Good. The more the better.

OT: Dennis Prager hits it on the nail again.

coffee cheers! *clink*

It's about time that the Iraqis started to show some initiative in controlling crime.

The former Iraqi president released all common criminals as part of an amnesty in October 2002, a move that many say has contributed to a surge in crime.

Took a page out of Castro's playbook (1980 Mariel boat swarm), didn't he?

Good.

One thing about the new Iraqi govt., they don't have to be quite so sensitive about hurting people's feelings in getting the bad guys off the streets.

Although I suspect Iraqi police brutality would draw attention that similar Egyptian or Syrian or certainly Saudi brutality wouldn't.

I'm shamelessly OT-ing in a fresh thread, but...
I'd like help spur this John Edwards quote around the web. I think it's important. (sorry it it's been posted already)

JOHN EDWARDS on CHRIS WALLACE,
December 28, 2003: quote:
---

Edwards on Iraq, September 12, 2002: "We know that for at least 20 years, Saddam Hussein has obsessively sought weapons of mass destruction through every means available. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons today. He has used them in the past, and he is doing everything he can to build more. Each day he inches closer to his longtime goal of nuclear capability — a capability that could be less than a year away.

I believe that Saddam Hussein's Iraqi regime represents a clear threat to the United States, to our allies, to our interests around the world, and to the values of freedom and democracy we hold dear...

The path of confronting Saddam is full of hazards. But the path of inaction is far more dangerous. This week, a week where we remember the sacrifice of thousands of innocent Americans made on 9-11, the choice could not be starker. Had we known that such attacks were imminent, we surely would have used every means at our disposal to prevent them and take out the plotters. We cannot wait for such a terrible event – or, if weapons of mass destruction are used, one far worse – to address the clear and present danger posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq."

Good. I hope they get every last one of those sewer rat journalists--and the insurgents they enable.

How does this fit in with their amnesty program?

Charles
OT but another article in the Daily Telegraph

Blunkett's ban will fan the flames
By Mark Steyn

And this is what Churchill had to say about Muhammednism

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

[Link: www.telegraph.co.uk...]

#8 Thom

Perhaps like this: "Speak softly, but carry a big stick."

Yes! Go get 'em Iraqi PD! I really do like Allawi. He's a tough character and he seems to have popular support among the Iraqi populace. I just hope he's got a BIG security contingent.

#1 Writermom - Dennis Prager is seemingly always spot-on. I really, really like the guy. He's level headed and never makes his point by shouting over people. If there were a few more of him running around this country woud be a better place, imo.

#9 DP111

So Churchill (correctly) thinks that fanatical Islam is like rabies?

Cool.

#12 correction - should be "thought" - past tense - sorry.

1 WriterMom

OT: Dennis Prager hits it on the nail again.

I have my reservations. I'm not opposed to presenting viewpoints in school, but the idea of having the clergy do it makes me squirm. There's nothing about information - on homosexuality or anything else - that makes it necessary for it to come straight out of the mouth of the local priest, minister, rabbi, or imam.

As far as Prager's take on threats to open societies, he's right that most 20th century totalitarian regimes came from the Left. But most of the totalitarian regimes that arose in the West seem to have come from the Right (Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, Salazar, various Latin American regimes, etc.). I'm about as wary of the Right as I am of the Left (although I increasingly seem to be drifting Right-wards these days).

#9 - Excellent - Churchill never minced words.

Hmmm. 500 plus criminals. So the Iraqis are up and running. Police and intel are working effectively. Let's watch the media spin this one. Good luck Iraq.

Drat. That should have been

"I'm not opposed to presenting different viewpoints in school..."

ben ami
Free speech is supposed to be for everyone.

I wouldn't get too excited, these are probably just all the same guys we JUST let out of Abu Graib.

The only difference is now the media won't care what happens to them once they get tossed in the dungeons.

ben -ami
my apologies

I think winston churchill could completely curse me out, and I'd still just love him... some people have a way with words, regardless of what they actually say, you just have to respect them. I only wish I were able to hear any of his speeches live, or at least live broadcast. he's definitely on the short list of people I'd go back in history to meet.

ben-ami

Would you have a problem with a religious person presenting the tenets of that religion during a comparative religion class?

18 Bob with one O

Yeah, but the public schools aren't Speakers Corner. Not everyone has a right to stroll into the public schools to exercise their First Amendment rights.

I read Tillys Story and was made very angry about all those murderded people in downtown Manhattan who are now not even remembered in the media. I guess the world starting with the schmucks on the left in America have forgotten what the F**K happened that day. All they seem to care about now is kepping the feelings of the worldwide Islamic body from being hurt.

I cant wait until that day when our dear Muslim friends reveal their true intentions in America and Abroad. The day is coming when this babble - excuse making, dont believe yourt eyes sh--t will be undeniable to everyone, and then maybe then it will be too late.

Read Tilly's Story as well as the other horror stories of that day, which the mass media has repressed and twisted into a Muslims are victims BS.

Do you get a little angry now a year after these posts seeing how the left relentlessly turned the victims into the forgotton and the murderers (Islamism) as innocent. How the F--k do the Muslimescontinue to make so many advances in continuing their criminal demonic distruction of Americaso soon after this horror?

Read Tilly's Story and see what is surely in store for us.

Charles, thank you for posting those stories of 9-11. I am afraid though that too many people have forgotton what our they did that day.

Tilly' Story

Ben -ami
you lost me.

22
Darleen

Would you have a problem with a religious person presenting the tenets of that religion during a comparative religion class?

What do you mean by "religious person"? You mean a religious person like an observant Jew or Muslim or Catholic, or do you mean a religious person like a rabbi or imam or priest?

And is there really any place in the US that has comparative religion classes in the public schools?

maybe public schools should just be teaching writing, reading, math, etc instead of promoting some multi-cultural love-in... oh wait, that will never happen.

14 ben-ami

There's nothing about information - on homosexuality or anything else - that makes it necessary for it to come straight out of the mouth of the local priest, minister, rabbi, or imam.

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Lev.18:22

Way OT: Ditka seriously considering race, says he would make a better senator than Ted Kennedy. (Apologies for the source)

Then again, my cat threw up something on the rug last night that would make a better senator than Ted 'Splash' Kennedy.

25 Bob with one O

Sorry. Let me try again...

Yes, everyone has the right to free speech. That does not mean that you get to exercise that right in all places and under all circumstances. The public schools are not like the Speakers' Corner in London's Hyde Park, where (as I understand it) anyone can climb up on a soapbox and spout off about anything that he wants to. For example, I can't just stroll into the local public school and demand the opportunity to address the student body on a topic of my choosing.

Whoa!
Kerry/Edwards down 15 points in NYC with likely voters.

It's a poll, so I take it with a grain of salt. Interesting, non the less.

Luigi

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.

Lev.18:22

Nu? Is there anything about that quote that only makes it applicable if it issues from the mouth of an ordained clergyperson?

DP111

Great link. I wish ten thousand more reporters had his OO's

Arresting the Minutemen?
/fat boy off

Funny how the article refers to these crooks as"detainees". The media's knee jerk soft pedaling is sickening.

Call them yard birds, jail birds, criminals, prisoners or what have you. Detainee sounds like the guys showed up for class late too many times.

Somewhat on-topic

Government says 99 foreign fighters detained in Iraq

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) Iraq is currently detaining 99 foreign fighters, the majority of whom are Syrians, Iraq's human rights minister said Monday.

Bakhtiyar Amin said the detainees include 26 Syrians, 14 Saudis, 14 Iranians, 12 Egyptians, nine Sudanese, five Palestinians, five Yemenis, five Jordanians, five Tunisians, one Lebanese, one Moroccan, one Turk and one Afghan.

And so on.

#31 RIP Ford

Um, hate to break this, but that poll was for North Carolina, not NYC...

Good to see though that my state, at least, knows how to vote...

#36 Titus

...and a partridge in a pear treee!

:D

I agree with Ralph Peters. The last thing we need is more potential Abu Ghraibs for the media to latch onto.

Kill them.

31

Thats not NYC.

Thats John-boy's home state of North Carolina.

PHOTOS of Iraq police rounding up terrorists and criminals. [Link: story.news.yahoo.com...] [Link: news.search.yahoo.com...]

Ben - ami,
So the Stonewall folks can be invited to speak and others can also as long as they're not religious officials?

Since when does being a rabbi priest or minister limit first amendment rights?

#37 Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
#40 Ed Moran: Abu GOMEX aoa 28C

D'oh! LOL

Sorry, I need some more caffeine.

42 Bob with one O

Again, I don't think that it has anything to do with the First Amendment. The public schools are not a venue for the exercise of free speech by all comers.

And again, what about the information makes it necessary for it to be presented by the clergy?

I hope they find these guys too:

For another new spin on the Phillipines hostage issue.

So far, they were pulling out, then they weren't, now the terrorists reject the ransom?

I'm confused.

Ben - Ami,
If the schools decide to have a debate to present both sides of an issue ones being religious is secondary to the idea of a debate. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.

About time the Iraqis showed some iniative, now that it's their butts on the line.
As far as Ben-Ami's argument about free speech goes, yes, the schols have a right to regulate speakers, the schools do, not some leftist mouthpiece organization. THe ACLU is supposed to protect people's civil liberties, how are civil liberties being affected by a speaker the school chooses!

OT but I can't take it.

That BIATCH Linda Heard is at it again:

Tear Down That Ugly Scar Through Palestine’s Heart

You would think that someone with as much looove for the Pali's would want to live there...but maybe they don't afford blue-eyed Welsh women the freedom they have grown used to in their home countries.

The International Court has spoken but nobody is listening. In a perfect world Israel should be subjected to economic sanctions and penalties but in ours it is destined to receive yet more US aid, written-off loans and state-of-the-art weapons. As long as oppression, extra-judicial assassinations, the murder of civilians and land theft are being rewarded while courts representing the international community are rendered irrelevant, the world will become an ever more dangerous place for us all. Justice like water will always seek an outlet. We can only pray the dam gates open slowly but never break.

I can only pray that somehow Linda Heard gets conscripted into Arafats personal harem. Nothing would be more fitting.

46 Bob with one O

If the schools decide to have a debate to present both sides of an issue ones being religious is secondary to the idea of a debate.

Well, it's not a question of being religious, but of being a religious professional. And your argument seems to make the presence and participation of clergypeople primary to the idea of the debate, not secondary. It's not as if the only people or groups who are against homosexual rights are churches, synagogues, or mosques, or as if the only people speaking out against it were priests, rabbis, ministers, or imams.

I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.

Yes, it looks that way. :-)

47 jakester

As far as Ben-Ami's argument about free speech goes, yes, the schols have a right to regulate speakers, the schools do, not some leftist mouthpiece organization. THe ACLU is supposed to protect people's civil liberties, how are civil liberties being affected by a speaker the school chooses!

So if the local public school invites the local imam in to explain how families are supposed to work, that's okay with you?

#47 jakester, #50 ben-ami

I'm all in favour of the separation of school and state!

Now that the Iraqis are in charge of their justice system, these guys will find themselves more likely to be part of a pyramid of skulls than a pile of circus clowns.

It depends, if the clergy is there to proseletize, tehn that's wrong, but if he is there to render a view on a current topic, then it's ok as long as it doesn't turn into a dirge of biblical quotes. If the imam is willing to explain an Islamic view of family, as part of an ongoing discussion of the topic, that's okay too, as long as people are free to rebutt him without fear of losing a limb!

#44 ben-ami 7/13/2004 07:56AM PST

And again, what about the information makes it necessary for it to be presented by the clergy?

No, not necessary, but on the other hand, why would someone who is priest be prevented from presenting the information?

Even back in communist Czechoslovakia, a priest was allowed to present information for the comparative religion study (part of history classes, secondary level of education). It was a window dressing, yes, religion was supressed in any way possible, but it was somehow understood that they know their stuff, provided that they had university credentials to teach, nu?

On the primary level, religion classes for children of believers were also conducted in school facilities.

So now the local Rabbi or priest is on the same level as an Iman?

Sorry, but an informed opinion is just that.

Jakester, where does it end? Let's say that the Windsor Locks High School invites the local Congregationalist minister and others in to present an argument against homosexuality. But there are other religious groups that have different takes on the same material. What happens if, say, a Reform rabbi, or a minister of the Metropolitan Community Church, or a liberal Episcopal priest demands access to the school to explain that the Biblical material doesn't necessarily mean what the Congregationalist minister says it does?

You want your kids to receive religious instruction in school? Fine - send them to a religious school. Public schools are simply not the place for religious instruction, which is what having the clergy in to present their viewpoints on issues amounts to.

55 Bob with one O

So now the local Rabbi or priest is on the same level as an Iman?

If you have evidence that in the eyes of the law they are somehow different, please present it.

I suspected that we have debunked those laws and shown them to have some serious loopholes. I do however see your point about religious teaching in schools. So you'd prefer to (perhaps) health care workers instead, no?

54 ordog Johnson

Even back in communist Czechoslovakia, a priest was allowed to present information for the comparative religion study (part of history classes, secondary level of education). It was a window dressing, yes, religion was supressed in any way possible, but it was somehow understood that they know their stuff, provided that they had university credentials to teach, nu?

United States history in the matter of public religous instruction is different from the European one. For example, in communist Czechoslovakia, priests were employees of the Culture Ministry. There was no problem with a clash between Church and State, because the Church's priests were also acting as State employees.

#50 ben-ami

The problem with islam is not that it is a religion, but that it is a political ideology.

#56 ben-ami

So, clergy should not be allowed to present their views on homosexuality, while transgendered wombyn wombats' agenda is fine? What gives, eh?

Bob with one O

So you'd prefer to (perhaps) health care workers instead, no?

You mean to come in to refute the Stonewalls Speakers? Sure. I'm sure that there are all sorts of public advocacy and lobbying groups for traditional sexual mores that don't depend on the clergy to present their POV.

60 ordog Johnson

The problem with islam is not that it is a religion, but that it is a political ideology.

Again, if you can show that this is the case in the eyes of the law, I wish you'd do so. AFAIK, Islam enjoys all the rights and privilages of a religion under the Constitution of the US, as well as the Constitutions of all 500 states.

Duh. 50 states.

Maybe religion should be taught by people with no knowledge whatsoever of religions?

#61 ben-ami 7/13/2004 08:46AM PST

You mean to come in to refute the Stonewalls Speakers? Sure. I'm sure that there are all sorts of public advocacy and lobbying groups for traditional sexual mores that don't depend on the clergy to present their POV.

Ok, here is a scenario: a speaker for a public advocacy group for traditioanl sexuality happen to be a priest of lutheran denomination.

Okay with you, yes, no?

My thoughts went to the several ministers I know that are also mental health care professionls (counselors).

65 ordog Johnson

I think I could accept that if he or she were appearing in their capacity as a member of that group, and not as an ordained pastor.

66 Bob with one O

See above. If they show up to speak as counselors, rather than as ministers, I think that's okay.

64 Geepers

Maybe religion should be taught by people with no knowledge whatsoever of religions?

Maybe religion should not be taught in the public schools at all?

#67 ben-ami 7/13/2004 08:59AM PST

I think that's okay.

Well, that's truly gracious of you that you would allow that.

(Just FYI, I am not a part of any religion. I may be considered an atheist, or rather agnostic. Thus I have no agenda to push, except freedom of religion--do not confuse with freedom from religion)

69 ordog Johnson

Well, that's truly gracious of you that you would allow that.

LOL. Gee, ordog, I'm damned if I do, and damned if I don't, huh?

#68 ben-ami 7/13/2004 09:01AM PST

Maybe religion should not be taught in the public schools at all?

Religion is a part of human history. Without a degree of understanding of religion, you would nopt be able to understand history. You can't extricate it from the subject. Should a priest be allowed to persent a course on religious comparative study? I say yes, provided that he/she has credentials to teach the subject (meaning that he/she has a PhD in comparative religion).

Now, if one interest group (for instance transgendered wombyn wombat worshippers of Gaia and Foetal Cranium Crushing) can provide a presentation regarding sexuality, then I do not see any reason why member of another religious group can't.

#70 ben-ami 7/13/2004 09:10AM PST

LOL. Gee, ordog, I'm damned if I do, and damned if I don't, huh?

No. I commented on your attitude. Otherwise, I am glad that you may not be in the clergy hate camp, although it may seem to be that way in your case on the first impression.

#71 ordog johnson

Transgendered Wombyn Wombat Worshippers of Gaia and Foetal Cranium Crushing

Where do I sign up? That sounds like the perfect new religion for me! Will they be at the Republican convention counter-demonstrations?

Bwahahahaha!

ordog

Religion is a part of human history. Without a degree of understanding of religion, you would nopt be able to understand history. You can't extricate it from the subject. Should a priest be allowed to persent a course on religious comparative study? I say yes, provided that he/she has credentials to teach the subject (meaning that he/she has a PhD in comparative religion).

Traditionally, religious instruction per se has been something that takes place at home or in church/temple/mosque/sysnagogue here in the US. That doesn't mean that no mention of religion is made in history or social classes in the public schools, but it's not done by religious professionals.

BTW, are you aware of any public school system in the US that offers comparative religion courses? My goodness, I thought they have enough problems (not) teaching math, science, grammar, and foreign languages to start branching off into state sanctioned catechism classes.

Now, if one interest group (for instance transgendered wombyn wombat worshippers of Gaia and Foetal Cranium Crushing) can provide a presentation regarding sexuality, then I do not see any reason why member of another religious group can't.

Interest group does not necessarily equal religious group. And again, where does it end? Do ALL religions merit equal time to explain their own particular take on the subject? See my post 56.

72 ordog

Otherwise, I am glad that you may not be in the clergy hate camp, although it may seem to be that way in your case on the first impression.

No, I'm not in favor of the sorts of laws they used to have on the books in Mexico (priests not being permitted to wear Roman collars in public, and so forth). But neither do I want to throw open the public schools to the clergy (as clergy).

Look, I'm a Jew who grew up in north Texas during the 60's and 70's and was educated in the public schools. School was crazy enough without bringing in assorted reverends and so forth. When I hear the phrase "bring clergy into the public school" I don't assume that the clergy in question are my sort of clergy, or even friendly towards me. Fellowship of Christian Athletes? Okay. Bible Clubs? If you insist. The Rev. Mr. Jones to open up the mysteries of the KJV? Hold on, now. ;-)

(On the other hand, I'm a part time teacher in a local Jewish school.)

74 ben-ami

BTW, are you aware of any public school system in the US that offers comparative religion courses? My goodness, I thought they have enough problems (not) teaching math, science, grammar, and foreign languages to start branching off into state sanctioned catechism classes.

Well, no. You have a point there. I am not syaing that current edumacation does not suck. And that math, or grammar do not take precendence. It does and they do.

However, I stand by it that comparative religion chould be a part of the history curriculum. Not catechism. Please note the difference.

FYI, this was the curriculum on the secondary edu level in CZ (high school age group, 15-18):
Czech (grammar, literature), Russian (mandatory), math (incl calculus, integrals, higher math and logic), physics (up to and incl. intro to GTR and QM), chemistry, biology (incl .biochemistry, genetics), gelology, history (incl. comparative religion), third language (pick of German / English / French / Spanish), Latin (mandatory for humanitarian branch, a slight reduction in allocated hours to match and physics), Greek (elective), social studies (intros to psychology, sociology, marxistic ideology [unfortunately], state and society), music, fine arts, phys-ed. I hope I did not forget something. All the above mandatory unless noted.

We did not have computer sciences yet, the only computers then were those behemoths that took a whole building. There was cs on UT level, though.

I am not sure that the same curriculum is still in place, this was some 35 years ago, I've heard that the euro edu is now even in worse shape than NA (US/Can).

gelology = geology, PIMF

Forgotten one: Philosophy. It was a part of history curriculum for 2 years and then separate subject for another 2 years.

76 ordog

third language (pick of German / English / French / Spanish)

Which was the more popular of the language choices?

Also, there were secondary schools with less generalized type of education, for instance architecture, graphic arts, engineering, etc.
However, they all had the above subjects, albeit in somewhat reduced form. Fine art and music classes were not present on engineering schools, albeit some basicss were introduced in history classes from a historical perspective.

#79 ben-ami

German, due to proximity of Germany. Followed by English, Spanish and French about the same popularity.
I did have choice between German and French, alas, for my type of curriculum, picked German. I learned English on my own (well, sort of, there is no substitute for living amongst English speakers, and to have a girlfriend or a spouse that speaks it as the first language is certainly a bonus). It is not much the issue of grammar or vocab, but pronunciation/accent and idioms/coloquialisms may be a tougher nut to crack.

#48 Sarah D.
Is she the same Linda Heard that wrote:

Yes, the West has made great strides in science and technology — often with the help of Arab scientists who were not appreciated in their own. countries.

The Arab world has something the West lacks — cohesive families, whose members support one another through thick and thin.

Why are Arabs from Egypt, Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and elsewhere routinely being paid less for doing the same job as their Western counterparts, often in their own countries and throughout the Gulf region?

Because Western workers know more and work full day without stopping five times a day for prayers and four times a day for drinking tea and taking a napes.
Time for Arabs to Stick Together

ben ami #74

Interest group does not necessarily equal religious group. And again, where does it end? Do ALL religions merit equal time to explain their own particular take on the subject? See my post 56.

There are many groups that are in the business of advocating morals, values or belief systems: religious groups, secular humanitst, atheists, and assorted advocacy groups.

If a group is advocating beliefs that are the opposite of common religious beliefs, they shouldn't be given access to school kids unless the view opposing them (the religious view) is also allowed.

This is all a lot of double-talk aimed at giving certain PC advocacy groups access while denying access to religious views which disagree with the advocacy groups. The best solution is for schools to allow no advocacy groups whose viewpoint is nothing more than a moral belief system gaoing by a non-religious name.

83

The best solution is for schools to allow no advocacy groups whose viewpoint is nothing more than a moral belief system gaoing by a non-religious name.

Agreed.

Schools should teach a few morals and enforce the rules that flow from those: no lying, stealing, cheating, bullying, harrassing, no sex on campus, and few other basics we could think of.

Other than that, they should stay out of the values business and leave it to parents, churches, the street, the law, or whatever is available to a kid away from school.

If schools could do a passable job of teaching and enforcing those basics listed, and a few that could be added, they'd be making a far greater contribution to society than by exposing kids to the present hodgepodge of PC advocacy groups that seem to slither from school-school in many parts of the country.

#74 Ben-Ami

It is only in the last century that religion has not been taught in schools.

The following is the first paragraph kids were taught to read with using Noah Webster's American Spelling Book (the most popular book of its time to teach kids to read and spell, also known as the "Blue-backed Speller."

TABLE XIII.
Lessons of easy Words, to teach Children to read, and
to know their Duty.

LESSON I.
No man may put off the law of God.
My joy is in his law all the day.
O may I not go in the way of sin.
Let me not go in the way of ill men.

Read the entire speller at this link
Webster's American Speller

I have a 2 bookshelves of school books used in the 1800's. I'm a volunteer literacy tutor, and have found these books helpful. They knew how to teach reading then. They taught reading by teaching spelling first, with phonics principles. A have a Sanders 4th reader (used by actual 4th grade children) which has words like "verdant" on every page, words that many of my college educated friends don't know.

You can see some books like these online at:

Lots of old schoolbooks links

The best link of these is the 19th century schoolbooks link, which has hundreds of old schoolbooks. The ones for the older grade levels are amazing!

Ben-ami
I believe (no pun intended) that we have reached an agreement.

I would think various religions could be incorporated into philosophy classes.

Of course, I read Philosophy for Dummies. [from the "...for Dummies" series of self-help manuals] What do I know.

I'm half-tempted to start one-room schoolhouses, with twenty kids in each school: ranging from kindergarten to eighth grade. Anything to get South Carolina off the "one of the dumbest States" list.

Of course, when a great history teacher [my former history teacher] gets clocked on the head by a dumbass student in a fight with his mother and subsequently decides to retire from teaching[because of lame admin policies], all hope seems lost.

There might be more to these arrests than meets the eye.

The arrests targeted one district of Baghdad. It would not be surprising if the district is inhabited disproportionately by the members of a particular Iraqi tribe or group of tribes. That would certainly be consistent with the emerging pattern of Iraqi society -- it is no melting pot.

If so it would not be surprising if the residents are in effect the Baghdad agents for the tribe's business interests -- which in this case could be trading in weapons and other contraband -- and its political interests -- which in this case could be sustaining the insurgency on behalf of the former Ba'athist regime and, of course, the tribe itself.

Arresting the petty thugs could well serve the purpose of disrupting tribal income and, quite possibly, eliminating a number of Ba'athist cells, without overtly politicizing the act of doing so.

Say, you don't supposed the residents of this particular district had ties to tribes in the vacinity of Falluga and points West, do you?

#88 Rayra

Actually, political spectrum is rather n-d structure than a circle. I would tend to think that 3 types of dimensions are involved.

1. utopian ... pragmatic
2. totalitarian ... libertanian
3. left ... right.

There are some subcategorical polarities, but they could be tucked under these main categories. For instance grpoupist ... individualist are a subset of totalitarian ... libertanian polarity.

Virginia Postrel would argue that there is another category, statist ... dynamist.
It is kind of unwieldy animal, because it has a close relationship to time and power dynamics. In other words, certain political position, in context of certain other positions may appear dynamist in one time frame of reference, and statist in another.

Point in case may be the "neocon" willingness to change the rules of the game (dynamist approach), while the libs are holding to a de facto conservative (or rather conservation) POV, statist in nature, as they entrenched their ideology far and wide and are not interested in change. Once the circumstances change, this can flip'd like by a swoosh of magic wand.

So back to our 3-d structure... Sphere may be the best simplified representation for all practical purposes.

In that case, the nazis and commies do not meet with a handhake (only if we consider our model a hypershere then that would become true). They just find themself close to the center of gravity of one qudrant, in a staistical corelative sense.

The nazis would be 100% totalitarian, 50% utopian and centrist (despite of their oficial moniker NSDAP, their "sozialismus" was exclusive and with strong undercurrents of concepts of slavery), while commies would heavily lean towards 100% in these values (ideologically, they shift somewhat towards pragmatism once in power, perks beat any ideology after a while, some animals become more equal than other).

Their common gravitational center is thus totalitarian extremity and they also meet on the utopian ... pragmatism polarity as established systems.