

Moving bases from one part of Europe to another is small potatoes. Instead, I think we're going to see a transformation of the nature of these bases -- from permanent garrisons to "lily pads" from which the American military can leapfrog abroad. Instead of maintaining large units in Europe like we do today, I think we're moving towards a model where we keep all these units in the United States, with their equipment pre-positioned in places like Diego Garcia and Eastern Europe, ready to deploy with them as a package to anyplace in the world. This would substantially lower operating costs, and increase the quality of life for soldiers who would choose to live in the United States (there will still be plenty of overseas opportunities for those who want to go). Moving out of Western Europe, with its gargantuan Cold War-era bases, is one step towards this new vision.

Quite so. At the same time, look for defense ties between the UK and the US to grow even stronger, with probably a lot more combined exercises in the years ahead. I'll even predict that the Iraq war was Britain's doorway to returning to true Great Power status. (But we won't know for a few years.)

by Donald Sensing, 9/26/2003 12:54:49 PM. Permalink |   

Today's contest reminder and update
I was emailed a question of how tightly I would require essay entries in my "Make your case against Bush" invitational to adhere to the 2,000-word limit. (Read details, contest rules and what the prize is here.)

My answer is that I am not going to count the words. As I said, the quality of the essay is more important than its length. Please don't send me a book, that's what I am asking.

Important: The original posting said for you to email your essay to me in ready-to-post text format, with correct HTML coding already done. No change to that, but if you wish instead to post your essay on your own blog, that counts. Just email me the permalink so I can read it. In lieu of posting a winning essay posted elsewhere, I will link to it. If you want me to post it here as well, please send me the plaintext form so I can post it with links intact.

Reminder: the deadline for entries is midnight CDT, Monday, Sept. 29.

by Donald Sensing, 9/26/2003 11:06:28 AM. Permalink |   

An interesting way of looking at polls
John Callender posts a graphical presentation of polling data concerning President Bush's approval ratings that really gets a point home: he is indeed politically vulnerable.

He also gives a couple of grafs of the speeech he thinks Bush should have given to the UN (hint: he thinks Bush should have gone there and crawled on his belly like a cold reptle to ask forgiveness). But he adds, "Of course, there's no way Bush would say something like that."

John, no president of either party in all history would have said what you wished, under any circumstances for any reason.

by Donald Sensing, 9/25/2003 07:47:05 AM. Permalink |   

Clark needs to "overcome childhood securities"?
That's a new one to me. Evan Thomas of Newsweek seems to me to have written less a profile than a hatchet job. You know I am no promoter of Clark for president, but Thomas' piece is initially so unfriendly to him that it repelled me.

Thomas plumbs the depths of Clark’s psyche and discovers:

Possessed of a defiant need to win, which was born of overcoming childhood insecurities. ...

By "insecurities" Thomas apparently means the facts that Clark’s father died when Clark was four, that he had a speech impediment as a child, and that he was a northerner who grew up in the South. Thank you, Sigmund, I thought you had died years ago.

Thomas even manages to describe Clark’s unquestionable battle heroism in mocking terms:

Clark’s response to getting shot . . . was characteristic: he kept on charging, harder than ever. “Get that machine gun up here! Watch the flanks! Get the artillery going! Am engaging!” he had shouted as he lay bleeding on a jungle trail in Vietnam. (Clark was awarded a Silver Star, essentially for continuing to command his troops after getting badly wounded.)

Yeah, well, Mr. Thomas, I’d like to see whether you could take four bullets and even continue to man your word processor. Clark continued to command his soldiers effectively in a difficult battle. He was responsible for their lives and their mission. He could have relinquished command without a scintilla of shame. You say Clark continued on simply because he was a hard charger (no doubt working out his childhood insecurities by fighting the NVA), but I say that he was devoted to his duty that day, even at risk of his life.

Yes, soldiers earn heroism decorations for doing what Clark did, and justly so. So, Mr. Thomas, why don’t you read a little Kipling:

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap.

In fairness, Thomas’ characterizations of Clark are less unfavorable later in the piece, but I find these cheap shots to be, well, cheap. And lazy journalism.

by Donald Sensing, 9/25/2003 07:35:53 AM. Permalink |   

Jeepers, creepers!
Life imitates art?

by Donald Sensing, 9/25/2003 07:03:53 AM. Permalink |   

Blogsosphere Short Stories
Michael Williams is hosting a "Spherewide Short Story Symposium," with 26 stories by 15 different authors.

by Donald Sensing, 9/25/2003 06:36:25 AM. Permalink |   

My "Make the Case" essay contest
I posted the details of my contest yesterday, for which I will even award the winner a prize. To enter, please read all the editorial guidance. So far, I have received no entries; it’s only been a day, though.

Here is one response, though:

Reality TV could not be more absurd than Donald Sensing's ridiculous essay challenge. I wish I had the time to write the book. Instead, I pass the pen and encourage others to do so in my stead.

Translation: "I wish I could state the case against Bush on this matter, but I know there is no case, so I’ll just bluster. As usual."

OTOH, that anonymous blogger does link to a high-school student’s ripping exposé of the PoMo bunkum found in much of the curriculum today, so s/he can’t be all bad.

by Donald Sensing, 9/25/2003 06:32:54 AM. Permalink |