Who knew?

The story and discussion can be found here. And they accuse other countries of doctoring their textbooks? Lots of good links in the comments.

I make no secret of how I feel toward Karen Hughes: I thoroughly loathe her. She is the female version of Karl Rove, and while Karl is the master of the smear, Karen is the master of the deceptive talking point. Universally despised by every reporter for her maddening insistence on “staying on-message” even when everyone knows she is lying, Karen’s game was best summarized by right-wing pundit Tucker Carlson after he held a BS interview with her.

I’ve obviously been lied to a lot by campaign operatives, but the striking thing about the way she lied was she knew I knew she was lying, and she did it anyway. There is no word in English that captures that. It almost crosses over from bravado into mental illness.

Which brings us to today’s story. Karen is upset that we aren’t all going crazy enough over the nightmare of terrorism, even though so many of us now look with dread and suspicion on all things Moslem, even though we are throwing people off of planes because of T-shirts with arabic writing, even though we are indulging in non-stop grieving (understandably so) over 911, which the president raises at every possible moment. No, none of this is enough. We must do more, each and every one of us, making terrorism our No. 1 obsession. Where, oh where, Karen mournfully asks, is all the outrage??

Terrorism threatens all of us. It targets the very foundations of a free society. Yet where are the mothers organizing against terrorism as American mothers did against drunken driving? Where are the fathers promising to teach their sons to choose to live rather than choose to die? Where are the religious clerics and congregations of all faiths arguing that no just and loving God would call on young men and women to kill themselves and others in the name of religion?

….So why aren’t more of us doing more to stop the terror?

First, I believe most of us hope that terrorism is an aberration. Unfortunately, I do not believe it is true. Part of my job is to look at the propaganda being spread on Internet sites and TV sets around the world. It is chilling. Bombings are depicted as acts of glory. Children are being taught the language of hate. Thousands of people have been trained in terror training camps, convinced the only way to defend their faith is to kill all others who have a different point of view.

She honestly believe we need Mothers Against Drunk Driving-type programs to curb terrorism? She really thinks each of us should be actively engaged in fighting terrorism? I hate to tell her this, but there is more to our human existence than terrorism. Yes, it’s evil and bad and we should be vigilant and cautious and protect the airports and maintain security standards, etc., etc. But if we allow 18 men with box cutters to turn us into a nation of crazed paranoiacs existing only to think about terrorism, then Osama will have won by a landslide. (And he already has.)

All of that propaganda she’s seeing, all the gleeful exuberance over acts of terrorism, all the threats – they’ve been with us for a very long time, and we won’t stop Jihadists in Pakistan from committing their atrocities with cookie sales in America to boost terrorism awareness. Outrage isn’t the solution. (Maybe a more practical solution would be taking seriously reports written from terrorism authorities titled, “Bin Laden Determined to Attack within the United States.”) There’s a time for outrage and we deserve to feel outrage for years to come over 911. But to demand that we keep it top of mind at all times and live a life dedicated to “standing up to terrorism” (whatever that means) is, again, a sign that we lost to Al Qaeda. Osama has turned us inside out. He has made us irrational. We live in the shadow of his fear, and that fear is Osama’s victory.

Meanwhile, the real truth is Hughes just wants to make us all hysterical before the November elections. After that, she couldn’t give a flying fuck. Like her counterpart Karl, she lives for one thing and one thing only, protecting Boy George, and everything she advocates is always and inevitably tied to Bush’s political standing. Never believe a single syllable she says. There’s a reason she’s the most detested woman in Washington. (Sorry if I sound a tad harsh, but I’ve had issues with this lady for years and years.)

The following is a guest post by my friend Bill Stimson, whom I finally had the plesure of meeting this past weekend. The views of this post do not necessarily reflect those of the site owner.
————————————————————————————————————————————

Are China’s Rulers Illegal?
by William R. Stimson

Once again China’s government lurches wildly and unpredictably in the diametrically opposite direction to the one everybody agrees it should rationally be headed in during these times. Not unlike a ward of psychopaths intent on blocking out reality, the country’s leadership has abruptly announced that, effective immediately, it is further restricting foreign news within its borders.

What makes this current measure of particular interest is its exact wording. Among the categories of news to be made illegal is anything that may “endanger China’s national security, reputation and interests.” It’s common knowledge that what most endangers China’s national security, reputation and interests around the world today is the banning of information and the censorship of news within China. So are we to infer from this that China’s Communist Party and its state-run New China News Agency have now effectively been made illegal?

Or, in the same way China considers all discussion of Taiwan’s status to be an internal affair, i.e., a matter not subject to discussion – is it perhaps also the case that it considers the endangerment of its own national security, reputation and interests to be an internal affair, i.e. something that can be allowed to go on unimpeded as long as it is perpetuated by Party leaders themselves?

Although this may seem irrational to those unfamiliar with China’s form of government, the fact is that China’s rulers define their own security, reputation and interests to be what is good for China. Since, other than them, no one else in China has a voice, they are free to get away with this. Insofar as they are making it increasingly difficult for outside news to penetrate the country, it’s not hard for them to win over the Chinese people to their way of seeing things.

So, even if now, according to these new measures that have been put into effect, China’s rulers are, in fact, illegal – nobody in China except the rulers themselves will have any way to find this out. It’s understandable why it’s so important to them to keep it this way. We can expect further crackdowns in the future on all kinds of news media, the arresting and harassing of even more journalists, a further tightening of the regulations governing Web sites and online forums, the mobilization of many tens of thousands more government workers to screen and block Web content, and the continued firing of editors in publications that resist official control.

In this one area, China is back to something like a Cultural Revolution. This looks bad, which is yet another reason why its leaders are scrambling to cover it all up, no matter how much harm this does to China and the 1.3 billion Chinese.

—————————————————————————————————————-

William R. Stimson is a writer who lives in Taiwan. More of his writing can be found at www.billstimson.com

I am, despite angry emails and comments, discontinuing the pasting of newspaper columns, as it’s become more trouble than it’s worth and it’s not what I want this site to be about. Exceptions will be Frank Rich and, when I think they’re super-relevant must-reads, Krugman and Friedman and the occasional MoDo. Usually I would skip Brooks and Tierney, but when Brooks writes a column like today’s, where you can feel his disillusionment with Bush and his despair over the war in Iraq, I’ll offer it. It isn’t immediately clear where Brooks is going with all this, and suddenly, when getting down to the specifics of Iraq, he lets it out. Be sure to read to the end.

Ends Without Means
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: September 14, 2006

A leade’s first job is to project authority, and George Bush certainly does that. In a 90-minute interview with a few columnists in the Oval Office on Tuesday, Bush swallowed up the room, crouching forward to energetically make a point or spreading his arms wide to illustrate the scope of his ideas – always projecting confidence and intensity.

(more…)

After providing a lengthy translation of a newspaper report on the story and how public opinion affected the investigation and ultimately dictated its terms, eswn notes,

This is one of those sea changes in China that you would not recognize while it was happening bit by bit. Ten years ago, the case would never hit the light of day, whether or not mass incidents occurred. This time, the police were fully aware of the public opinion wave while their investigation was going on. When they announced their findings, their worst nightmare was realized with two major mass incidents. This may trigger a national-level investigation in order to mollify public opinion. What is the difference between now and ten years ago? Would you believe — the Internet?

A sea change, indeed. It’s a great story, and one can only wonder how long the government can hold back the ire of its people when it comes to other injustices. In the US, the Internet famously led to the downfall of Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott and the resignation of NYT editor in chief Howell Raines. Is the day far off when we won’t see similar trials of leading figures by netizens in China? I don’t see how the government can push back the groundswell of public opinion, no matter how many filters and firewalls they implement, no matter how many journalists and Internet essayists they imprison. If they had the power to stem the tide, the Rui’an riots would never have happened, would they?

An eye-opening chart. Of course we all know this to be the case, but the graphic drives the point home. Meanwhile, in the world of Malkin, Hot Air, Chuckles Johnson, Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler et. al., there are sleeper cells in your backyard and every Moslem is a potential terrorist and they are coming to get you and your children and the only way to react is to be constantly hysterical. Every story of the latest terrorist threat, although later proven inevitably to have been absurdly overstated, causes an explosion, an orgy of hysteria among our friends on the far right. Then when it’s all proven to have been vastly exaggerated if not downright false, they simply move on to the newest “threat” and start all over. There are never any corrections or apologies. But back to the chart… It begs the simply question, why aren’t we equally hysterical over guns, or hernias? No one questions the awful tragedy of 911 and the need to remain vigilant. But is perpetual fear, based on the most questionable of rumors, really the answer? Does it save any lives? And if we are so concerned over one another’s lives, why not focus on the stuff at the top of the list as opposed to the very bottom?

A Muslim American speaks out against Muslim butchery, and it isn’t pretty. But then again, it is.

The leader of al-Qaida in Iraq, Abu Hamza al-Muhajer, recently issued a decree to its supporters: Kill at least one American in the next two weeks “using a sniper rifle, explosive or whatever the battle may require.”

Well, Abu Hamza al-Muhajer, I am an American too. Count me as the one of those you have asked your supporters to kill.

I am not alone, there are thousands of Muslims with me in Las Vegas, and many more millions in America, who are proud Americans and who are ready to face your challenge. You hide in your caves and behind the faces of civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq. You don’t show your faces and you have no guts to face Muslims. You thrive on the misery of thousands of Muslim youth and children who are victims of despotism, poverty and ignorance.

During the past two decades, you have brought nothing but shame and disaster to your religion and your world.

We should see more stories like this, and I hope we do. American Muslims, well integrated into Americdan society, have rejected the dogma of Bin Laden and see him for the monster he is. More of them should speak out more often.

When I tell you guys to go after a story, I expect you to snap to it. Or else I’ll “whine.”

Well, allow me to take the bait – it is an extraordinary story. And eswn does us a great service presenting it with such meticulous detail. From the article he cites:

Crowds angered by alleged police mishandling of a school teacher’s death attacked government offices in a southern Chinese city, sparking arrests and beatings by riot troops, newspapers and a local hospital said Monday.

Students and local residents of Rui’an’s Tangxia township claimed police falsified a report and colluded with the husband of high school English teacher Dai Haijing, 30, to have her death classified as a suicide, according to Hong Kong newspapers Ta Kung Pao and The South China Morning Post.

The demonstrators also staged a protest at the husband’s factory where they damaged cars and other property.

The protests reflect widespread perceptions that China’s weak and largely opaque legal system is tainted by communist officials’ abuse of power and susceptible to influence by the country’s newly moneyed classes.

For some startling photos, see eswn’s two posts. This isn’t a little protest outside a police station – this is a real riot, and the rioters are surprisingly young and angry. And, if you have the stomach for it, don’t miss the extremely graphic picture he links to; I haven’t seen photos of that many suicides, but does this look like suicide to you? It looks like an awfully inconvenient way to kill oneself.

Watch it. Don’t forget the lies. They’re all right there, if you really want to know the extent to whch were were sold a bill of goods..

When I want to remember, I watch this. And I can’t help crying every time, even five years later. Every time. Despite some of its jingoism, despite knowing how we were to squander that precious sympathy we enjoyed for one brief shining moment from the entire world, I still cry.