Gleanings from the blogosphere, Sept. 19

Aisha at Eteraz has a very interesting post on the opposition to terrorism in the Middle East, fatwas against it by Muslim clerics, and the not-so-powerful voice of Sharia law. A definite read if you were labouring under the impression that Muslims have not been speaking up against terrorism.


Paul D. Kretkowski at Beacon comments on China's generosity toward its neighbours. China is apparently building infrastructure in neighbouring countries. Kretkowski suggests that accepting this generosity could come back to bite them in the butt. Maybe sometimes it's a better idea to look a gift horse in the mouth.


Steve Janke at Angry in the Great White North is arguing, somewhat humorously, that the Harper government is not firing Guy Fournier as head of the CBC after some rather bizarre and unprofessional behaviour, precisely because it suits their purposes to have the CBC discredited. Sometimes I think the Conservatives are taking deviousness to new levels, but I am more often amused than horrified. Hoist 'em on their own petard!
[Update] Guy Fournier has now resigned.


Iraqi blogger Mohammed at Iraq the Model is bemoaning the violent reaction of Muslims to the Pope's speech and outlines Islam's history of spreading the faith by the sword. He puts the blame squarely on Muslim clerics.

Some accuse the pope of bad timing but I wonder what is going to be the best time to accept criticism and accept questions? Next year? a decade from now? When?

There will no be such time for our clerics who derive their power from this history, and to them, questioning or criticizing this history is a threat to their holiness and power.

Technorati tags: Guy Fournier, Pope Benedict

Defending the indefensible

I normally rather enjoy Thomas Sowell's columns when I happen to come across them. Not today. Torture is indefensible, but he defends it. Glenn Greenwald has done a thorough and excellent job of tearing his arguments to pieces, so I won't run through them all. I will add this though. When you start using torture in the name of defending yourself against terrorism, you have stopped fighting terrorists. You have joined them.

Technorati tags: Thomas Sowell

Arar has no rights in the US

It would appear that the American judicial system reserves the right to commit injustice against non-citizens. From Jurist Legal News and Research:

In 2004 Arar filed a lawsuit in US federal court challenging US extraordinary rendition practices under the Torture Victim Protection Act. Arar's lawyers argued the Act provides the US court with jurisdiction over cases involving civil rights abuses committed abroad, including Arar's case, but US District Judge David G. Trager dismissed the case in February of this year, citing "the national security and foreign policy considerations at stake" and holding that Arar, as a non-citizen, could not raise a constitutional right to due process. Arar is appealing that decision. (Emphasis mine)

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding Trager, but it sure seems to me like he's saying the US government has carte blanche to commit civil rights abuses against non-citizens. Can selective application of justice be understood to be justice at all?

In the meanwhile, O'Connor is urging the Canadian government to "register 'a formal objection' with both the United States and Syria concerning their treatment of Arar."

Technorati tags: Maher Arar, Extraordinary rendition

Maher Arar vindicated by inquiry

Justice Dennis O'Connor has concluded that Arar was an innocent victim and was not involved in al-Qaeda activities in any way, as U.S. officials had alleged.

O'Connor criticizes the RCMP for supplying misleading, inaccurate information to their American counterparts, for releasing information without reviewing it first, and for trying to whitewash their role in the affair.

The government too comes in for censure:

But O'Connor said reports were prepared by government officials after Arar's release that had the "effect of downplaying the mistreatment or torture to which Mr. Arar had been subjected."

He also slammed Canadian officials for leaking "confidential and sometimes inaccurate information about the case to the media for the purpose of damaging Mr. Arar's reputation or protecting their self-interests or government's interests."

In my mind, the most important thing now is for the government to put measures in place to ensure that this never happens again. The Anti-terrorist Act in particular needs a major overhaul.

Technorati tags: Maher Arar, Dennis O'Connor, RCMP

Gleanings from the blogosphere, Sept. 18

Glenn Greenwald attacks Presidential Infallibility Syndrome at Unclaimed Territory.

This principle is just axiomatic -- the fact that someone is accused by the Bush administration of being a terrorist or suspected by the administration of working with terrorists does not, in fact, mean that they are a "terrorist." There is a distinction between (a) being accused or suspected by the Bush administration of working with Al Qaeda and (b) actually being in cahoots with Al Qaeda and being a "terrorist."

Presumption of innocence and the right to a fair and open trial are values that can not be compromised. They underpin our entire society and must be protected.

Flee the village...

"The Canadians are coming! Armed with plastic knives and forks!"

The comedian (whose name I forget) was on stage at Montreal's Just For Laughs festival, and the audience was bent double in laughter. If there were any soldiers in the audience, they were bent double too.

Canadians like to laugh at themselves, and this is probably why we have a disproportionate presence in the comedy world, by which I mean American entertainment. Other reasons have been put forward for the uncanny number of Canadians in American comedy, but I think they miss the mark. Canadians rule comedy because we are so good at laughing at ourselves.

This extends right up to the highest levels. Years before Al Gore thought to appear on Saturday Night Live, Canadian politicians - including sitting prime ministers - were appearing on political satire shows like Royal Canadian Air Farce and This Hour Has 22 Minutes, not to mock their opponents, but to joyfully skewer themselves and occasionally the satirists for not caricaturizing them well enough.

But it's not only the famous that we have enjoyed mocking. One of my favourite episodes of Corner Gas - gotta love any comedy set in Saskatchewan! - features a bemused American tourist who ends up in "Dog River" by mistake. The "ugly American" proves himself to be consistently well-informed, respectful and courteous, while his Canadian hosts (especially Hank) are prejudiced, obnoxious, and self-righteous. There were no outraged letters to the editor, no dip in ratings, no protests about the attack on the Canadian identity. We just enjoyed the inversion of stereotypes and laughed heartily at ourselves. It remains one of my favourite episodes.

And the skit that triggered this reflection: Royal Canadian Air Farce was portraying Prime Minister Harper and his wife Loreen as stiff, robotic, semi-humans and the children were called in to say good night. Who should appear but the real Harper children!

I can't speak with any expertise on this subject, but I have a hard time imagining an American president lending himself or family members to a political satire show for the express purpose of poking fun at himself. Admittedly, this is not entirely disinterested on the part of Canadian politicians; Preston Manning in particular proved that self-parody will only increase your popularity with the Canadian electorate.

So I ask my American friends in particular and readers of this blog from all parts of the world: how good are you at laughing at yourselves? I don't mean laughing at your opponents, either. Is it common practice for your politicians to mock themselves, and do your comedies skewer your own culture? Or is the mockery generally turned toward the "other"?

Technorati tags: Corner Gas, Royal Canadian Air Farce, This Hour Has 22 Minutes

Border fences

The San Francisco Chronicle blasts border fences as being not only stupid but counter -productive, arguing that the partial fence along the Mexican border has resulted in more, not fewer, illegal immigrants living in the US, in large part because just as many people keep coming north, and fewer of them can get back home.

I applaud this voice of reason. Border fences are colossally expensive and ineffective to boot. The lovers of fences are also militating in favour of building one along the Canadian border, which raises stupidity to stratospheric heights. (The border is 7000 miles long and not known to be a source of illegal immigrants.) Unfortunately the idea seems to have some traction in Congress. The only good I could see coming from it is a lessening the flood of illegal guns into Canada... (That was sarcasm, folks.)

Technorati tags: Border fences

Citizendium sets itself up to rival Wikipedia

Nicholas Carr at Rough Type is talking about Larry Sanger's announcement of a new rival to Wikipedia. The new online encyclopedia, Citizendium, intends to be a more rigorous version of Wikipedia with experts invited to provide guidance. Sanger was one of the original founders of Wikipedia and obviously is not entirely happy with the direction it's taken, calling it dysfunctional.

The heart of the dysfunction is the debate between deletionists and inclusionists, each of which has its own association(!).

I've witnessed some of the tension between the two camps personally, with one of my sons being a heavy contributor to the French Wikipedia (primarily articles on Canadian history and politics). I've heard him fulminating about the necessity of baby-sitting people twice his age who seem intent on deleting any article that doesn't correspond to their rigorous definition of what is relevant.

Carr concludes that having two online community encyclopedias might be the best resolution of the conflict. Give them each their own sandbox to play in.

The best way forward in this case - the way that creates the least harm - may not be through the process of consensus-building. Trying to find common ground between the deletionists and the inclusionists seems a futile exercise - in fact, those who seek compromise between the two camps are known as "delusionists." The time may have come to form two competing Wikipedias - to "fork" the encyclopedia, as software programmers would say. Let the deletionists and the inclusionists pursue their separate ideals separately - and let users decide which version best suits their needs.

Technorati tags: Citizendium, Wikipedia

Bigger than 9/11

This is the kind of attack Al-Qaeda is threatening against the US, warning all American Muslims to flee New York and Washington. The announcements come from Abu Dawood, the newly appointed commander of the al Qaeda forces in Afghanistan, and were obtained by journalist Hamid Mir.

The attacks are to be led by Adnan el Shukrijumah, known as "the Pilot," seen at right.

AT the same time, they are announcing major offensives against NATO forces in Afghanistan during the month of Ramadan.

Unfortunately, al-Qaeda has a tendency of following through on threats.

Read the entire interview.

[Update] 7:12 PM

According to Wikipedia, the Canada Free Press who first published this interview, is not the most reliable of sources. On the other hand, the Wikipedia article itself seems somewhat confused, labelling CFP a far right publication and shortly thereafter talking about how it has frequently supported Liberal and NDP candidates, which would be anathema to any far right organization.

Ultimately what matters most here is the authenticity of the actual interview. This should become clear over the next few days or weeks. I certainly would not mind discovering the whole thing was a hoax. If it isn't, I wouldn't mind discovering that North American intelligence services were privy to the whole plot and will use this announcement as a trigger to move in. And for those who would be tempted to leap to conclusions, drawing attention to this is not the same thing as quaking in fear, any more than telling someone there's a car coming is ceding to panic. In this case, checking out the validity of these announcements is a prudent, not a fearful thing to do.

Technorati tags: Al-Qaeda, Canada Free Press

Gleanings from the blogosphere, Sept. 17

Michael J. Totten has a very interesting post about the moral (and other) objections to the recent Lebanon war raised by a right-wing Israeli. Now there's a perspective we haven't gotten very often!