Anti-War Protestor Meets Real Iraqis

After being away all weekend, I've been trying to catch-up on all of my blog reading and when I clicked over to Penraker, I find that he has been blogging like mad since I left.

One particular story he links to has to do with an anti-war protestor who met some Iraqi ex-pats that went to the polls for the first time. It's a very interesting read.

Neo-Confederacy

Glenn Reynolds links to the review of a book written by a neo-Confederate successionist discussing an "alternative" view to American History. Glenn, a Tennessean, describes his take on the romanticism of the Confederacy:

...I have to say that while I understand, to a degree at least, people's fascination with the Civil War, I've never understood the romanticization of the Confederacy. It didn't last very long, it was horribly run and governed, it accomplished nothing but disaster and defeat, and it existed in the service of a horrible cause. I once angered an alumnus of Washington & Lee by suggesting that Robert E. Lee, however personally admirable he might have been in some ways, bore huge responsibility -- if he had honored his oath to the Union, the war probably would have been over in six months, leaving everyone (and especially the South) better off.

...As a political force, neo-Confederate sentiment is pretty trivial at the moment, even compared to the decaying remnants of Marxism. But that's no reason not to smack it down when it appears.

Some of you may be unaware, but this isn't a trival matter. The South has been planning to "rise-up" again, however they just can't seem to get around to doing it. In the year 2000, this article of the Onion describes the neo-Confederate movement:

For the 135th straight year since Gen. Robert E. Lee's surrender at Appomattox, representatives for the South announced Monday that the region has postponed plans to rise again.

"Make no mistake, the South shall rise again," said Knox Pritchard, president of the Huntsville-based Alliance Of Confederate States. "But we're just not quite ready to do it now. Hopefully, we'll be able to rise again real soon, maybe even in 2001."

Pritchard's fellow Southerners shared his confidence.

"Yes, sir. The South will rise again, and when it does, I'll be right up front waving the Stars and Bars," said Dock Mullins of Decatur, GA. "But first, I gotta get my truck fixed and get that rusty old stove out of my yard."

"Lord willing, and the creek don't rise, we gonna rise again," said Sumter, SC, radiator technician Hap Slidell, who describes himself as "Southern by the grace of God." "I don't know exactly when we're gonna do it, but one of these days, we're gonna show them Yankees how it's done."

"Save your Confederate dollars," Slidell added. "You can bet on that."

The Deep South states of Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, Louisiana, and Tennessee consistently rank at the bottom of the nation in a wide variety of statistical categories, including literacy, infant mortality, hospital beds, toilet-paper sales, and shoe usage. Even so, some experts believe the region could be poised for a renaissance.

"The way things stand, things in the Deep South almost have to get better. Otherwise, the people who live there will devolve into preverbal, overall-wearing sub-morons within a century," said Professor Dennis Lassiter of Princeton University. "Either Southerners will start improving themselves, or they'll be sold to middle-class Asians as pets."

In the meantime, the Union lives to see another day. Maybe if the South got Andrew Sullivan to be their 21st Century General, they would finally taste the glory that they've sought. As a matter of fact, the thought of any army not at least consulting Sully before invasion is "gob-smackingly vile." In the meantime, guys like this are determined to keep Sullivan from "risin' up" too high.

Onion article courtesy of Kyle at "From the Still".

Give 'Em the Finger

This image has been seen around the world--72% of Iraq's eligible voters turned out to take hold of a right that has been denied to them for far too long. The turnout by the Iraqi people demonstrated their tremendous courage in the face of adversity; the enthusiasm they displayed belied the entire narrative the western media has been reporting for two years. All of the threats, death, violence and chaos weren't enough to suffocate the embers of freedom that are now being fanned into flames.

There are even signs of new hope here in San Francisco. Tonight I walked down to North Beach to get some quick dinner when I saw a group of Middle Eastern men hanging out in front of Cafe Greco, smiling and laughing. All of them had painted their index finger purple in solidarity with their bretheren. My conversation with them will remain a private matter, but I found it interesting to see a bunch of Iraqi's celebrating freedom and democracy two blocks away from the Communist/Anarchist, City Lights Bookstore (who, ironically, just cancelled their speaking event featuring Ward Churchill).

Many of our good soldiers died to give freedom to a group of people that most of the world thought didn't deserve it; many more Iraqis died trying to stand up to the terrorist thugs that sought to oppress them. There is a long road ahead of them, but today their sacrifices were vindicated as freedom won a major victory over tyranny. Today I pray that Iraq's democracy will continue to grow stronger everyday in the face of the many that have hoped against them.

Message to the Iraqis:

Iraqis begin voting in U.S.

Iraqi expatriate Benjamin Nissan, a beautician who said he likes to dress like Elvis Presley, casts his ballot today in Skokie, Ill., as voting begins in Iraq's first independent elections in more than 50 years. -- Nam Y. Huh / Associated Press

If I could sum up in one picture what this election is about, it wouldn't be the one above, but I don't think there were too many Iraqis going to the polls dressed as Elvis under Saddam's regime.

Godspeed to you Iraq. Prove wrong all of those in the world that would rather see you fail just so they can say, "I told you so." Here is an appropriate speech for the occasion, delievered by character Lou Brown in the movie Major League (edited slightly by me):

I'm not much for inspirational addresses. I just wanta point out that every newspaper in the (world) has picked us to finish last. The local press thinks we'd save everybody a lot of time and trouble if we just went out and shot ourselves. Me, I like to waste (news) writers' time so I'm for hangin' around and seein' if we can give all these guys a nice, big shitburger to eat.

I'm Out!

"...but you were never in!"

Alright, Tahoe is having one of the best ski seasons in years, so I am going to get onto the Yak trail (Rt 80) tomorrow and slash down the mountain for the weekend. My 4 readers would be happy to know that I am looking forward to snow bunnies, snowboarding, snow bunnies, food, snow bunnies, beer and wine, and snow bunnies. It's raining cats and dogs here in San Francisco, and this storm is heading right to Tahoe. Fresh power awaits!

Regretfully, I'm sure this will be the weekend that Instapundit finds this site. Actually, no, it is a safe bet to say that he won't. Have a good weekend...

UPDATE: My agent tells me that I shouldn't be an attention whore. He's right. My booty is worth way more than a link from Instapundit. I mean, Glenn is cool and everything, but I work out!

UPDATE: China

Last week I posted about China's public justification of their suppression of pro-democracy demonstrators in Tiananmen Square. Just to refresh, Zhao Ziyang, a purged Communist Party official who critized the government for its actions against the demonstrators, died last week. The Chinese government worried that his death would provide an excuse for pro-democracy and other groups unhappy with the government to "stir up trouble." Well, it looks like they really were worried:

China has detained dozens of people, some of whom have been severely beaten, for trying to mark the death of former leader Zhao Ziyang, witnesses said.

...At least three people, including a woman in her 70s, were punched and manhandled by police officers outside the government offices which receive complaints in the Chinese capital, witnesses said.

They were among some 60 people who pinned white paper flowers to their clothes, a traditional Chinese symbol of mourning, said a bystander who took pictures of the beatings and posted them on overseas websites.

"A man from Henan province was beaten badly. His left eyeball looked like it was beaten out of its socket and he had a one inch cut to his right eye," said the man who requested anonymity.

"An elderly woman from Shandong province was beaten to a point where she couldn't move and a man from Hunan province was also beaten," he said.

Police shouted at the petitioners that Zhao, who spent nearly 16 years under house arrest until his death last week, was a "political criminal," the witness said.

"They said: 'Why are you commemorating him? You're clearly opposing the government. But the petitioners said 'We think differently. We think he's a good person."

When asked to comment, Communist officials responded, "Beating the crap out of elderly people is the warp and woof of our tremendous economic growth. See, all these old people do is mooch off of the hard work of the young. Take, take, take--all day long. So, when given the chance, we eliminate these leeches. It's easy, we just pretend they are little girls. Hey, didn't you see our growth at 9.4% this year?"

I wonder if this woman agrees?

"There's a lot of people here who are sort of into socialism and communism. And I'm really interested in that."

Too bad he's dead sweetheart, but Uncle Joe would be like, totally interested as well.

Three Days Left to Eternity

Anthony Perez-Miller reflects and offers hope about our mission in Iraq:

On 9 April 2003, the statue of Saddam fell in Firdos Square, Baghdad. That afternoon I went to mock antiwar protesters in the main square here in Bloomington.

Twenty-one months and more have passed since. The news has often been grim; given the astounding success of the invasion, I did not expect that the path to Iraqi independence would be as difficult as it has proven. But I nonetheless have little patience for the moulting hawks whose support for this endeavor has depended upon how closely our efforts have resembled some unrealizable Platonic Ideal.

Since I was born in the post-Vietnam era, this is the first major war that my generation has experienced firsthand. Those of us that have ignored history can only rely upon the Vietnam obsessed press for perspective; and a grim outlook is the natural result. However, history has shown that when the United States enters a conflict, perseverance and patience must follow. History proves that most armed conflicts have setbacks, screw-ups and disasters, and no planning can exempt the technologically superior United States from this fact.

When looking at the War in Iraq, Operation Iraqi Freedom (the three week period from the initial invasion to the fall of Bagdad) can be looked at as the D-Day stage of WWII--an enormous undertaking that resulted in achieved, key-objectives. After D-Day, Allied forces had the Germans on the run and many thought that the war would be over by Christmas. However, Germany would put coal in the Allies' Christmas stockings by launching a lethal and desperate counter-offensive (the Battle of the Bulge). Just as our highly esteemed leadership in WWII miscalculated, many good men that planned for the war in Iraq felt the clean-up operations would be much quieter--yet, like the Germans, our Baathist and Jihadi enemies would band together and desperately fight it out to the last man.

Anthony continues by speculating how the end-game in Iraq will look:

Democracy in the Land Between the Rivers might still prove an experiment which fails utterly. Yet I would put even odds—at least—on a very different outcome: that this election will instead be of profoundly historic significance, and will mark the beginning of the advance of human freedom in a region that has until now never seen the like.

When a battle of wills takes place, he who hunkers down and pushes through will see victory. We must have faith that this experiment will not ideologically fail; as our Republic, the Great Experiment, was based on idea the idea of "We the People." Our nation, even through one of the bloodiest civil wars in history, protected this vision for mankind.

The execution of our objectives in Iraq has been imperfect, but excellent overall. Just as the Germans would ultimately lose after giving us a black-eye and a fat-lip, our enemies in Iraq will learn how fruitless it is to fight against a technologically and, most importantly, ideologically superior foe. We have history on our side, the only question is, do we have the guts to follow through with it? Many in Iraq desperately hope that we do.

More Bad Signs From Russia

Russia is displaying more symptoms of its disease:

Russia's nationalist lawmakers have asked the prosecutor general to ban all Jewish organizations because of their "extremist" views, in a vitriolic call ahead of this week's 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Nazi death camp at Auschwitz.

...The seven-page call signed by 20 members of the 450-seat State Duma lower house of parliament that included the Communist Party and nationalist groups used some of the most profane language against Jews publicly published in the post-Soviet era.

"The whole democratic world today is under the financial and political control of the Jews," said the statement.

The group was led by Vladimir Zhirinovsky and his Liberal Democratic Party.

"We would not want our Russia, which is subject to a permanent, extra-legal war seeking to prevent its rebirth, to find itself among unfree countries," the statement said.

It called on the Russian courts to ban "all Jewish religious and community groups" which the statement also described as "anti-Christian" and accused Jews of staging attacks against their own community as a provocation so they could pin blame on others.

"We would like to underline that many anti-Jewish acts around the world are staged by the Jews themselves as a provocation in order to take punitive measures against patriots," the letter said.

The Russian state officially does not subscribe to any religion but Orthodox Christians dominate the country's religious life and often enter into politics with the patriarch's frequent meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin and some visiting heads of state.

"We cannot follow the false idea of tolerance which is imposed on us, such as that of the acceptance of sin, of evil, of heresy, and in the present case, of nothing less than satanism," said the document.

It was also published by a periodical called Orthodox Russia in a version that had some 500 signatures that included editors of nationalist publications.

The appeal was published on paper carrying the parliament's letterhead and called on Russia's prosecutor general to "officially open a legal investigation into banning all Jewish religious and community groups" on grounds of "defense of the homeland."

Sound familiar? As in failing Islamic nations, "blaming the Jews" provides an avenue to project one's own internal decay onto a group of people that have nothing to do with it. This "rally around the flag" attempt at Russian neo-nationalism sadly has a rich history in Russia.

Around the time that our country was developing its first constitution, Catherine the Great, through a series of wars, expanded Russia's borders. Part of these conquests included areas with large Jewish populations in what is today Belarus and the Ukraine, west of Kiev. These Jews would become a valuable tool for the tsars when they faced internal strife. Instead of facing their problems, they would shift blame towards the "Jesus-killing" Jews.

This method turned violent just after the assassination of Alexander II in 1881. Russian mobs would gather together and riot against Jewish communities. These riots were called pogroms--the Russian word for "devastation." The pogroms against the Jews would continue through the following tumultuous years as the Russian population became increasingly restive against tsarist rule.

As Nicholas II began his reign in 1894, the revolutionary atmosphere was electric. Vyacheslav Plehve, his Minister of the Interior, believed that in Western Russia, Jews comprised 90% of the revolutionaries in Western Ukraine and 40% of the entire Russian population. However, those seeking reform comprised of a broad base of Russia's constituents. The spontaneous and failed revolution of 1905 was carried out not by the Jews, but by 110,000 factory workers.

The Jewish scapegoat has a long and rich history in Russia. Just like their Islamic counterparts, they ignore their real problems at their own peril. In the meantime, the Jews, yet again, suffer the brunt of their delusions.

UPDATE: This comment, left by Supernatural Rabbit Scribe, was way too good to keep off the front page:

Actually, speaking as an ignorant drunken idiot living in a dilapidated mobile home and seeking someone to blame for my condition, Zhirinovsky's position really sorta resonates with me. The last bill collecter who called before they cut off my phone was named "Nguyen." That a Jewish name?

ARGUMENT AD SULLIVANIUM

David Cohen (Brothers Judd) has just come up with the most hilarious, yet exhaustively descriptive term to describe Andrew Sullivan's approach to building an argument:

ARGUMENT AD SULLIVANIUM

Defined: shrilly ranting and raving like a panic-stricken 4 year-old who just had their lollipop stolen by the bully down the street. Like the 4-year who can only resort to somewhat-naughty language and tears, argument ad sullivanium only results in making one look more pathetic and helpless. The best retort to one who engages in this style of argument is laughter--and the harder you laugh, the harder they cry.

Stalin - A Brief History of Industrialization and The Reign of Terror

Last week, it was reported that Moscow officials were considering erecting a statue to honor Joseph Stalin after seeing his imaged banned in public for forty-years. Due to outcry, Moscow officials backed off and it looks like Stalin will remain underground for the time being.

However, statue or no statue, I think it is important to revist what a monster this man really was. Below is a historical essay that looks into Stalin's reign of terror from the beginning to the end of his rule. My bibilography for this essay is entirely in print:

• Surviving the Storms: Memory of Stalin's Tyranny; by Helen Dmitriew
• Journey into the Whirlwind (Helen and Kurt Wolff Books); by Eugenia Ginzburg
• The Stalinist Terror in the Thirties: Documentation from the Soviet press (Hoover Institution publications); by Borys Lewytzkyj
• Behind the Urals: An American Worker in Russia's City of Steel (A Midland Book, Mb536); by John Scott, Stephen Kotkin
• A Vision Unfulfilled: Russia & the Soviet Union in the Twentieth Century; by John M. Thompson

Beginning in 1928, Joseph Stalin masterminded the first of three, five-year plans that would lead to the collectivization and mass industrialization of the Soviet Union. The developments made under these plans prepared the Soviet Union for the eventual war against Nazi Germany. However, Soviet citizens would pay for these five-year plans in blood; millions were purged and terrorized by a leader sought on obtaining absolute power by creating the perfect Soviet man—a man absolutely loyal to the State.

By 1929-1930, the Communist Party had almost completely shut down private trade with state stores replacing merchants. At this point, the government had already banned private ownership of land, but, due to peasant opposition, were cautious in turning farms over to the state. Instead of a direct confrontation, Stalin sought a compromise and decided on a plan of cooperative agriculture called the collective farm. Under the collective farm, farmers would voluntarily collectivize their farms with the state effectively controlling all procurement and production. If the state could gain this control, they would be able to transfer food and other farm goods to the cities at the lowest possible cost. However, Stalin’s biggest obstacle to collectivization was a richer peasant class called the Kulaks, who fiercely resisted any attempts at collectivization. Stalin initiated a propaganda effort to smear the name of the Kulaks. Being labeled “a Kulak” was akin to being called un-Soviet—a greedy person who doesn’t care for the state, only for themselves.

The peasants, as majority, resisted state attempts at collectivization and their defiance caused severe grain shortages. People in the cities, who worked in state-owned factories, weren’t being fed. John Scott, in his book, Behind the Urals describes this shortage from the perspective of the city:

“During the entire winter of 1932-33, however, the riggers got no meat, no butter, and almost no sugar or milk. They received only bread and a little cereal grain…in the beginning of 1933 in Dining-Room No. 30 it was necessary to eat two or even three dinners to get a really adequate mean for a man working high at fifty below zero (pg. 76, Scott)."

Stalin was falling behind in his efforts to industrialize and, fearing a revolt, knew he had to do something about getting workers in the city fed. The Communist Party, under Stalin’s orders, began to force peasants into collectivization and feverishly pushed production into a wartime like pace. Some peasants resisted this change by killing livestock and burning or hiding grain. The government immediately retaliated by labeling these rebel peasants as ‘kulaks.” Then they either forced them into labor camps or shot them. Between 1928 and 1931, the number of Gulag inmates increased from 28,000 to 2 million. Helen Dmitriew, a political prisoner, recalled meeting an older man in a labor camp who was the only one left alive in his family because of his resistance to collectivization (pg. 102, Dmitriew). He later died from overwork and malnutrition.

However, after forcing collectivization, production and procurement steadily increased. John Scott visited his wife Masha’s parents who were members of a local collectivized farm. He said:

“…(her father) spoke slowly and simply to me of what the collective farm had done in the village. Everyone had bread. The flax crop was larger than ever before, and there was more livestock. To be sure, there was some resistance…but they would learn.”

His father-in-law also saw and improvement in working conditions:

“…before the revolution they had worked twelve to fourteen hours a day, now they put in eight hours. What was gained by collective effort was spent in decreased working hours. Production was about the same as it had been twenty years before (pg. 125-126, Scott).”

Eventually this increase in farming production was felt in the cities. Scott explained,

“By 1936 the food question was solved. That is to say, there was enough food for everybody…from 1935 to 1937 Magnitogorsk boasted five model ‘Gastronom’ that were as well-stocked as any American city, though Magnitogorsk prices were a little higher (pg. 242, Scott).”

Stalin’s plan of collectivizing farms to feed cities for crash industrialization worked, but many Soviet peasants and their families paid dearly for it. One of the most tragic results of forced collectivization was found in the Ukraine during 1931 and 1932. It is estimated that 3 to 5 million Ukrainians died from deprivation and starvation. Conditions were abominimal:

“The peasants ate dogs, horses, rotten potatoes, the bark of trees, grass—anything that they could find. Incidents of cannibalism were not uncommon (Thompson, pg. 266).”

The massive industrial transformation was gaining steam within the Soviet Union, and collectivization provided its base. The state eventually gained control of all heavy industry and Stalin was ready to implement his First Five-Year Plan in 1929. In the next ten years, the Soviet Union would experience a tremendous leap in industrialization, but this also would come at the expense of human life. The First Five-Year Plan focused on heavy industry such as coal, steel, iron, plastics, chemicals, automobiles and machine tools. The Second Five-Year Plan focused on consumer goods, along with further development of heavy industry, and the Third Five-Year Plan focused on militarization. Cities emerged and formed out of nowhere (such as Magnitogorsk, where the majority of John Scott’s story takes place). Beginning in 1930, half a billion cubic feet of excavation work was completed, forty-two million cubic feet of reinforced concrete poured, five million cubic feet of fire bricks laid and a quarter of a million tons of structural steel erected. The feats were amazing and gigantic. Many peasants, who fled their farms due to the appalling conditions resulting from collectivization, were put to work building these cities. Though many of these peasants were untrained and had no technical skills, they worked hard in groups, and became largely responsible for the labor that built the first dam on the Ural River in April 1931 (pg. 70, Scott). On the other hand, the Communist Party set many unrealistic goals within the Five Year Plans, which lead to inefficiency, waste and more loss of human life. According to Scott, many workers were inadequately trained and pushed too hard, causing them to make costly mistakes. He stated that:

“all too frequently, however, the new aggregates failed to work normally. Semi-trained workers were unable to operate the complicated machines, which had been erected. Equipment was ruined, men were crushed, gassed, and poisoned, and money was spent in astronomical quantities. The men were replaced by new ones from the villages, the money was made good by the State in government subsidies, and the materials and supplies were somehow found (pg. 136, Scott).”

The push for higher production was increased even further through the Stakhonovite movement. Stakhana, a coal miner, had attained an enormous feat for coal extraction and the Party exploited this accomplishment by making him a national hero with the hopes of motivating others to work harder. From a statistical standpoint, output and production did increase, but it also strongly embittered many workers. Scott recounted,

“This created a restlessness among workers who had received the impression that all improvements in production would reflect themselves in direct wage increases, and that norms would never be changed (pg. 163, Scott).”

Many times, a “Stakhanovite” risked being harmed or killed by the majority of workers who weren’t capable of producing at the same level.

The Communist Party motivated the Soviet people through the “social realism” movement. Production news dominated the press; other pieces of propaganda depicted the “Soviet Socialist Utopia” where everyone’s sacrifices today would result in a better and brighter tomorrow. Writers and artists were paid by the government not to portray life as it was, but life as it ought to be. Scott observed,

“They (Soviet people) had never been softened by easy living. The papers told them every day that they were the luckiest people in world, and they believed it. They had work and bread. (pg. 265, Scott).”

The duality within in the lives of the Soviet people was characterized in the social realism movement.

The results of industrialization were largely successful. The bright side was that by the eve of World War II, the Soviet Union was 2nd in world production behind only the United States. The combined success of farming production and industrial capacity would eventually play a major role in defeating Hitler. However, ecological conditions deteriorated severely due to mass industrialization. Yet, the negative side effects to the earth would be nothing compared to the losses incurred during the purges and reign of terror.

THE REIGN OF TERROR

In the summer of 1933, forced collectivization succeeded and the threat of a peasant rebellion had subsided. Soon, there were members of the Communist party favoring efforts to rebuild bridges back to them. Stalin, with other hardliners, stood in firm opposition by arguing that any “kulaks” should be given the death penalty.

Stalin drew opposition within the government from a party secretary named of Mikhail Riutin. In what later was named the “Riutun Affair,” Riutin, who was strongly opposed the extreme punishments towards farmers, submitted an appeal to the Central Committee denouncing Stalin’s methods of collectivization as reckless and coercive. When a few other politburo members signed the appeal, Stalin became furious and retaliated by arresting Riutin along with the other signatories (they would eventually be executed in the later days of the Reign of Terror). Even though Stalin showed great anger in dealing with Riutin, he still wasn’t strong enough politically to initiate greater purges. However, he would gain that power after January, 1934 at the 17th Congress of the Communist Party.

Sergei Kirov was a charismatic orator within the Communist party that heavily favored moderation. His strong personality naturally attracted others looking for leadership against Stalin’s extremist ideas. The growing support for Kirov manifested itself at the 17th Congress where Kirov was given a louder and livelier ovation than Stalin. To add insult to injury, Kirov received more votes than Stalin did in an inner election to the party’s Central Committee. Stalin, who was losing his grip on power, immediately transferred Kirov to Moscow, where a gunman, who was supposedly working alone, assassinated him. There isn’t any concrete evidence directly linking Stalin to any involvement in this assassination, but the elimination of Stalin’s biggest opponent was a rather dubious coincidence.

The government’s reasoning for the purges was to protect the country from “counter-revolutionaries” and “enemies of the people.” These purges, amazingly, mostly affected the members within the Bolshevik wing of communist party loyal to Stalin. The official regulation as stated in Article 58-1, 58-7 and 58-12 of the R.S.F.S.R. follows:

Any action is counter-revolutionary, which is directed toward the overthrow, undermining, or weakening of the power of the workers and peasants…or directed toward the weakening of the external security of the Soviet Union, or the administrative, or national gains of the proletarian revolution….

Undermining of state industry, transport, commerce, monetary circulation, or credit system, as well as of the cooperative systems, committed for counter-revolutionary purposes by counter revolutionary use of state institutions or factories…or interference with their normal activity, as well as use of state institutions and factories in the interests of their former owner…involves…supreme measure of social protection – shooting….

Failure to report definite knowledge of preparation or commitment of a counter-revolutionary crime, involves…deprivation of freedom for not less than six months.

Eugina Ginzburg, reveals in her book, Journey into the Whirlwind, just how loosely the last article above was used in terrorizing the Soviet people. She was a writer for the Pravada, a communist newspaper circulated in Kazan and worked with a man named Professor Elvov., who wrote a four volume History of the All-Union Communist Party. Stalin loyalists took exception with his accounting of events in 1905, and the book was labeled as “having errors in its treatment of permanent revolution.” The whole book, and Elvov’s article in particular, was condemned by Stalin in his famous letter to the editor of the Proletarian Revolution. After the appearance of the letter, the errors were defined more specifically as smuggled-in ‘Troskyist ideas’(pg.7-8, Ginzburg).” Elvov was later arrested and purged from the Communist party charges of counter-revolution.

Ginzburg was later confronted and accused what she had not done in dealing with Elvov according to Article 58-12. She stated:

“I had not denounced Elvov as a purveyor of Troskyist contraband. I had not written a crushing review of the source book on Tartar history he had edited—I had even contributed to it…I had not even once, attacked him publicly at a meeting…My attempts to appeal to common sense were summarily dismissed (pg. 9, Ginzburg).”

Stalin’s reign of terror wasn’t intended to appeal to common sense. It was designed to instill fear into the minds of the Soviet people that any opposition to Stalin would be punished. Even so much as a joke about Stalin would be grounds for arrest or execution. Eventually, Ginzberg was accused of association to counter-revolution and sent to prison.

In jail, Ginzberg then underwent a purge trial where she was interrogated under extreme duress in harsh conditions. One of the methods of torture used to gain a confession was called the “conveyor belt.” This procedure consisted of putting her into a room that was so small she couldn’t sit in for days, and then they deprived her of sleep and food, while verbally threatening harm to her and her family.

When these attempts at her confession failed, the authorities extended their reign of terror to other who worked with her. One day she was summoned to the office of her interrogator and found co-worker, and friend, Volodya Dyakonov sitting in the room. He was asked to sign a document of verification stating that Ginzburg was organizer of a counter-revolutionary group. When responding to Ginzburg’s plea, Volodya responded by saying, “Forgive me Genia. We’ve just had a daughter. I need to stay alive (pg. 92, Ginzburg).” Terror had won another victim.

All of these phony trials were set up so that the Soviet people would realize that there was a real threat and that it needed to be purged out. Stalin would first purge his Party, then the military and eventually even the political police hired to run the purge trials. James Scott concluded in the end:

“the purges had a devastating effect on the lives of millions of Soviet citizens, who were arrested and exiled. Most of these people were innocent, but some were guilty…Stalin considered the investment a good one (pg. 206, Scott).”

The effects of the purges had long lasting effects on the Soviet system and people. Many government leaders were purged, leaving a very inefficient and frightened governing body in its wake. The Bolsheviks were the hardest hit group out of all the political groups. Over 80% of the delegates to the 17th Party Congress were either executed or in prison. The military was completely cleansed of the “enemies of Stalin.” This cleansing of the Red Army would have would disastrously affect their ability to fight. In the Winter War against Finland, the Soviets fought poorly, and this miserable performance led Hitler to believe that the Soviet Union was vulnerable to attack. When Hitler eventually attacked the Soviet Union, most of the Soviet Air Force was destroyed on the ground because the pilots feared what would happen to them if they had acted without permission from Stalin.

So, why did Stalin resort to such utter horror? Nikita Khrushchev believed that it was because Stalin was just paranoid and mad. Even though this may be true, Boris Levytsky showed in his book, The Stalinist Terror in the Thirties, that there was more to it.

“In trying to establish himself as the ‘new Lenin,’ Stalin suddenly felt himself surrounded by doubters and dissidents…determined to silence these doubters, Stalin initiated a relentless pursuit of ‘enemies of the people’ while encouraging endless praise and adulation of himself (pg. 230, Levytsky).”

Stalin’s hope was to establish absolute and unlimited power for himself by molding a “totally obedient” party member who was completely loyal and obedient to the “great god”, Stalin.

Stalin succeeded, through collectivization and mass industrialization, in modernizing the Soviet Union in the 20’s and 30’s. This modernization would prove pivotal in their victory over Germany in World War II, yet there was a natural reluctance on the part of many Soviet people and Stalin felt betrayed and dishonored when many people doubted his forceful and coercive methods. Stalin did not see this as a mere difference of opinion and was dedicated to ridding himself of these “enemies.” Millions of lives were lost between modernization, the purges and World War II. The Soviet people, who endured through this firestorm, had hopes of a greater future when the Soviet Union emerged as a nuclear superpower after the war. Fifty years later, this formally muscular superpower would splinter and be reduced to a core nation run mostly by kleptocrats. Unfortunately for these people, their course of history was set when communism became the mechanism through which the Soviets chose to lead. This ideology caused their leaders to build their country’s muscle with steroids versus the solid foundation in the West; where free people determine their own fate through hard work--ultimately benefiting the common good. Our contrasting standing in today’s world testifies that freedom is not only the inalienable right of man, but it is the fabric with which a lasting society is built upon.

A Capitalist's Diary - Airbus's Big Win Over Boeing

Via Glenn Reynolds, Colby Cash discusses the success of the new Airbus A380:

One feels a little embarrassed at the "See? Europeans aren't entirely pathetic" part. And, after all, the A380 still does need to get off the ground. But in an age of exaggerated environmental and geopolitical anxieties, it is encouraging to see a feat of engineering and business flair celebrated without apology.

The advent of the superjumbo was a long time coming, much longer than anyone originally expected. The Boeing 747, currently the largest airliner in service, was first flown in 1969. It has, in other words, gone unchallenged since the year when man walked on the moon and wallowed in the mud at Woodstock. No one at Boeing, or anywhere else, ever expected the 747 to be the workhorse of the skies for half a century. The original design was created in an effort to win a U.S. military contract for high-capacity cargo lift, and was adapted to commercial aviation only after Boeing lost out. (Today -- this is one of history's wry little jokes, I suppose -- the U.S. military relies on modified 747s for airborne command-and-control, and there has been persistent talk of adapting the airframe for use as a cheap missile platform.)

I was initially turned off by the Euro leader's grandstanding during the rollout of the A380, but that feeling quickly turned into pure joy. As Colby Cash describes above, the new A380 owes its existence to the mechanisms of capitalism. In this age of oil dependency, the Europeans proudly stood in front the biggest commercial airplane that world has seen. And proud they should be; Airbus has shown Boeing a thing or two about how capitalism weeds out stogy-old ideas that refuse to change.

The August 2, 1999 (Vol. 140, No.3) issue of Fortune Magazine featured an article on Airbus titled "Blue Skies for Airbus." Said article revealed that Airbus was about to bet the company on a code-named, super-project called the A3XX. Not settling for their success in gaining market share from Boeing on midsized planes (100-115 passengers), they would attempt to go after Boeing's prized 747 maket. However, Airbus's recent success had a rough start as the company would emerge from what started out as the epitome of Euro buerocracy.

Airbus formed in the 1970's out of a partnership between four European companies: British Aerospace, DaimlerChrystler Aerospace, Aerospatiale (France), and Casa (Spain). They agreed to pool their resources and underwrite the costs of capital expenditures to design and manufacture their airplanes. However, according to Fortune, this group became "politicized, inefficient, and financially opaque." For example, the French almost pulled out of the design of the A318 because they didn't feel like they were getting what they deserved. To save the project, Fortune said, "some of the production of another plane, the A319, was moved from Germany to France." At this point, government loans were primarily responsible for keeping this wounded duck from being shot out of the sky; hardly the recipe for a successful company.

Years prior to this article, Airbus centralized their decision making authority and, through this new corporate structure, developed a shrewd business plan that would eventually leave Boeing reeling. They designed their next generation of mid-to-large sized aircraft to use the same parts as their smaller jets. Airlines, who operate with razor thin margins, would be able to spread their maintenance costs over an entire range of planes, instead of concentrating costs to planes of the same model. Airbus offered an economical alternative that was extremely attractive to the airline industry.

Their sales rapidly increased as a result and Boeing cried foul to the U.S. government. They argued that Airbus was "dumping" low cost, cheap planes into the market. Rightly, Washington decided this wasn't the case, and Boeing continued to lose market share. Boeing was now going head-to-head with a serious competitor.

The next battle in the commercial airplane industry turned into a debate over whether the market wanted "more capacity" or "smaller, but faster." Airbus, saw that the market for travel was increasing 5-10% a year and, with no signs of a letdown (in the pre-September 11th world), they figured that capacity at airports would be limited in the amount of flights that could take off and land. As demand for flights steadily increased, capacity would eventually cap the amount of travelers that could leave from a given point. Airbus hoped to solve this by increasing the passenger capacity with their future 555-seat passenger plane.

Boeing looked at another set of market data and decided that travelers desired to decrease their time in the air. Instead of going head-to-head by redesigning a double-decker version of the 747, they would try to develop a super-sonic commercial plane that would get travelers to their destination much faster. They would meet this demand with a cool, 21st Century-looking "Sonic Cruiser" (shown below), which Boeing said, "would change the way the world flies as dramatically as did the introduction of the jet age."

Looks pretty spiffy, however, as Apple figured out, cool and spiffy looking don't necessarily meet the needs of the market. The Travel Insider explains what Boeing's venture would realize:

What was this allegedly revolutionary new plane? Remember that the introduction of the jet age brought about a doubling in plane speeds, and a doubling of passenger capacities.

Alas, the Sonic Cruiser promised to fly merely 15-20% faster than a regular jet plane (at Mach 0.95 - 0.98), and would carry only 200 - 250 passengers (half as many as a 747), with a range of between 6,500 - 10,000 miles (similar to a 747). The plane was described as using about the same amount of fuel to carry a passenger as a 747 or 767.

The promise of a 15-20% increase in speed (15% faster than a 747, 20% faster than a 767) is not the same as a 15-20% reduction in travel time. 20 - 30 minutes of any flight is spent on the ground, taxiing to and from the runway. More time can be wasted with air traffic control delays. When planes are flying below 10,000 ft in the US they are limited to 250 knots maximum speed. Planes don't fly at full speed when climbing up to cruise level. On an 8 hour trans-Atlantic flight, the Sonic Cruiser would save about one hour - hardly a revolutionary change in flying time at all.

Furthermore, when you add in all the other factors that make up a total travel experience (driving to the airport, checking in, going through security, boarding the plane, disembarking at the other end, waiting for luggage, then traveling on from the airport to your final destination) there is as much as 5 or more hours of additional traveling time. A one hour saving on a 13 hour total travel experience is a negligible saving - sure, it is welcome, but it hardly 'changes the way the world flies as dramatically as did the introduction of the jet age'.

The Sonic Cruiser failed. It was a business, not an operational failure. Boeing cancelled this project and decided to play prevent defense with their latest, fuel-efficient 7E7. This plane will gain some traction in the market, however it is far from the revolutionary designs that Airbus implemented. Instead of responding to Airbus's successes with the fresh and revolutionary designs that were once a signature of their company, Boeing's response has been nothing more than snearing rhetoric. A good axiom in business is to remember that the market pays for results, not soundbites and cutdowns. Currently, Airbus is the company that is meeting market demand, while Boeing continues to wane by their refusal to change.

So, American capitalists should cheer this success by Airbus. When you have socialist leaders standing on a platform praising the A380, they are, maybe without their knowledge, really cheering the triumph of capitalism, which ultimately benefits us all. Even though these European countries subsidized Airbus to a large degree, Airbus's ultimate win came from the "invisible hand." If Boeing doesn't realize this, that same "invisible hand" will push them out the door.

Pettiness

I'm working on a longish post in response the article about the Russian government rehabilitating Joe Stalin, but it is taking a lot longer than I thought. I guess when your grammer is sinking to the level of a demented jellyfish, it is time to hang it up for the evening.

In the meantime, I would like to share with you (all 4 of you) a little encounter I had this morning. As I was standing in line for a hot cup o' Joe in my favorite North Beach cafe, two San Franciscian's stood behind me, rudely breaking the law of talking about politics before everyone's had their first hit of caffeine in the morning. They were going on and on about how Bush isn't "serious about the war because of his million-bazillion dollar party!" My head started to get that aching feeling you get when you wake up the morning after drinking too much red wine.

Listen, I'm not the political swami who's feels he is so much smarter than everyone else. You can look at my IU basketball predictions to give you a gauge of how good I am at predictions. But, as those two socialites continued to jabber, my headache softened when I eased back and just let it go. I've had to learn to do this since I moved here 4 1/2 years ago--you pick your battles, or you go on your website and bitch about it. Guess which avenue I chose?

The refrains coming from the peanut gallery are numerous. Here are a few: fake turkeys, no flue shots, but Cheney got one!; every red-stater is a Jesus lovin'-gun shootin'-warmonger; the Euros, Arabs, Africans, Latins and the Candians hate us, but those that don't work for the CIA; Ohio was stolen; Rumsfeld is deliberately holding back armor and troops; we're too stingy to the tsunami victims; etc...(I'd list more, but I feel that headache returning).

Looking at this impressive list of arguments, it is no wonder that they think Bush is an idiot. It takes such a statospheric level of thinking to come up with such ideas. When I look at the reality around me, the world looks much more sinister and complicated than being the result of all the plans Bush and his Third Reich could cook up. But alas, I can count on the tinfoil hat brigade to right my misguided and muddled thinking with their complex thinking.

So, Bush isn't serious about the war? Afghanistan is free and Iraq is having elections in 10 days. Is that serious, or should we implement your serious plans that always start out with the words "Global Summit, Kyoto or Durban Conference on Racisism."

It's hard to elevate the conversation to addressing legitimate concerns when the critics are dead set on being petty. I want to win this war, but I'm not convinced that these folks do. The "concern for the war" that the two individuals behind me in line talked about having was belied by the comment that ended the conversation when one of them said, "Bush, he's the real terrorist."

Until this pettiness ceases, I'll be drinking an aweful lot of coffee...

Another Tyranny, Another Dustbin

China defended its decision to murder pro-democracy demonstrators in Tiananmen Square the day after the death of a Communist Party official who, at the time, spoke out against the Chinese government's actions:

"The political disturbance and the problem of Zhao himself has already passed. What happened in 1989 has reached its conclusion," Kong Quan, the Foreign Ministry spokesman, said at a regular briefing. Citing the rapid growth of the Chinese economy since the Tiananmen massacre, he added: "The past 15 years have shown China's decision was correct."

Passed? You mean suppressed to the ground with a big stick. One tends to be a little hesitant to demonstrate their opposition after watching their own army open fire on them. Why don't you ask the thousands of Chinese who escaped your tyranny, that live right here in San Francisco, what they think has "passed?" Well, I have, and most of them would have very naughty things to say about you and your so called "conclusion."

And if you think the last, and selective, 15 years mean anything, look to last 60 years; the world (except for Barbara Boxer & Co.) has seen, in that time, that even the most barbarous of regimes are one step away from being tossed into the dustbin of history. Hitler and Stalin both improved their respective economies in the short-term, but their gluttony (just like yours), in the long-run, would reveal the rot within their tyranny. It wouldn't be long before what they built through fear and trembling, would come tumbling down in the face of the imperfect, but free, world. Put your 15 years of short-term economic growth up against the long-reaching freedom that, in the last 3 years, has birthed in Afghanistan and the Ukraine, and soon to be Iraq, and you'll eventually, and painfully, see how the end never justifies the means.

Climbing Log: Mount Sill - 1st Attempt

"Climbing California's Fourteeners," by Stephen Procella and Cameron Burns, is the "Bible" for climbers attempting to summit the 15 highest peaks in California. Each and every climbing party I met attempting one of these peaks has used this book in their research. This book is an amazing resource on the history of climbing these mountains, however, most of the discussions with climbers on the mountain usually display, with varying degrees of hostility, frustration over the lack of detail in finding routes described in the book.

Unfortunately, my climbing team and I learned this the hard way. Below is a log and analysis of our 1st attempt at climbing Mount Sill. (There will be a wrap-up and pictures to follow, however I am posting the body for now).

June 2003 - Unsuccessful Summit Attempt of Mount Sill

My attempt at climbing Mount Sill in June of 2003 was my first unsuccessful summit attempt. Many things happened that lead to this occurrance, but lack of solid beta, or intelligence, was the primary culprit.

TEAM MEMBERS

Since my name on this blog pseudonymous, I will do the same with my climbing team. The team, including me, consisted of five men who I will refer to as:

• Bam-Bam
• Bugle Bum (initially to be called Organ Arse)
• The Frenchman
• Me-Wind-Em-Up
• TF6S

TEAM OBJECTIVES

• Day One: Via Glacier Lodge, take the South Fork of the Big Pine Creek Trail to the top of a large buttress to reach Willow Lake. At Willow Lake, leave the trail and follow the creek east to Elinore Lake (not Elsinore as per Porcella). Set up camp for the night.
  
• Day Two: 5 am start. Leave camp with summit gear towards the Eastern face of Mount Sill. Ascend the mountain face via the Class 3 East Coulouir with Ice Axes and Crampons. Summit no later than 1 pm and decend via the same route (The Frenchman and Bugle Boy would ski down). At Elinore Lake, clean and pack up camp, then head back to Glacier Lodge parking lot the same way we came in.

TRIP LOG

DAY ONE: We began the trip, after a solid nights sleep, from Glacier Lodge. The 75-degree weather was perfect at 7,000 ft and everyone was giddy looking over the basin where we could view the rugged Palisade Crest and Norman Clyde Peak to South (all over 13,000 ft). I winced as The Frenchman and Bugle Bum put on their packs containing all their ski gear. With their packs over 100 pounds, I felt bad that I filled their ski boots with rocks. Ok, I didn't really do that, because that would be irresponsible; but I didn't envy them.

The initial hour of any climbing trip is where everything begins to settle and the tone is set for the whole trip--you begin to accept the reality that you are carrying 45 lbs. on your back and you find your pace and rhythm. During this point Bam-Bam suffered a hard lesson in learning to only pack what you need. His pack, even without the skis that the others were carrying, was severely over weight. Within twenty minutes, he was lagging behind and couldn’t keep up. After radioing him several times, I sensed his mounting frustration and decided it was necessary to take on some of his weight. By the next stop, Me-Wind-Em-Up and I had split up some of the cooking gear to lighten his load.

According the Ranger Station, we would have to make a river crossing to get to the South Fork Trail heading up the buttress to Willow Lake. The drainage from the creek coming down from Willow Lake was rather high in early summer, however the Rangers had said the crossing would be relatively easy. As we reached the river, the five of us took a break and walked around the area to find the best place to cross. The Frenchman and Bugle Bum decided to strip down and cross the river at a calm point that came up to their chest. The rest of us saw a place up river where we could throw our bags over and jump across. The 36-degree water does tend to entice one to look for a better way across.

Bam-Bam jumped the river across from us and with Me-Wind-Em-UP belaying me, i.e. holding on to the back of my shorts, I heaved the first bag across the river, with Bam-Bam guiding it to shore. I repeated this action with the second bag successfully, however, my foot fell in the water. So, I decided to walk down shore, stomping the water out of my boot before attempting to get the last bag, Me-Wind-Em-Up’s, over. As I was doing this, Bam-Bam and Me-Wind-Em-Up attempted to move the bag without me, misjudging the amount of weight they need to move. The bag fell into the river and started downstream. I took off running to a point where I could get into the water and hold on to some branches. I jumped in and the bag came barreling down the river hitting me flat in the chest. I was able to hold onto some branches while arresting the bag, however gallons of water were building up as I had created a human dam in the middle of this glacial, runoff river. After screaming for help, Me-Wind-Em-Up rushed over and plucked his bag out of the river. Seeing that I was already wet, I just waded across and got out on the other side looking like a purple twin-pop.

The first drama of the day brought some relief due to our secondary planning. Me-Wind-Em-Up had wet socks, so I gave him and extra pair. I had another extra pair that I needed since I was soaked. I was thankful that it was now 85-degrees out, so I was able to strip down to my boxers so my clothes could dry. We had ruined one of the Motorola radios, but the main worry at this point came as we tried to get Me-Wind-Em-Up’s camera to work. It was on, but it refused to focus (weeks later the camera ended up working perfectly again—nice work Canon!). So, looking like a Swiss-Alpine climber’s nightmare with my black mountaineering boots laced up, my purple-flannel boxers, no shirt and my pack, we started up the switchbacks of the buttress.

At the top of the switchbacks, right below the north-face of Birch Mountain (13.6k), we had our first encounter with the wet, slushy snow that would haunt us for the rest of the trip. Being that the snow was soft and mushy, our crampons had absolutely no effect. We had to traverse around the snow to reach the switchbacks leading to the top of the buttress. This off-trail route was filled with scree and talus and was slow going. Not only did we have to be careful of falling, but also it was important to minimize erosion impact. However, with a slight delay, we made it to the top of buttress reaching 9,000 ft.

The top of the buttress looks out over a basin in the middle of one of the most beautiful sights I have ever seen in my life. With the buttress and Birch Mountain behind us, we were surrounded by a “U-shaped” jagged, ridge line that contained two 14k ft. peaks (Middle Palisade and Mt Sill) along with eleven peaks over 13k feet. Looking into this basin, we could see Willow Lake about 800 feet below and, according to the Porcella book, the creek running east that we would need to follow to Elinore Lake. We left the South Fork Trail and descended to the bottom of the basin where we ate lunch on some rocks just overlooking the lake. Off in the distance, at the top of Mt Sill, some gray, hazy clouds formed that come in like clockwork around 1-2 pm at high altitudes in the Sierras. The PB&J sandwich I ate tasted like heaven after logging 3,000 ft delta in altitude difference that morning.

Another harsh lesson would be learned at this point. We had one water-filter that Bam-Bam brought. It contained a number of independent pieces that, if lost, would affect its ability to, you know, work. The Frenchman was filling his water bottle, when a plastic piece, which connected the pump to the tube leading to the canister, popped off and fell in the river. We searched and searched and, like the ever cunning fellow, I found it in the bottom of the river lodged between some rocks. Dodging a bullet, we connected it and kept pumping water only to have the bloody thing pop off again never to be found again. The filter still worked as Bam-Bam rigged the tube to fit directly into the pump, however instead of it taking 20-30 seconds to fill a liter of water, it would take 7-10 minutes.

Leaving the trail, we would be bushwhacking the rest of way up to Elinore Lake. We crossed several smaller creaks that were draining into Willow Lake from various other lakes sitting at the bases of the peaks sitting on the ridgeline. After our hop-skips and jumps, we started up the creek line.

At this point and time, we came to the obvious conclusion that there is no way that Porcella had climbing Mt. Sill via this route. For the next three hours, we would run into cliff faces, snow covered couloirs, thick brush and talus fields impeding our way to Elinore Lake. Add this to the fact that the showers we saw off in the distance were now on top of us.

Towards the end of this section, there was a cliff face that encountered some of the most dangerous climbing I had done to date. This part was pure Class 4 and we were without a rope (for those of you unfamiliar with mountaineering ratings--Class 1 and 2 as easy walking; class 3 as scrambling-moderate-to-difficult; class 4 as difficult scrambling where a rope might be preferable, but mostly required; and class five for technical climbing requiring a rope). A fall would have left anyone of us in serious condition. Bam-Bam had a plastic rope used for our bear bag that he “belayed” us with as we hugged the cliff-face, with full packs on, across this perilous section. The rope was purely psychological, but it was enough to get us across without wetting our pants.

According to our topo, we were about 2 miles from Elinore Lake (about ¾ of the way there). We continued across a swampy, grassy area, only to come face-to-face with another 1000 ft. cliff. We wandered around for and hour and a half, crossing several creeks only to realize that the only option would be to cross the main creek, and follow the talus slopes up the valley, between the nameless mountain we were facing and Mount Gailey, which led to Elinore Lake. It was past 5 pm and we decided that we’d had enough. We would set up camp, at about 9,500 ft., and get an early start the next morning.

I learned an important lesson with regards to mountain cuisine--Bam-Bam, who absolutely loves to cook, demonstrated that you don’t have to eat food that tastes like your shoe when you’re camping. Since it was only a two-day climb, we had fresh veggies sautéed in olive oil served with angel hair pasta, pesto sauce (from a little packet) and mozzarella cheese. Not only did it taste like something I could order in my local North Beach Italian restaurant, it was light and added almost no additional weight to our packs. This meal was a huge morale booster.

After dinner, Bugle Bum derived his name by demonstrating what happens to the human body after finishing an REI-just-add-water-to-dirt-and-dried-noodles-and-call-it Beef Stroganoff-meal. As we set up camp for the evening, and swapped stories that always began with, “Can you believe how stupid and bad the directions for getting up the creek were?” a green cloud containing pure poison was being emitted from something I once thought was human within our group. Throughout the night, I slept easily knowing that we had an impenetrable force field to ward off any bears with late dinner plans. Unfortunately for the Frenchman, he had to share a tent with Bugle Bum, which he would later regret.

DAY TWO: 4 am rolled around, and we all dragged ourselves out into the cold to find that one of team members hadn’t had the best of nights--the Frenchman had to get up several times in the night to throw-up. After making several jokes about what Bugle Bum’s fumes had done to him, we knew that in all seriousness, the Frenchman was experiencing high-altitude sickness. After talking with him, he really wanted to give the summit a shot and, other than a headache and vomiting, he wasn’t displaying any symptoms of the more life-threatening high-altitude sicknesses such as HAPE or HACE. Being the good libertarian-ish guy that I am, I trusted the Frenchman’s judgment in his own self and felt he continue if he wanted to, and so did Bugle Boy. However, Bam-Bam took exception. We argued about the Frenchman’s ability to trust his own body, but in the end Bam-Bam would not budge. He wasn’t being the bad guy; he really cared about the Frenchman and didn’t want to see anything bad happen to him on the mountain. We all knew it, but we also knew that if the Frenchman stayed behind, at least one person would have to miss the summit to take him down to a lower altitude. In the end, Bugle Bum decided to stay and the rest of us got our gear together to begin our summit attempt. We settled our differences with a hug and would call each other when we got to Glacier Lodge to make sure everyone made it down safely.

Bam-Bam, Me-Wind-Em-Up and I crossed the river and slogged up the long talus field that covered the north slopes of Temple Crag. Within the first 20-minutes, we hit the wet-soft snow that be the obstacle that caused me to reveal an extremely ugly side of myself.

Since we were crossing talus, each step you took was completely unpredictable. You didn’t know if you were standing on a rock, or a bush or 6-foot hole between boulders. So movement would go like this: step, step, FALL—step, FALL—step, step, step, step…...step, FALL—FALL—FALL—step, step--etc. Our crampons were useless over this terrain; what we needed were snowshoes. As this was occurring, I kept repeating the Porcella description of the trail over and over in my head. This lead me to mumbling fucks and shits under my breath in complete frustration over what I was now realizing would be a failed attempt at the top. The mumbling of swearwords turned into all out cursing every time I fell into one of those holes. Bam-Bam and Me-Wind-Em-Up were experiencing the same frustrations, however they tried to laugh it off and keep it in perspective--I, on the other hand, did no such thing. Then my general swearing and cussing turned into negative comments about anything from the snow, to the rangers, to the book, to lacking snowshoes. I was being a major drag on my team.

We eventually made it to Elinore Lake around 11:00 am. Sitting just above 11,000 ft, staying true to our decision to summit no later than 1:00 pm, we decided it would be best to turn around (even though it looked like a straight-forward climb to the top). We decided to take about an hour to just hangout up there, nap, eat, bask in the sun, take pictures, etc. This would be important in helping me to gain some perspective.

Me-Wind-Em-Up and I ended up lying on the top of a huge boulder, absorbing nature in all its majesty. It was about 65-degrees and the only noises we heard came from a slight breeze and what sounded like hundreds of birds singing cheerfully. Me-Wind-Em-Up, who happens to be one of my closest friends, broke the silence when he said, “You know, we are really lucky to be up here, and I know we didn’t make it to the summit, but just look at this place. How many people will ever sit in this place and see this amazing picture? I wish my parents could see this, but they will never get the chance.” At that point, the feeling I had when I first looked into that basin across that ridgeline came rushing back. That feeling met head-on with that fussy, little whiner that bitched and complained up that snow path. The initial feeling of elation changed to an overwhelming sense of embarrassment. I choked a few tears back, smiled and forgave myself for being a dummy. The rest of the trip would see me fighting back any of those urges and frustrations, and that moment that I spent up there with my buddy has become one of the most important lessons learned in my life. Unfortunately, I’m not yet smart enough to figure these things out beforehand, but I thank my friend for being understanding to me.

We headed back down and packed up our camp. This time, we decided to avoid the creek and follow the high ground to the South Fork Trail—in doing so, we found the route that would take us back up to Elinore Lake the following year. As we walked across, we looked up one of the slopes and saw several ski-trails in the snow; we laughed about our buddies being able to get at least a few runs in to justify the weight they carried on their backs. The rest of the trip was uneventful as we cruised back down, telling stories (fish-tales) and quoting movies. It was a beautiful day and our conversation started to vear towards describing that big, fat steak we'd eat once we returned to town.

We made it back to the car around 4 pm and cruised down to Rossi’s, in Big Pine, seeing the most welcoming sign for weary pilgrims that said, “Steak & Spaghetti—OPEN.” Everyone was down safe and some hard lessons were learned, but with good friends and some of the most beautiful landscape in the world, the trip, which was the least successful that I'd been on, was judged a great one by the three dirty, carnivorous, steak eaters occupying a dark booth at Rossi’s.

More to Follow…

Force Transformation

Anthony Perez-Miller ponders the question of force transformation and its future manifestations:

My last link dump pointed to various defenses of SecDef Donald Rumsfeld. At some point I will acquit myself better on that subject, but in the meantime: The blogosphere has for the most part moved beyond merely answering the complaints of sundry hacks to considering what force transformation actually means.

I'm still trying to get my mind around this one as well, however, I do have some initial brainstorms that we should keep in mind in furthering this discussion.

First, we should expand this discussion beyond the Armed Forces and include the Intelligence Agencies. If there is one major lesson we have learned in Afghanistan and Iraq, it is the need for "actionable intelligence." The future forces that we deploy must work as seamlessly as possible in reacting to threats from the initial point of the gathering intelligence, its actionable assessment, and then the planning and execution phase of forces on the ground. Lacking human intel along with a CIA who is hostile to the Bush Doctrine, the CIA, in the end, may be the part of this equation that needs to be changed the most.

Next, it is imperative that we address how far the United States is willing to take the Bush Doctrine. What should our civilian leadership do if they are, in these instances, given intelligence on the ground about Baathist leaders in Syria giving order to forces fighting in Iraq, or on the nuclear capabilities of Iran? Given that we were snowed on WMDs in Iraq, it looks like this may be the hardest question of all to answer. However, it should also be emphasized that we cannot just "wait and see" what happens. If Syria is harboring men who are wanted for making war, in Iraq, against the United States, or if one of the largest terrorist supporting countries in the world, Iran, is working on a nuke, they forfeit their sovereignty and the America must not be afraid to act.

Just a couple of initial thoughts to get the ball rolling.

al-Sadr's Change of Heart

Remember Muqtada al-Sadr, the Shiite cleric and the head of the Imam Mehdi Army, who tried to go toe-to-toe with the U.S. military this summer?

Well, this story is certainly good news. This AP reporter writes on the various security situations, mostly in Mosul, that are affecting the January 30th elections and towards the end of his story is this nugget:

Elsewhere, about 300 followers of radical Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al-Sadr began a three-day sit-in in front of the Oil Ministry in Baghdad to protest gasoline shortages that have caused hours-long waits at gas stations.

About a dozen of them entered the ministry and complained to Minister Thamir Ghadbhan, asking why U.S. troops have fuel for their vehicles and Iraqis don't.

Notice what the story doesn't say: no guns, no beheadings of innocent Iraqis who cooperate with the Americans, no hunkering down in holy shrines taking pot shots at their enemies. Instead, we see a peaceful demonstration in front of a government building. The U.S. Army completely embarrassed the young cleric and his followers during their last standoff, however that alone wasn't what changed al-Sadr's tactics.

Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani ended the standoff in Najaf by negotiating a truce between U.S. forces and the holed up cleric's rebellion. The truce not only ended the fighting, it reenforced al-Sistani as the leader who truly has the popular support in the Shiite community. This is very important, as al-Sistani has been the leader who rejected Iranian support for armed rebellion, backed free elections and has been a proponent of emphasizing the government's ability to implement the rule of law. Al-Sadr knows that if he were to try another armed rebellion, it would most likely be put down not by the Americans, but by Sistani's supporters.

It is going to take a team approach to bring democracy to Iraq. The U.S. needs to keep hunting down Baathist insurgents and terrorists, while Iraqi leaders, with a vision of their country's future, need to marginalize the extremists and put their faith in a future free-Iraq governed by its people.

Only five-months since the armed conflict ended, one of Iraq's biggest radicals has been reduced to a sit-in on the steps of the Oil Ministry. We aren't at the goal-line yet, however, signs like this are encouraging.

Big Findings on Titan?

A co-worker just alerted me that the Huygens probe from the Cassini mission just landed on Titan. The first images back from Titan are producing tears of joy from the European Space Agency team:

The picture is in -- and it has brought tears to those who have worked so hard to make it a reality. It clearly shows river channels and what appears to be the shores of some kinds of sea -- think of Lake Michigan filled with paint thinner -- that is how NASA's Carolyn Porco put it on our air a few moments ago.

I can't believe I am actually blogging about the possibility of finding other forms of life outside of our dear planet earth. This is truly amazing.

The site linked above is a blog updated by Miles O'Brien, so keep checking in for updates. It sounds like we may be in for some treats.

UPDATE:

Here's the picture.

Secret Weapons

The Pentagon has been thinking outside the box:

Most bizarre among the plans was one for the development of an "aphrodisiac" chemical weapon that would make enemy soldiers sexually irresistible to each other. Provoking widespread homosexual behaviour among troops would cause a "distasteful but completely non-lethal" blow to morale, the proposal says.

Must...resist...Andrew Sullivan joke (Did the author of this article read what he wrote out loud?!) The article continues:

Other ideas included chemical weapons that attract swarms of enraged wasps or angry rats to troop positions, making them uninhabitable. Another was to develop a chemical that caused "severe and lasting halitosis", making it easy to identify guerrillas trying to blend in with civilians. There was also the idea of making troops' skin unbearably sensitive to sunlight.

Imagine sharing your foxhole with the bad-breathed, horny guy. Well, actually this already exists; it's called jail. Plus the rats, minus the wasps.

"Hey Mike, How About a Ham Sandwich?"

Clint Eastwood, in a room full of Hollywood elites, took aim at Michael Moore:

...Michael, if you ever show up at my front door with a camera - I'll kill you."

The audience erupted in laughter, and Eastwood grinned dangerously.

"I mean it," he added, provoking more guffaws.

Sitting well out of range at a table in back, Moore - who received a special "Freedom of Expression" award for his anti-Bush polemic "Fahrenheit 9/11" - chuckled.

Don't worry, Clint, Michael is a coward. He only goes after people who can't defend themselves, you know, like guys with Alzheimer's Disease. However, Mikey seems to be pissing a lot of people off lately. Here is a depiction of Moore's cameo in "Team America":

...Moore’s punishment in “Team America” is extreme: he’s depicted as a gibbering, overweight, hot-dog eating buffoon who straps explosives to his body to blow up the American do-gooders. The puppet was reportedly stuffed with ham when it blew.

Did you hear that Zarqawi? More ham for you!

Time to Play!

Ah, it's time to climb!

We finally have a break in the weather out here in California, so I am getting outside to cure some of my cabin fever. If I don't get outside soon, I'll just waste all my energy making fun of Andrew Sullivan. Ultimately, it hurts me more than it hurts him.

So, indoor climbing tonight, shooting guns tomorrow and more outdoor climbing this weekend. I'm such an agro-heterosexual.

I'll stop in periodically. In the meantime, Penraker responds to my post about "Quagmires." I'll add something more thoughtful to this later.

Go read Anthony's post on philosophy, science and politics. When Steven Den Beste stopped writing, a major substantive vacuum formed in the blog-universe. I think if Anthony keeps it up with posts like this, he'll fit the bill just nicely. While you're over there, drop by and say hello--it gets lonely out there in the cold, dark desolation of Bloomington, Indiana.

And Now...An Andrew Sullivan Medley

Warning! Bombastic Rhetoric Suited for an 8 Year-Old Follows!

If Andrew Sullivan seems a little numskulled lately, it's because some heavy-hitters are pummeling him. Sullivan is looking like George Foreman in the last round of the "Rumble in the Jungle" gasping for air while flailing punches in hopes that he lands one.

Here is a short collection of Andrew Sullivan's recent attempts at sparing matches:

On military matters, he went after two prominent military experts, Wretchard and Victor Davis Hanson, who dared to disagree with his "Military History For Retards" analysis of the execution of the war. Read my post here for an extended, and somewhat less-hyperbolic analysis of his critique of Hanson.

Today, Glenn dared to express his view over the rumors of Lincoln being gay:

WAS LINCOLN GAY? Andrew Sullivan cares, and so do the folks at The Weekly Standard. I can't seem to, though. The guy saved the nation, and I'm supposed to care about where he put his wing-wang?

Sullivan, prattling along like the ever-so dramatic little schoolgirl, responds:

This, apparently, is Glenn Reynold's view of what being gay is. And Glenn is on the side of the angels in this. It's enough to make you despair.

Does Andrew think that he is the only source for all things gay to all the heterosexuals in the blogworld (and in the real world for that matter)? ::sigh:: I despair that he might think so. Glenn calmly defends himself:

Andrew is despairing a lot lately, I'm afraid. But if I was dismissive above (and I was) it's because I'm just not that interested in other people's sexuality. I don't even care about Brad and Jen's split, and not only did they not save the Union, as near as I can tell their whole reason for existence is to promote such interest. (Something that I, by contrast, have done only once, as far as I know . . . .) I'm actually a bit surprised by Andrew's reaction, as many people who find other people's sexuality fascinating seem fascinated with the idea of controlling it, which I'm certainly not. Your sexuality is your own, as Lincoln's was his own, but don't expect me to be fascinated.

He hasn't dared to yet, but if Sullivan thinks it is safe to come out of his corner, Jeff at Beautiful Atrocities is waiting for him.

Michael Hirsch and John Berry - Quagmire Queens

Penraker pulls no punches in analyzing the groupthink-based article in Newsweek that purportedly claims that the Pentagon is looking into the "El Salvador option." (Said Newsweek article in Italics):

"The Pentagon’s latest approach is being called "the Salvador option"—and the fact that it is being discussed at all is a measure of just how worried Donald Rumsfeld really is."

How odd. The fact that the Pentagon is considering going after the terrorists and killing them is to be considered evidence that Rumsfeld is really, really worried.

"What everyone agrees is that we can’t just go on as we are," one senior military officer told NEWSWEEK. "We have to find a way to take the offensive against the insurgents. Right now, we are playing defense. And we are losing."

We have now learned to look for these quotes - any time anyone from the major media inserts one of these quotes in a piece, most rational people who have read about Jayson Blair, and Mr. Kelley from USA today, now know that a senior military official may exist who said this. Or equally likely, they may not exist.

Last November’s operation in Fallujah, most analysts agree, succeeded less in breaking "the back" of the insurgency—as Marine Gen. John Sattler optimistically declared at the time—than in spreading it out.

Most analysts agree? This is more "me and my friends think" stuff. A rational examination of the Falujah episode would agree that it hurt the terrorists, and it forced them to move to other places, re-establish themselves - and that is costly to an insurgency. (underlining below is mine)

"Now, NEWSWEEK has learned, the Pentagon is intensively debating an option that dates back to a still-secret strategy in the Reagan administration’s battle against the leftist guerrilla insurgency in El Salvador in the early 1980s. Then, faced with a losing war against Salvadoran rebels, the U.S. government funded or supported "nationalist" forces that allegedly included so-called death squads directed to hunt down and kill rebel leaders and sympathizers. Eventually the insurgency was quelled, and many U.S. conservatives consider the policy to have been a success—despite the deaths of innocent civilians and the subsequent Iran-Contra arms-for-hostages scandal. (Among the current administration officials who dealt with Central America back then is John Negroponte, who is today the U.S. ambassador to Iraq. Under Reagan, he was ambassador to Honduras.)

Why does he have to put "allegedly" in front of "included so called death squads?" I think it is because he is relying on reporting that was never confirmed - that it is merely one of those left leaning myths that gets going.

And look at the attempt to minimize those who believe it succeeded 'Many conservatives believe' it worked. What, no independents or liberals believe that? What a strange formulation. It seems to say, in a sly way, that the only impetus for their belief was political.

And why that bit about Iran Contra. That was Nicaragua, not El Salvador. What in the world does Iran-Contra have to do with El Salvador? Nothing. But, there is a need to conflate things, so away we go.

Perfidy on behalf of the mainstream news media is a favorite topic within the blogosphere and this is just the most recent example of an opinion piece being sold off as a "story." Many journalists (not all) have been looking for any stories that will portray the war effort as a failure. Unfortunately, this goes all the way back the Afghanistan campaign when journalists were passing the word "quagmire" around just as the Northern Alliance rolled in Kabul.

Be wary of any story that utters the word quagmire as fact--the very word is steeped in Vietnam-era narrative. The reason that many journalists see Vietnam everywhere is because they do. Their worldview, that this is an immoral war where America can't lose on the battlefield, but at home, hasn't changed. The press was able to force-feed their agenda to the public in the 1960's and 1970's; but now their monopoly on information no longer exists. Combine an informed public with the fact that our military is fighting much more effectively than in Vietnam (though, militarily, they still fought well in Vietnam), we look to be in pretty good shape (Admittedly, the Iraqi situation could deteriorate for a number of other complicated reasons far removed from the press's coverage of the war).

The elections are now three weeks away. Look for the press to come-up with a myriad of stories filled with quotes from "most analysts" and "unnamed senior military advisors" who will deem the elections as "illegitimate." At that point, realize the stench filling the room isn't coming from anything that you stepped in, but from something thick coming out of your T.V. or newspaper.

Taking Ownership

Some of the trees that America planted in Iraq are starting to bear fruit. Via Strategypage, here is some truly outstanding news:

Since November 10th, anti-government forces made twelve attacks on police stations, and were defeated every time. Earlier in November, nine police stations were overrun and no attacked were defeated. Most of this action has taken place in Mosul, where many of the al Qaeda and Baath Party gunmen fled to before the attack on Fallujah. Mosul does not appear to be in any danger of falling under anti-government control. However, anti-government forces are better trained (many were veterans of Saddam’s security forces) and motivated (because they fear retribution from Kurdish and Shia Arab kin of their victims while they worked for Saddam). Those who belong to al Qaeda also have religious fanaticism to propel them. Ongoing reforms in the Iraqi police and military finally got to the point where the police and army troops could organize effective defenses against these police station raids.

The training of the new Iraqi police and security forces has been an integral part of the overall U.S. strategy for winning the war in Iraq. This was a risky bet to place. The U.S. is attempting not only the tactical training Iraqis in fighting off insurgents, they are attempting to confront a cultural issue that is embedded within the modern fabric of Arab culture itself.

The U.S. military structure, with optimal results, emphasizes the empowerment of decision-making ability down to the lowest ranks. This is antithetical to the culture within Arab armies where only the highest ranks control and act upon information. Retired U.S. Army Colonel, Norvell Atkine, who spent years as an advisor tasked with training security and army forces throughout the Middle East, observed the fundamental problem regarding the way Arabs handle information:

In every society information is a means of making a living or wielding power, but Arabs husband information and hold it especially tightly. U.S. trainers have often been surprised over the years by the fact that information provided to key personnel does not get much further than them. Having learned to perform some complicated procedure, an Arab technician knows that he is invaluable so long as he is the only one in a unit to have that knowledge; once he dispenses it to others he no longer is the only font of knowledge and his power dissipates. This explains the commonplace hoarding of manuals, books, training pamphlets, and other training or logistics literature...

...In military terms this means that very little cross-training is accomplished and that, for instance in a tank crew, the gunners, loaders and drivers might be proficient in their jobs but are not prepared to fill in should one become a casualty. Not understanding one another’s jobs also inhibits a smoothly functioning crew. At a higher level it means that there is no depth in technical proficiency.

Atkine continues in his observation of the relationship between officers and enlisted soldiers:

Arab junior officers are well trained on the technical aspects of their weapons and tactical know-how, but not in leadership, a subject given little attention. For example, as General Sa`d ash-Shazli, the Egyptian chief of staff, noted in his assessment of the army he inherited prior to the 1973 war, they were not trained to seize the initiative or volunteer original concepts or new ideas. Indeed, leadership may be the greatest weakness of Arab training systems. This problem results from two main factors: a highly accentuated class system bordering on a caste system, and lack of a non-commissioned-officer development program.

Most Arab armies treat enlisted soldiers like sub-humans. When the winds in Egypt one day carried biting sand particles from the desert during a demonstration for visiting U.S. dignitaries, I watched as a contingent of soldiers marched in and formed a single rank to shield the Americans; Egyptian soldiers, in other words, are used on occasion as nothing more than a windbreak. The idea of taking care of one’s men is found only among the most elite units in the Egyptian military. On a typical weekend, officers in units stationed outside Cairo will get in their cars and drive