Link parking
Tariq Ali v. Christopher Hitchens: A Debate on the U.S. War on Iraq, the Bush-Kerry Race and the Neo-Conservative Movement

The last word on the Iraq war by Norm Geras, why There was no persuasive moral case against the Iraq war.

NYT: How to Make New Enemies, By ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI.

A grand American-European strategy would have three major prongs. The first would be a joint statement by the United States and the European Union outlining the basic principles of a formula for an Israeli-Palestinian peace, with the details left to negotiations between the parties. Its key elements should include no right of return; no automatic acceptance of the 1967 lines but equivalent territorial compensation for any changes; suburban settlements on the edges of the 1967 lines incorporated into Israel, but those more than a few miles inside the West Bank vacated to make room for the resettlement of some of the Palestinian refugees; a united Jerusalem serving as the capitals of the two states; and a demilitarized Palestinian state with some international peacekeeping presence.

Such a joint statement, by providing the Israeli and Palestinian publics a more concrete vision of the future, would help to generate support for peace, even if the respective leaders and some of the citizens initially objected.

Secondly, the European Union would agree to make a substantial financial contribution to the recovery of Iraq, and to deploy a significant military force (including French and German contingents, as has been the case in Afghanistan) to reduce the American military presence. A serious parallel effort on the Israeli-Palestinian peace process might induce some Muslim states to come in, as was explicitly suggested recently by President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan. The effect would be to transform the occupation of Iraq into a transitional international presence while greatly increasing the legitimacy of the current puppet Iraqi regime. But without progress on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, any postoccupation regime in Iraq will be both anti-United States and anti-Israel.

In addition, the United States and the European Union would approach Iran for exploratory discussions on regional security issues like Iraq, Afghanistan and nuclear proliferation. The longer-term objective would be a mutually acceptable formula that forecloses the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran but furthers its moderation through an economically beneficial normalization of relations with the West.

NYT, October 24, 2004, After Terror, a Secret Rewriting of Military Law, dealing with military tribunals.

by Donald Sensing, 9/27/2004 11:04:00 AM. Permalink |

The Sunday Sermon, 9-26
Today's Sunday Sermon is here.

by Donald Sensing, 9/26/2004 03:32:00 PM. Permalink |

The Sunday Sermons
I am grateful to everyone who emailed and commented urging me to continue to post my sermons. To that end, I have created a subdirectory here and used a standard blog template for the index page there.

Yesterday's sermon is here. I'll post future sermons weekly, planning on early Sunday mornings.

by Donald Sensing, 9/20/2004 05:07:00 PM. Permalink |

On blogging sabbatical
I am this day beginning an extended sabbatical from blogging. There are a number of reasons both professional and personal. Primarily, I have had to re-evaluate whether I want to continue to devote the time and energy that it would take to maintain the site. In my heart, the answer is no. Other uses of my time and personal resources are perforce taking priority. And they should.

I do not know how long I'll be offline, but don't envision resuming posts for at least 6-8 weeks. This site will stay online, but only new content to be posted on this extended break will be photos and text about my son's graduation from boot camp at Parris Island Oct. 22.

I am deeply grateful for the gentility of my readers and the considerate emails you have sent me over the months, both to express compliments and point out mistakes. Honestly, I remember getting exactly two flames. Even the folks who disagreed with me, sometimes strenuously, were never personal about it. You are wonderful people. I wish the best of success, prosperity and God's blessings for you all.

Update: Yes, the sermon postings will continue.

Also, Matthew White is continuing to explain Marine Corps boot camp, week by week.

by Donald Sensing, 9/20/2004 09:20:00 AM. Permalink |

Offline for the nonce
I'll have no more posts until Monday, except possibly the Sunday sermon. Thank you for your forebearance.

Update: Scott Forbes emailed to advise me that

Someone using the handle "onehandclapping" is currently vandalizing a Daily Kos message board, and an over-zealous commenter there just suggested *you* might be the attacker... and posted a link to your site.

I'm pouring water on this farfetched theory ... .

For the rercord: I have never left a comment on Kos. In fact, I don't even read Kos. I do not leave comments anonymously or pseudonymously. If the Kos commenter wants to use "onehandclapping" as his moniker, he can go right ahead; the term itself is in public domain. But it ain't me.

by Donald Sensing, 9/17/2004 02:45:00 PM. Permalink |

This is a big problem

This is the three-day predicted track for Ivan:



And this is the five-day predicted track:



Click images for high-resolution view. Note there is no difference - buit both images are dynamically linked to the NOAA site for Ivan. Neither are the two links to the same URL.

There is a potential for devastating flooding in the Appalachian mountains in eastern Tennessee, western North Carolina, West Virginia and Virginia. Mountain runoffs fill extremely quickly and in heavy rains are often highly destructive.

In the TVA system, officials began opening spillways a few days ago to lower reservoir and lake levels, preparing for the inches of rain Ivan is expected to drop here. But that lowered water has to go somewhere. Guess where? Ultimately to the Mississippi River. Lucky for New Orleans it got mostly missed by Ivan, else that flow could have added to the problem.

But that's not all. Jeanne has already slammed Puerto Rico and is predicted to head straight toward southern South Carolina, where lies Parris Island. As many of you know, that's where my son is stationed.



I note that today the PI web site has a link for the first time to the command briefing on 2004 Hurricane Preparedness. It's a PowerPoint (*.PPT) briefing, if you want to see it. Very informative, too.

by Donald Sensing, 9/16/2004 11:01:00 AM. Permalink |

And the hits just keep on coming
August was the record month for my SiteMeter stats: just under 210,000 page views and ~153,000 unique visits.

As of last night, it was exactly halfway through September and already this site had received almost 170,000 views and more than 120,000 visits.

According to Awestats server statistics, 59,754 different computers have logged into this site so far in September, vice the existing record of 77,933 for all of July. This month's visitors have made 130,844 total visits and 227,068 page views.

I am grateful for your patronage, and I thank you for reading!

by Donald Sensing, 9/16/2004 06:55:00 AM. Permalink |

I am taking to my bed
Today I stopped at the Public grocery not far from my home. As I checked out, the sweet young thang at the register asked me, "Do you want to take the senior citizen discount?"

I turned 49 eight days ago. I think I will just withdraw from the world for a few days.

I mean, I don't really look all that old!

by Donald Sensing, 9/15/2004 03:06:00 PM. Permalink |

Bad day in Iraq - dozens dead
Here are news links of the carnage in Iraq today. I have to go to a meeting (sigh) but I hope to post some thoughts about this when I get back. As bad as this news seems, it might indicate some things favorable for Iraq and its future.

by Donald Sensing, 9/14/2004 05:49:00 PM. Permalink |

Linkagery

The always-readworthy Geitner Simmons looks at some "forgeries used by the USSR as part of their disinformation campaigns over the decades."

Joe Gandelman comments on Putin's Power Grab.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein is urging gun dealers voluntarily to honor the now-expired prohibitions of the "assault weapons ban" that expired last night.

Joseph Marshall, a frequent commenter here, has had enough of Haloscan and started his own blog, wherein he has some questions for Second Amendment supporters.

The Rev. Mark D. Roberts is starting a new series on Christian Inclusiveness.

Update: I wrote this post Monday evening and saved it as a draft in Blogger. I neglected to change the date and time when I published it this morning, which is why it first appeared as a late-night Monday post. Having been gone all day, I have only now been able to correct it.

by Donald Sensing, 9/14/2004 07:25:00 AM. Permalink |

You are always wrong
That what Tennessean columnist Tim Chavez says American journalism thinks about its audience.

[B]iases are significant, as New York Times public editor Daniel Okrent wrote in criticizing the liberalism of his newspaper in covering social issues.

Okrent acknowledged that in reporting, Times' staffers and editors display their pro-positions on gay marriage, abortion and gun control and their negative feelings toward devout believers. Times' staffers consider their positions the national norm. ...

Many print journalists do not want to understand. From most but not all of their responses, my industry is one of the few businesses in which the customer is always wrong. Readers supposedly don't understand the mystical ways of journalism. Readers supposedly do not understand the difference between news and editorial pages.

Bunk. These news consumers are smarter than they are given credit for. And journalists give themselves too much credit. Anyone can walk off the street and be a journalist, as USA Today proved when it made Michael Moore a member of the press corps at the Republican National Convention. Yet, as a column by the editor for the Knoxville News-Sentinel showed, it's only conservatives having trouble being represented in newsrooms. The editor had to advertise for a reader to be his paper's new local political columnist.

In my response to Jonathan Klein's "bloggers in pajamas" dismissal of the medium, I posted part of a piece I posted in Feb. 2003:

There is no "accountability" of journalists in any meaningful sense. There is no equivalent of a bar exam for journalists. There is no licensing procedure for journalists. There is no minimum education level required, nor any particular special kind of training at all. Fill out an employment application, get hired at minimum wage or better, and presto, you're a journalist. Or just take a pad and pencil, call some folks on the phone and do some interviews, and you're a journalist, too. Think not? Read on.

Glenn Reynolds writes of the difference between traditional journalism and blogging:

For journalists of [Dan Rather's] generation, admitting an error means admitting that you've violated people's trust. For bloggers, admitting an error means you've missed something, and now you're going to set it right.

What people in the legacy media need to ask themselves is, which approach is more likely to retain credibility over time? I think I know the answer. I think Dan Rather does, too.

I don't foresee blogs significantly displacing mainline media if for no other reason that newspaper and magazines and broadcasts are a niche all their own that people want filled. It's only blogging's extremely low financial overhead that makes this medium possible at all. (Bill Quick, however, thinks that "liberal media" are in terminal condition.)

Whether Memogate will have a lasting effect on MSM remains to be seen. I could argue either way right now. But their managers, editors and stockholders need to absorb the fact that Big Media are no longer privileged in trustworthiness because they are Big Media. Face value acceptance of news stories is going to lessen among news customers; it had started before Memogate and is amplified by it.

I am wondering, too, whether this state of affairs doesn't result from MSM's salad days of the 1960s. "Question authority" was a pop slogan then that many MSM came to embody when considering the federal government's claims about the Vietnam war (and with good reason). How ironic that reporters like Dan Rather, who reported from Vietnam, and other Big Media are finding that they are the Authority that is persistently Questioned.

by Donald Sensing, 9/13/2004 04:27:00 PM. Permalink |

Amen to this!
I agree that we should not have to put up with this.

by Donald Sensing, 9/13/2004 07:36:00 AM. Permalink |

Game absolutely over, period
Memogate can't survive this one-two punch

I long ago concluded the Memogate documents were forgeries. I was not the first to do so by any means, but I based my conclusion on the docs' style and format, rather than a technical analysis of the typeface and imprinting technology, which I am not qualified to evaluate.

But others are. Here are two long and very technical (but quite readable) essays from extremely qualified authors. The first, "The IBM Selectric Composer" (which I also wrote about), includes an interview with Gerry Kaplan, an authority on the machine. The decisive part of the analysis was the centering of the letterhead text.

This point was so important to Gerry that he went out of his way to mention it to me again later in the day: centering type is hard on the Selectric Composer. Two of the memos, May 4 and August 1, 1972, feature a three-line centered head. Each of those lines of type had to be centered by measuring it carefully, doing some math, then advancing the carrier to just the right point on the page. The margin for error would be pretty wide because type can be off by a few points in either direction and still look pretty well centered. It wouldn't be objectionable unless you went looking for it. So it wasn't necessary for Lt. Col. Killian — or his typist — to be millimeter-precise.

And yet … he was. ...

These letterheads weren't centered to within a couple of points of each other. They were centered exactly the same. Three months apart.

Gerry also wrote,

Something that I think would be a good test for your website may be to reproduce the centered heading using MS Word and Times New Roman. If you can produce centered text that matches identically to the letterhead, it is, in my opinion, a true hoax. The reason is, because even if they were able to center text with a typesetting machine such as the composer, a PC (and good word processor), will center the text even more precisely, not at the "point" level, but rather on the twip level (1/1440th of an inch or 1/20th of a point).

And Word-produced text does in fact match; see the proof at the site.

Next, read Joseph M. Newcomer's definitive analysis of the documents CBS presented. Newcomer explains his credentials thus:

I am one of the pioneers of electronic typesetting. I was doing work with computer typesetting technology in 1972 (it actually started in late 1969), and I personally created one of the earliest typesetting programs for what later became laser printers, but in 1970 when this work was first done, lasers were not part of the electronic printer technology (my way of expressing this is “I was working with laser printers before they had lasers”, which is only a mild stretch of the truth). We published a paper about our work (graphics, printer hardware, printer software, and typesetting) in one of the important professional journals of the time (D.R. Reddy, W. Broadley, L.D. Erman, R. Johnsson, J. Newcomer, G. Robertson, and J. Wright, "XCRIBL: A Hardcopy Scan Line Graphics System for Document Generation," Information Processing Letters (1972, pp.246-251)). I have been involved in many aspects of computer typography, including computer music typesetting (1987-1990). I have personally created computer fonts, and helped create programs that created computer fonts. At one time in my life, I was a certified Adobe PostScript developer, and could make laser printers practically stand up and tap dance. I have written about Microsoft Windows font technology in a book I co-authored, and taught courses in it. I therefore assert that I am a qualified expert in computer typography.

Convinces me. His analysis is too intricate for a non-techie like me to excerpt sensibly, but not to complex for me to fail to comprehend. That's a real achievement in technical writing. Suffice to repeat his conclusion:

It is therefore my expert opinion that these documents are modern forgeries.

Criticisms by others and myself of matters of style and format are compelling by themselves, but these two essays alone are convincing. Now even the Boston Globe is abandoning ship. Like I said, this game is absolutely over, period.

This is my last post regarding the authenticity of the CBS memos, unless something truly new and significant turns up. I've received lots of email about how the publication governing flight physicals was in the Air Force 160-series, not the 35 series. But also several Air Force veterans advised me that the USAF changed its publication numbering system dramatically around 1990. I also remmeber seeing in the last several days a PDF of a document released by Bush that references a flight physical and AFM 35-13, but not I can't find it. If you know which I mean, please leave a link in the comments.

by Donald Sensing, 9/13/2004 07:28:00 AM. Permalink |

Heavy fighting today in Iraq
Insurgents fired more than a dozen rockets and mortar shells into the Green Zone In Baghdad today, the heaviest barrage in months..

Iraq's interim Interior Minister Falah al-Naqib told reporters that much of Sunday's violence was related to a series of raids by Iraqi security forces trying to capture 21 fugitives. Al-Naqib said 16 were captured -- and that all of them were Iraqi Sunnis.

Fighting broke out in several locations in Iraq, in which a Bradley Fighting Vehicle was destroyed by RPG fire, according to reports. None of the Bradley's soldier were killed, but they barely escaped before some Iraqis began celebrating near its ruin

US attack helicopters fired into the immediate area, killing at least a dozen Iraqis (reports don't agree), including a Palestinian reporting for Al-Arabiyah. He was reportedly killed while taping.

Earlier on Sunday, rockets fired by insurgents hit several houses in the Doura neighborhood of southern Baghdad. One unidentified resident says five people were killed -- including three of his relatives -- when rockets crashed into his home.

"Two missiles landed here at 1 o'clock [a.m.]," the witness said. "The first made a hole in the roof from which the second missile entered and killed them. What is our guilt? We are neither terrorists nor Americans. They are innocent people. What is their guilt? We are living in a battle zone. What is our guilt?"

That's why we call them terrorists.

The Moscow Times reports,

In an Internet statement that could not be immediately verified, the group led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi boasted it held the initiative in the Iraqi insurgency and possessed the "capability to surprise the enemy and hit its strategic installations at the right time and place."

Knowing that Zarqawi needs to real reason to fight, I still wonder whether the enemy is trying to make Iraq seems as "quagmirish" as possible between now and November, as John Kerry has promised to withdraw American troops from Iraq within six months of taking office. (Yes, I know he has said other time frames as well, but that was one of them.)

by Donald Sensing, 9/12/2004 05:59:00 PM. Permalink |

Polish troops killed in Iraq
We pay too little attention to the countries, other than Britain, that have sent troops to serve in Iraq. Those soldiers are at risk, too. Today three Polish soldiers were killed in action near Hillah.

I thank the Polish people for standing by us, and sorrow in these losses also.

by Donald Sensing, 9/12/2004 05:49:00 PM. Permalink |

Linkagery

J. Jarrell at Shape of Days explains why Memogate makes him feel old. Yeah, me too.

Dust in the Light reveals that yesterday, Sen. Kerry promised a pre-emptive anti-terrorist policy. Sort of.

Who are you going to believe, Dan Rather or your lying eyes? Also here.

by Donald Sensing, 9/12/2004 02:14:00 PM. Permalink |

Records! Show me the records!
Bill Hobbs wants to know whether the Texas Air Guard has records showing whether it posssessed specialized typewriters in 1972 of the kind CBS News continues to insist could have produced the infamous memos.

Bill, I'd be surprised if TANG or any other military unit could produce records on what kind of office equipment it posssessed in 2002, much less 1972. They just aren't the kind of records that would be kept, certainly not for 32 years.

Besides, all military files that are no longer active are either destroyed or handed over to the National Archives after (IIRC) two years. And you know what happens to them then!



by Donald Sensing, 9/12/2004 01:51:00 PM. Permalink |

North Korea now nuclear armed?
Stones Cry Out reports that "A large blast and mushroom cloud is reported in North Korea." A number of links are provided, and the blast (if authentic) is said to have occurred last Thursday.

Update: Colin Powell says the blast was not atomic, but he did not say what might have caused it. (BTW, it's easy to tell whether it was atomic with spy satellites, but not so easy to determine what a non-nuclear cause was.)

by Donald Sensing, 9/12/2004 07:46:00 AM. Permalink |

9/11's crucial questions
The Sunday Sermon

John 18:28-40

28 Then they took Jesus from Caiaphas to Pilate’s headquarters. It was early in the morning. They themselves did not enter the headquarters, so as to avoid ritual defilement and to be able to eat the Passover.

37Pilate asked him, "So you are a king?" Jesus answered, "You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice." 38Pilate asked him, "What is truth?"

There is a scene in Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark when Professor Jones is delivering a classroom lecture. He tells the students, "Archaeology is the search for facts, not truth. If it's truth you're interested in, Professor Smith's philosophy class is down the hall."

Truth and fact are not the same thing. We need only observe the presidential race to discern that. John Kerry and allies say that the results of America's war against Iraq is mostly a failure while George Bush and allies say they are mostly success. Both sides have the same facts, but both arrive at a different "truth."

People rarely fight over facts. What they argue about is what the facts mean, what is the Truth the facts indicate.

Truth is important and so is truth's relationship to facts. Every one of us operates every day on what is known as the "correspondence theory" of truth. For example, when doctors make diagnoses, they correspond symptoms and test results to disorders, ailments or diseases. So do mechanics when determining what makes the pinging noise under the hood of your car. In either case the decision about health or auto repairs relies on a necessary correspondence between certain facts and certain conclusions that are true, or at least most likely true.

But corresponding facts to truths means that some conclusions must be false. Falsehoods don't correspond to facts. But two other claims about what is truth alive and well in Western civilization today say there is no such thing as falsehood. One is relativism, the notion that something can be "true for you" and another thing "true for me." We can each have our own personal Truth regardless of facts.

But relativism is tolerable only for trivial matters. You may love cauliflower and I despise it. "Cauliflower tastes good," is true for you and its opposite, ""Cauliflower tastes bad," is true for me. And we're both right. But it doesn't matter.

However, when we think that the stakes of truth are significant, we all drop all pretense of relativism. If one doctor tells Horace he has heart disease and another says he doesn't, Horace doesn't conclude they are both right.

Some people think that the truth of a statement is related to whether it "works." So a religion may be true for Horace if he sees some benefit to it, but false for Edna if she sees none. The danger of thinking truth being whatever works is that the perceived benefit might really be bad. "Cigarettes are good" works in the sense that many smokers report a soothing or relaxing sensation when they smoke, but the fact remains that cigarettes are toxic.

Joseph Goebbels was Hitler's propaganda chief. True statements for him were those that worked to boost the Nazi cause. Surely nothing more need be said about that understanding of truth.

Christian faith and practice relies on correspondence, not relativism or utility. On the first Easter morning, the women went to the tomb and observed certain facts: the stone was rolled away, the tomb was empty, they saw Jesus alive. So they drew the obvious conclusion, "He is risen!"

Yet more than relating facts to truth is necessary. As James pointed out, even the demons know that Jesus rose from the dead, yet demons they remained. John Wesley admonished that we may affirm the truth of one, twenty or a hundred creeds and yet have no saving faith at all.

Back to Hollywood. Near the end of Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Jones and his father enter a desert cavern where reposes the Holy Grail, the cup from which Jesus drank at the last supper. They are captured there by the bad guy, a killer named Donovan, who is convinced that drinking from the cup imparts immortality in this life. The catch of getting the cup is that there are three lethal traps to pass through to reach it. Only Indiana and his father know the clues that, if properly interpreted, tell how to pass the traps.

But Indiana refuses to go after the grail. So Donovan shoots his father, who falls to the floor, bleeding profusely. "The healing power of the grail is the only thing that can save him now," Donovan growls. "It's time you asked yourself what you believe."

How do we discern what we believe, whether in religion or politics or other endeavors? What we believe is crucial. Belief, like truth, must correspond to fact. Belief is more important for our mental and spiritual health than truth. What we know to be true is what we know is, but what we believe impels what we do. All belief is founded not only on facts, but also on trust. And we seek not simply to know what is true, but what we can trust.

But there is such a thing as a moment of truth, when we have to confront what we trust and are compelled to decide how deeply we hold our beliefs.

Standing before Jesus, Pilate said to him, "Do you not know that I have power to release you, and power to crucify you?" Such a bald statement of power would certainly have been a moment of truth for me. Jesus answered him, "You would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above." It was not a diplomatic statement but a naked challenge to Pilate's power and authority. No one, Christian or not, can doubt that Jesus believed completely what he had claimed about himself and trusted that God would deliver.

Moments of truth that force us to confront what we believe often come from encounters with evil. These encounters are decisive because they demand decision without delay. Consider, though, that such immediacy is also found in matters of the heart, matters of love, where we also often think delay or indecision are unacceptable. In a young man or woman's life there so often is a time when he or she realizes that the beloved one must be claimed as one's own, else the beloved will be gone, perhaps forever. It is a crisis moment of hope, faith, fear and desire.

It is also a moment of risk, for to bare one's soul is to go spiritually naked. Whether confronting evil or love, the crisis moment forces the issue: What do we believe? Whom do we trust? What shall we do? What shall we risk? What do we fear? What do we love?

These are questions I have pondered in the years since three airliners were flown into buildings in two cities and another crashed to earth in Pennsylvania. More than three thousand people died, so many more injured, thousands also left in mourning.

We are not generic, lumpen people. We are American people who faced a crisis moment of evil then, and continue to be gnawed by it now as combat continues in Afghanistan and Iraq.

What do we believe, we Americans? Do we really believe that the truth is self evident that all persons are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, and that governments are properly instituted to secure these rights, as our Declaration of Independence says? Do we say that this declaration corresponds to facts about the nature of God and God's purposes in creation, or shall we say that divinely-commanded freedom is true for us, but divinely-sanctioned tyranny is true for others? Shall we say that democracy works for us, but dictatorship works for others?

Do we trust that this American experiment will endure and indeed expand? Are we agreed not to vanish into the black hole of history as a dark cloak of theocratic fascism spreads, claiming Allah's authority to enslave women and children, oppress men and murder all who will not submit?

Only when we can answer these questions with significant unity can we answer what shall we do and what shall we risk. We already know what we fear: a dirty bomb, a biological attack, increasing terrorist chaos across the world, years of combat and dead soldiers in far countries. But I would submit that these fears, as serious as they are, should not be our greatest fears as Americans.

Our greatest fear should be that as a people we will decide that this crisis of decision is no crisis at all. Franklin Roosevelt said there is nothing to fear but fear itself, but I say that today there is nothing to fear but thinking this crisis does not matter, that it will pass and the storm will be still on its own. Islamist terrorists have said they want kill at least four million Americans, but more than that they want to destroy the American idea - that a just ordering of both religious and political life requires the people to be sovereign. Our idea of religious freedom is to think and let think and to favor no religion over another in law. But our enemies have made it clear that all must submit to Allah as they define Allah. Osama bin Laden has stated explicitly and publicly that he envisions only two possible futures for the United States: we either become a fully Islamic country ruled solely by Islamic law, or we die.

Yet even apathy to the American idea is not my own greatest fear. Revelation chapter two records the words of Christ as revealed to John:

1 “To the angel of the church in Ephesus write: . . . 2 I know your deeds, your hard work and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate the wicked, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false. 3 You have persevered and have endured hardships for my name, and have not grown weary. 4 Yet I hold this against you: You have forsaken your first love.” (Rev 2:1a-4)

Even in the continuing crisis, I wonder sometimes whether we American Christians will treat our religion as a mere commodity, to be swapped in or out of our lives according to what suits us at the time. Have we adopted religious relativism, where niceness and tolerance is prized more than truth and faithfulness? Could it be that Christ holds something against us, in spite of our good works, because we have forgotten that he is meant to be our first love?

John 21 records Jesus and his disciples one morning not long before Jesus died.

15 When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Feed my lambs." 16 A second time he said to him, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love you." He said to him, "Tend my sheep." 17 He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love me?" Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, "Do you love me?" And he said to him, "Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you." Jesus said to him, "Feed my sheep. 18 Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were young, you girded yourself and walked where you would; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish to go." 19 ... And after this he said to him, "Follow me."

My greatest fear is that we will not feed or tend Christ's sheep, and that when he leads we will not follow. I think that is why Jesus asked Peter three times whether he loved him. He was setting Peter up for a crisis moment of love when Peter would have to confront what he believed about Jesus and his love for him.

Love requires commitment. The Bible is full of stories of people who play hide and seek with God’s calling. Their faith falters, their obedience is short-lived, their worship wanes, and their commitment must be tested and reestablished again and again. The stories of Elijah withdrawing to a lonely cave, Jeremiah refusing to preach, Jonah sailing away to Tarshish, and Peter worshiping then denying Jesus are stories of men who resisted God’s claim upon them. Intimacy with God and with each other costs; it costs us our time and our energies. A willingness to be present, to remain, to be accountable, to see things through, to come out from hiding are necessary to serve God.

Let us pray both as citizens of America and of the Kingdom of God that we will hold fast to what is true and good. May we have courage, resolution, commitment and wisdom in our steps as a nation, but especially as ones to whom Christ has said, "Follow me."

by Donald Sensing, 9/12/2004 07:39:00 AM. Permalink |

Prayer for Deployed Troops
Almighty God,
We ask your blessing upon our deployed troops,
those on land, at sea and in the air
in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world.
Hold our Marines, Sailors, Soldiers, Airmen and Coast Guardsmen in the palm of your hand as they enter Harm's Way.
Protect them as they protect us
in defense of liberty and the increase of freedom.
Bless them and their families for the sacrifices and selfless acts they perform.
Remind us all that courage is not the absence of fear,
but the strength to do the right thing in the face of fear.
Be with us also here at home as we pray for their safe return
and peace in our time. Amen.

Chaplain (CAPT) Jane Vieira, USN, via email from Col. Brooks Hodges, ALARNG, in Kabul

by Donald Sensing, 9/12/2004 06:27:00 AM. Permalink |

A superb 9/11 retrospective
The exceptional blog Winds of Change run by my good friend Joe Katzman published an extraordinary 9/11 retrospective today. Joe emailed,

These are the pieces that have really impressed me over the last 3 years, in terms of the way they addressed the events of 9/11 and the decisions that sprang from it. Some are blog articles. Some inclusions are mainstream media articles or sites.

* Fighting Back
* Heroes & Remembrances
* The Twin Towers' Rise... and Fall
* Humour
* Voices from the Aether
* Concluding Thoughts

Very much worth the time, truly. Thank you, Joe.

by Donald Sensing, 9/11/2004 09:40:00 PM. Permalink |

This is clever
With apologies to Jeff Foxworthy, you might be a blogger (in your pajamas?) if ... aw, go read. Really.

by Donald Sensing, 9/11/2004 02:38:00 PM. Permalink |

"Winning the peace"
Glenn Reynolds said today that this "Letter from America" by Alistair Cooke was a must-read. It is, but what struck me was how Cooke reminded his audience of the Marshall Plan that was formulated by Gen. George C. Marshall and voted into being by the Congress. It granted $11.8 billion (Cooke says $13B) to rebuild Europe's economies. As Cooke said, the economies of Europe were shattered, not merely wounded, by the war. Europe was seriously at risk of descending into chaos.

Photo: Secretary of State George C. Marshall at Harvard, where he first proposed the Marshall Plan

There is no doubt that the Marshall Plan is what won the peace for Europe. It is no exaggeration at all to say that Western Europe's prosperity, stability and freedom are products in large of the Plan.

But here's the kicker: Franklin Roosevelt never envisioned such a plan, and the Truman administration, with Marshall as its proponent, did not propose the Plan until 1947, two years after the war ended.

by Donald Sensing, 9/11/2004 02:08:00 PM. Permalink |

Always remember
In Memoriam:



I don't have a long post about 9/11 today. I am preaching tomorrow on "9/11's Crisis Questions." Here's an excerpt:

There is such a thing as a moment of truth, when we are compelled to decide what we really do we really do believe.

Standing before Jesus, Pilate said to him, "Do you not know that I have power to release you, and power to crucify you?" Such a bald statement of power would certainly have been a moment of truth for me. Jesus answered him, "You would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above." It was not a diplomatic statement but a naked challenge to Pilate's power and authority.

Moments of truth that force us to confront what we believe often come from encounters with evil. These encounters are decisive because they demand decision at the moment.

The crisis moment forces the issue: What do we believe? Whom do we trust? What shall we do? What shall we risk? What do we fear? What do we love?

That is the lesson I have pondered since three airliners were flown into buildings in two cities and another crashed to earth in Pennsylvania. More than three thousand people died, so many more injured, thousands more left in mourning.

We are not generic, lumpen people. We are American people who faced a crisis moment of evil then, and continue to be gnawed by it now as combat continues in Afghanistan and Iraq.

What do we believe, we Americans? Do we really believe that the truth is self evident that all persons are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, and that governments are properly instituted to secure these rights, as our Declaration of Independence says? Do we say that this declaration corresponds to facts about the nature of God and God's purposes in creation, or shall we say the divinely-commanded freedom is true for us, but divinely-sanctioned tyranny is true for others?

Do we trust that this American experiment will endure and indeed expand? Do we have faith that we will not go gently into that good night as a dark cloak of theocratic fascism spreads that claims the name of Allah to enslave women and children, oppress men and murder all who will not submit?

Only when we can answer these questions can we answer what shall we do and what shall we risk.

Read the rest tomorrow, if you wish.

Update: Blogs of War has an excellent 9/11 post that is link rich. Worth the time to go there.

Here is a link to an enduring slideshow memorial of the day set to Enya's "Only Time." It still chokes me up. High-speed access required; it's seven MB.

by Donald Sensing, 9/11/2004 01:17:00 PM. Permalink |

Mailbag cornucopia
I got a lot of email today - goes with the turf of the intense interest in the CBS story and the fact that today's hit count was one of the highest I have ever had, almost 24,500 page views as I write this, 19,400-plus "uniques." (Thanks to everyone!)

So here is email I think you'll find interesting. Sorry I can't print all I've received, but I did read it all.

I appreciate your post, particularly the pdf file so we can actually see the source documents. I'm currently in the Air Force, but joined in 1985. Even though I joined well after 1972, a few things in the Annual Physical Examination memo jumped out at me and you may want to check them out as well:

1. I'm not familiar with units using periods in their acronyms. I would have expected to see FIS not F.I.S.

2. NLT is used in current AF correspondence. I would question why it is both spelled out ("not later than") and the acronym included. Current usage would either use "not later than" or "NLT", not both.

3. I agree with your statement that Air Force documents prior to the 1990s placed signature blocks on the left (at least it was that way in 1985).
- Also, I would have expected to see the rank and designation of the Texas Air National Guard on the same line as the name as follows. I don't know how the Texas Guard designated itself in 1972, so I will use "USAF" instead (but see what other authentic guard documents of the time used, it should be inserted where I have placed "USAF"):

JERRY B. KILLIAN, Lt Col, USAF
Commander

4. Not that I have any insight to this, but a P.O. Box on Air Force letterhead just seems out of place. I'd check the number out.

Note: During the 1990s, the USAF made major changes to the structure of their regulations. You cannot rely on current regulations to determine what was valid in 1972.

Dave Calder

I’ve been doing some deep digging through my personal military records. I retired in 1995 after 28 years and I kept almost every piece of paper with my name on it (including every monthly pay statement since 1970, my wife despairs!)

Anyway, I can’t find any reference to an AFR or AFM 35-13. I realize that’s not conclusive, but I did remember during my walk down memory lane that all during the late 60’s and 70’s all the flight medical regulations were in the 160 /161 series.

I also recall that the entire “35” series of manuals and regs were personnel related, for instance AFR 35-10 was the dreaded bible for all things pertaining to uniforms. I suspect that the “AFM 35-13” referred to in your post referred to who was authorized (i.e. qualified) to wear the Aircrew Wings, and not, as suggested a medical reference.

Jim Hogue, CMSgt, USAF ret
Plano, Texas

And along those same lines --

I went rooting around my cellar and came up with a copy of AFR 60-1 "Flight
Management" dated 15 August 1978. Paragraph 5-12 "Physical Examinations" cites AFR 160-43 as the authority for conducting the physical, but concludes with the sentence;

See AFR 35-13 for further action to be taken on personnel who fail to
complete the required flight physical examination when due.

Typo -- "AFM" instead of "AFR"? Also, this only shows that AFR 35-13 existed as of August 1978.

John Downey
USAF, Dec 71 - Jan 85, EWO AC-130H, Navigator KC-135, EWO RC-135M/V/W

And to shed more light (or muddy the waters):

I'm new to this whole Blog situation, but loving every minute of it. As far as an examination of Air Force regulations, I am an AF Reservist who previous was on active duty and initially came into ROTC in 1979. I'll caution you that over the years, the AF reg's changed every few years and it would take some time to ferret out what reg's did in various periods of AF history.

So, while I'm not defending these memo's which i completely believe are fake, but just saying that you can't rely on the current numbering or naming conventions as a complete guide.

Ed "Otto" Pernotto

And even the Bible sheds light on this controversy!

I noticed the big plans among the MSM to turn this into Bush AWOL Week. When the scandal over the documents that Rather used blew up today I couldn't help thinking of:

Psalm 7
15 He who digs a hole and scoops it out
falls into the pit he has made.
16 The trouble he causes recoils on himself;
his violence comes down on his own head.

(The Rev.) Michael Nee

Are these docs already old news?

OK, in blog time we've already gone on a year over
the forgeries. It's history.

What about the future? Weren't these keystone kops
trying to poison the U.S. elections with libelous
documents? Isn't that a federal felony? Shouldn't
someone go to jail for this?

Trying to stay ahead of the game here,

Nick Osborn

I think Volokh has something to say about that.

Don't know much about type face but I do know the formating was all wrong on the Bush documents. Was a JAG in Air Force from '71 - '78 on active duty and until '96 in the reserves. The "MEMORANDUM FOR" format in the Bush documents was not in vougue until the '90's.

Edward T. Farry, Jr.
FARRY and RECTOR, L.L.P.
Colorado Springs, Colorado

And another really technical point:

One thing curious to me is this: how long has the acronym "CYA" been in public use? Has it been in use since 1973? How would be determine it's first use?

My first memory of the term comes from the mid-80's. I remember reading about Apple Computer's management organization. Of their informal guidelines was this: "Don't cover your [rear]; solve the problem!"

But were Americans using the term back in 1973? I don't know, and I'm not sure how to find out.

---Tom Nally, New Orleans

And provenance is a problem:

So, we're supposed to believe that some source - other than the government or the family - has maintained these 4 and only these 4 documents for over 30 years that just happen to touch on the current controversey. What else does the source have and why does he have it? Does he have files on all the members of the squadron, or just on Bush. Why does he have both official and personal files?

And why does he have photocopies of the personal memos instead of originals? I can understand why there would be a copy of the orders memo (and I'll even grant photocopy instead of carbon paper), and I can understand that there MIGHT be a copy instead of the original MFR - but, if the personal memos came from Killian's personal files, why aren't they originals? The purported "CYA" memo, especially, is not the kind of memo that you want lots of copies floating around the unit.

The "CYA" memo, by the way, is the punchline and other memos are the setup.

--mile

From a guy who slugged through those years:

Donald; Can someone explain how a state of the art, new technology, flippin’, blippin’ typewriter could be found in an ANG office in Texas in 1965-75? I worked as a DAC from 68-92, then as a civilian Marine from 92-02. We were lucky, LUCKY to have something that worked to type on, much less a new or near new Selectric. Heck, we only got our first computers (and darned few) by 1988. Most offices were lucky to have clay tablets! (well, I exaggerate). I think the newest Selectrics in our main offices at Ft. Eustis, VA in 1975 were 5 years old. But we were TRADOC.

CBS jumped the very big shark on this one, and I pray for the good of American journalism they catch big time consequences.

Fingers crossed,

Frank

Another MS Word comparison that has details I have not seen before:

See my analysis of the first page in this set of documents. The executive version: It's Microsoft Word.

There are images here that show that the type is not only spaced between words, but between letters. Also, there’s an image that shows a modern Word version overlaid on the alleged 1972 document.
.. Rob Hruska

Rob says in the post, though, that centering text, as in the memos' letterheads, on a typewriter is very difficult and time consuming and not worth the effort for these memos.

I demur. I typed all my papers in high school and college on typewriters, first a manual Royal and then a German-made electic Olympia. Once the margins are set, it's not hard at all once you learn. All you need to do is know how to count and divide by two. But it only works on uniform spacing, not proportional spacing or kerning.

Even so, a letterhead would be a standard block of centered text that a secretary would have memorized the counts to do. So I disagree with Rob on that point but find the rest of his post pretty interesting.

by Donald Sensing, 9/10/2004 09:33:00 PM. Permalink |

$10,000 reward to reproduce CBS documents
Talk about putting your money where your mouth is! John Gaddis is offering $10,000 to "anyone who can reasonably recreate the CBS memos on equipment available in early 1972." Other folks have kicked in another $500, making the total award $10,500.

There seems to be no rules nor criteria for judging, though. However, two people have tried but failed to claim it, and John explains why.

In other news, a professor of computer science at Rice University with 30 years experience in the field explains why not even the IBM Composer could have produced the memos. It has to do with the "computational complexity" required to produce text with the features of the memos. Long but easy to read.

by Donald Sensing, 9/10/2004 09:21:00 PM. Permalink |

Those darn bloggers!
Former CBS executive Jonathan Klein talking to Tony Snow just now: "Bloggers have no checks and balances." They are "sitting in their living room in their pajamas."

Hence we can't be trusted - you know, like the mainstream media can <cough>Jayson Blair</cough>.

Sigh.

I covered all this in gory detail way back in February of last year. There are at least three pertinent facts here:

Bloggers are fact checked incessantly by other bloggers and most blogs have a comment feature where a lot of fact checking goes on. And it's done in realtime, unlike any MSM. Reporters for MSM generally have one editor. I have, today alone, 17,000-plus, every one of which is empowered to tell me I screwed something up. In realtime. On my site. Try that with 60 Minutes.

Journalism is a job, not a profession. In fact, I have extensive formal journalism training, and I can tell you that there is no particular skill to it that is particularly difficult or unobtainable by average people.

There is no "accountability" of journalists in any meaningful sense. There is no equivalent of a bar exam for journalists. There is no licensing procedure for journalists. There is no minimum education level required, nor any particular special kind of training at all. Fill out an employment application, get hired at minimum wage or better, and presto, you're a journalist. Or just take a pad and pencil, call some folks on the phone and do some interviews, and you're a journalist, too. Think not? Read on.

by Donald Sensing, 9/10/2004 07:08:00 PM. Permalink |

Rather gets his back up
Dan Rather is strenuously defending the 60 Minutes documents as I type.

Update: Belmont Club has an excellent analysis of CBS's tactics, where the dispute seems to be headed now, and words of caution for CBS critics.

by Donald Sensing, 9/10/2004 05:36:00 PM. Permalink |

IBM introduced proportional-spacing typewriter in 1966
But there is a really huge catch

As I and many others have written (I'm not even going to bother with a link), one of the most important indicators that the memos showed by CBS News are forgeries is the presence of proportional spacing in their text.

One expert after another (again so many that I won't bother to link) has said that IBM Selectric typewriters used in 1972-1973, the purported dates of the memos, could not do proportional spacing, only mono spacing.

But there was in fact a Selectric-derived machine made by IBM that did do proportional spacing. It was called the IBM Composer and it was introduced in 1966, according to IBMComposer.org.

The IBM "Selectric" Composer was the first desktop typesetting machine. It was based on the successful "Selectric" technology. In case you're not familiar with that, the IBM Selectric typewriter is the one that has a small ball with all the letters imprinted on it.

The basic task of the IBM Composer was to produce justified camera ready copy using proportional fonts. It has the capability of using a variety of font sizes and styles.

The first IBM Composer was the IBM "Selectric" Composer announced in 1966. It was a hybrid "Selectric" typewriter that was modified to have proportional spaced fonts.

So far, so good for those advocating the CSB documents are genuine, right? Is CBS redeemed? Well, I think not:

It is 100% mechanical and has no digital electronics. Since it has no memory, the user was required to type everything twice. [boldface added]

That right there stops the whole defense of the documents because there is no way that such a machine would be used to type pedantic Air Force office documents that were intended only for filing. I know that the military has a reputation for needless bureaucratic makework, but really, that's ridiculous beyond the pale.

But the site explains more:

While typing the text the first time, the machine would measure the length of the line and count the number of spaces. When the user finished typing a line of text, they would record special measurements into the right margin of the paper. Once the entire column of text was typed and measured, it would then be retyped, however before typing each line, the operator would set the special justification dial (on the right side) to the proper settings, then type the line. The machine would automatically insert the appropriate amount of space between words so that all of the text would be justified.

Again, all that work for a Memo for Record? Only the tinfoil hat brigade can believe that.

But wait! There's more! The site has color pictures that are very informative - especially the captions, such as this one:

When you're ready to retype the document, you set this dial to the appropriate color/number combination before typing each line. The Composer will automatically insert the right amount of space between words to make the line lengths equal on all lines. [boldface added]

What this means is that the Composer's proportional spacing feature could apparently adjust only the width of the space between words in a line to make the line lengths equal down the column or page. That's what proportional spacing does - adjust the distance between the center of the last letter of a word and the center of the first letter of the next word. The Composer did this to produce full-justified text.

But both of the Killian memos CBS displayed are "ragged right," meaning that the text's left margin is justified, but the right is not. That indicates, I would think, that if the memos were typed on a Composer, the typist didn't use the proportional spacing feature.

Yet the documents do display proportional spacing, which MS Word on PCs produces whether you set it for full justification or not. But on the Composer, it seems a typist can't use pro. spacing without also producing fully justified text. Remember, this machine has no onboard memory, it operated only mechanically. It was either pro. spacing and justifying or it wasn't.

In fact, it's not clear from the documentation that the machine could be used as a plain typewriter at all, although I'd be pretty surprised if it couldn't.

But the CBS memos also displayed kerning, which does for individual letters what pro. spacing does for words, adjust the distance between letters to account for the difference in widths of individual letters. An i and an o, for example are of different widths and kerning adjusts the space between each of their centers to make the text's presentation easier to read.

I have not found any mention of kerning in either IBM's sales brochure (online) for the Composer, nor the contents page of the user's guide, although the user's guide does have a page number for "measuring width of proportionally spaced letters," which sounds like kerning. So the jury remains out on whether the Composer could kern until a better citation can be found.

But the bottom line remains: this machine did produce proportional spacing, but only after a lengthy and technical process by the typist that included typing each line twice. It simply wouldn't be done for routine memos. Also, I would guess that its purchase price would be very high, not the kind of thing a commander is likely to blow a huge chunk of his budget for.

So I think that CBS defenders who promote the Composer as their rescue are really grasping at straws.

by Donald Sensing, 9/10/2004 01:57:00 PM. Permalink |

Site notes
I don't know what happened to comments. They are handled through Haloscan.com, and sometimes Haloscan checks out to parts unknown.

A couple of people have emailed that I didn't turn off italics at the beginning of More format and content analysis of CBS documents about Bush. But I did, and have checked it several times. Nor does the post below the "summary" section at the beginning appear italicized on my computer. So I don't know why it does on those who emailed me.

by Donald Sensing, 9/10/2004 11:48:00 AM. Permalink |

Ivan devastates Grenada
Hurricane Ivan is rampaging toward Cuba, presently headed for landfall at Tampa, Fla. The graphic below is linked to NOAA and is updated periodically, so the predicted path may change from the time of this post.



(Click image for large view.) According to broadcast news reports, the hurricane crushed the small island country of Grenada, dmaging or destroying at least 90 percent of homes there.

by Donald Sensing, 9/10/2004 11:38:00 AM. Permalink |

It's the Office Assistant's fault!
This image shows how CBS News wound up with documents forged on MS Word.

by Donald Sensing, 9/10/2004 09:35:00 AM. Permalink |

More stylistic errors in CBS memos
Captain's Quarters lays out some more style and format errors in the documents CBS News purported to cast aspersions on President Bush, supposedly dating from the early 1970s. I posted my own style and format errors analysis here.

Says CQ:<bl