Traveling, back Sunday
I am on business-related travel for the rest of the week. I'll be back online Sunday evening, hopefully. Have a good week!

by Donald Sensing, 5/27/2003 10:22:00 PM. Permalink |

Soldiers All
by Sgt. Oscar Thomasson, Sedgwick County, Kansas, Sheriff's Department

From Boston and Concord, they heard the call
Leaving family, farm and field,
They gave their all.
For liberty they fought and would not yield.
Soldiers all.

In places like Gettysburg, The Ardenne and Iwo
Through fire and flame
They learned what true patriots still know
Into the valley of the shadow they came
Soldiers all.

In distant lands, in conflicts large and small
On the land, on the sea, in the air
Brave men and women still fall
Freedom's light to share
Soldiers all.

At home we have sorrowfully added to their lists
In the Towers, at The Pentagon and in a farmer's field
For liberty they fought and would not yield
Taking on terrorists with bare hands and fists,
Soldiers all.

Placing their frail bodies between their beloved homes and war's desolation
Fighting in the mountains and on the desert sand
They bring new hope to this Nation
And liberty to an oppressed land,
Soldiers all.

Sgt. Thomasson sent this to me Saturday, but I was out of town and haven't been able to wade through my email at a pace I would like. It is still appropriate for Memorial Day, even if a day late. Thank you, Sgt. Thomasson!

by Donald Sensing, 5/27/2003 05:22:00 PM. Permalink |

Bandwidth is everything in modern combat
Digital communications are rapidly replacing oil as the lifeblood of American fighting forces. So reports Wired.com:

The prime example, he says, is a portal called the Warfighting Web. Launched just nine months ago, it lets military personnel access key data - battle plans, intelligence reports, maps, online chats, radio transcripts, photos, and video. Caddell sketches out a typical scenario: A Special Forces unit in northern Iraq attacks an Iraqi irregular unit. The firefight is recorded with digital video, which is uploaded to GCCS via secure satellite. JOC intelligence officers fire up the Warfighting Web, click through to "Latest Intelligence," watch the fight, write a summary, and post follow-up orders to the unit. The soldiers either download the orders directly or receive them by radio from the nearest Tactical Operations Center, the most forward command post on the network.

And don't miss the joys of using Microsoft Chat for tactical communications:

"What's funny about using Microsoft Chat," he adds with a sly smile, "is that everybody has to choosean icon to represent themselves. Some of these guys haven't bothered, so the program assigns them one. We'll be in the middle of a battle and a bunch of field artillery colonels will come online in the form of these big-breasted blondes. We've got a few space aliens, too."

Do they have any blonde space aliens? Inquiring minds want to know. Hat tip: Richard Heddleson

by Donald Sensing, 5/27/2003 04:49:00 PM. Permalink |

Air Force to lease aerial tankers
The US Air Force has decided to proceed with leasing a fleet of 100 new Boeing 767 aircraft, modified as tankers and designated KC-767. Under Secretary of Defense Pete Aldridge said that the leasing arrangement is more cost-effective than buying the airplanes:

The Leasing Review Panel, which is chaired by myself and Undersecretary Zakheim [Comptroller], looked at the pros and cons of leasing KC-767s or the direct purchase of the 767s to begin the recapitalization of the fleet, and recommended to the secretary that we'd proceed with the lease arrangement. This minimizes the near-term cost of the Department of Defense and delivers the aircraft sooner. If we were to purchase the aircraft and deliver them on the same schedule as the lease, it would require billions of dollars more in our Future Years Defense Plan [FYDP]. And reallocating that amount of money for other programs would result in a loss of military capability.

Therefore, the secretary has directed that we proceed with the final negotiations on the lease under the following conditions:

The unit cost of the aircraft, fully modified to acceptable standards and capabilities, shall not exceed $131 million per unit.

The lease will be based on a firm, fixed-price contract, with a return on sales not to exceed 15 percent for the green aircraft [brand new] or for the modifications and additional equipment to convert it to a tanker configuration.

Rush Limbaugh characterized the deal as "corporate welfare" (which suddenly seems to bother him, for some reason) and laid the decision to lease rather than buy squarely at the feet of Sen. Tom Daschle's wife, Linda, a high-powered aviation lobbyist. How she is supposed to have persuaded defense secretary Don Rumsfeld and Aldridge, two of the most unswayable figures in government, is beyond me. Besides, Boeing stock closed today down nine cents, not what they would pay a lobbyist to help them do.

Anyway, what I glean from the news release is that the main concern was getting the new tankers into the air the quickest way possible. The old KC-135 fleet is, well, old, and is suffering from many airframe problems. So I see little to complain about in the leasing arrangement.

I wonder whether Sgt Stryker, he of personal airframe expertise, has anything to say.

by Donald Sensing, 5/27/2003 04:22:00 PM. Permalink |

Buy this book NOW!
Austin Bay is a reserve officer and one of the finest military analysts around. He writes a column syndicated by Creators Syndicate, a heavy hitter in syndicate land. I am fortunate enough to count him as one of my friends as well.

Therefore, I say: Hie ye to the link below and buy his new novel,
The Wrong Side of Brightness.




Glenn Reynolds, master of Instapundit.com, wrote of Austin's book:

"A Frederick Forsyth for the twenty-first century...Austin Bay has written a novel that is, like its characters, lean, gritty, and well-versed in the international underworld."

You can read the first chapter online. Enjoy! Buy! It's only $6.99 at Amazon.

by Donald Sensing, 5/27/2003 04:05:00 PM. Permalink |

Tomb of the Unknowns is falling apart
The tomb of the unknown soldiers at Arlington National Cemetery is badly cracked, and the crack is worsening.

Cemetery officials say the crack -- which has long been creeping across the 71-year-old monument -- now takes more than a 360-degree course around the facade and has gotten so bad that they have decided the entire memorial must be replaced, a process expected to take about a year.

by Donald Sensing, 5/26/2003 03:32:00 PM. Permalink |

What hath Annika wrought?
The ripples from Annika Sorenstam's entry into the PGA will reverberate for decades.

by Donald Sensing, 5/26/2003 03:22:00 PM. Permalink |

This bugs me, too!
I quite agree!

And then read this essay by Reid Stott.

by Donald Sensing, 5/26/2003 03:15:00 PM. Permalink |

Truth about UN sanctions
Jim Miller has it.

by Donald Sensing, 5/26/2003 03:11:00 PM. Permalink |

Back, but only shortly
The Indy 500 was fantastic! Television does not even begin to convey the size of the speedway or the speed of the cars or their noise. All almost overwhelming!

I am buried in work and email, and Wednesday I will go to Florida to attend a close friend's ordination service, back Saturday night. Very compressed week . . . .

Yes, readers and fellow bloggers, I did get your email and am working my way through it. But individual replies are out of the question, at least for a long time. Sorry!

by Donald Sensing, 5/26/2003 01:32:00 PM. Permalink |

Gone to the Indy 500!
I'll probably not be back online until Monday, as we will return home from the race late Sunday.

by Donald Sensing, 5/24/2003 08:14:00 AM. Permalink |

Army begins Pfc. Lynch investigation
Two investigations ongoing; US Army Criminal Investigation Command involved

A general officer has directed that an AR 15-6 investigation be conducted to determine the facts and circumstances surrounding the ambush of US support soldiers in which nine were killed and Pfc. Jessica Lynch and five others were captured. The soldiers were part of the 507th Maintenance Company.

Army Regulation 15-6 is entitled, "Procedure for Investigating Officers and Boards of Officers." There is an "Investigation Guide for Informal Investigations," which is basically the implementing instructions for investigating officers. AR 15-6 governs command-directed investigations that are not part of a criminal investigation or an inspector-general investigation. "Informal" does not mean casual. It The officer appointed to investigate may swear witnesses to statements and must render a comprehensive, written report of the investigation to the commander who directed it.

At any rate,

One question the team is addressing is the plight of 19-year-old Pfc. Lynch, whose capture by Iraqis and subsequent rescue by an allied special-operations team propelled her to folk-hero status across America.

The Washington Post reported that she staged a fierce fight before capture, emptying a gun and killing Iraqi attackers before being stabbed and shot herself.

But two Pentagon officials in interviews cast doubt on that report. The officials said all evidence suggests that Pfc. Lynch's truck crashed in the chaos of the ambush in the central Iraqi town of Nasiriyah. She suffered several bone fractures and was in no position to put up a fight, the officials said.

A senior officer said the intention of the investigation was to discern "lessons learned," but that judicial proceedings could arise if the investigation uncovers evidence of misconduct by a survivor of the ambush. (No such proceedings are done in the event a dead soldier committed misconduct, of course.)

In a parallel investigation, the Army's Criminal Investigation Command is investigating the ambush to determine whether Iraqis committed war crimes. It is against international law to execute POWs. Nine 507th soldiers died in the ambush or afterward and were found in shallow graves.

Video images of some on Iraqi television appeared to show bullet wounds to the forehead.

I spent two years on the staff of CID Command. (CID is the command's historic name and the organization is still referred to by those initials.) The longer I worked with them, the more honest I got. They are very, very good at what they do, and they have a lot of experience investigating crimes in overseas combat areas, dealing with foreign nationals.

by Donald Sensing, 5/23/2003 07:16:00 PM. Permalink |

This is the earth and moon from Mars orbit



Says the National Geographic,

The camera aboard NASA's Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) spacecraft currently orbiting the red planet photographed Earth, the moon and Jupiter, as seen in the evening sky of Mars, at 9 a.m. EDT, May 8, 2003.

by Donald Sensing, 5/23/2003 06:26:00 PM. Permalink |

Today's short index
I'll be gone most of the rest of the day. Today's posts, until tonight anyway, are:

Part two of my series on science and religion, next post down.

Imposing gun control in Iraq

by Donald Sensing, 5/23/2003 09:36:00 AM. Permalink |

What "Theory" Really Means in Science
This is part two of my series on science and religion. Part one is here.

Facts and theory

One of the basic premises of science is that the scientific method uncovers "facts." A scientific fact is defined by geologist Stephen Jay Gould in a Time magazine interview (Aug. 15, 1999) as "a proposition affirmed to such a high degree that it would be perverse" not to assent to it. In this sense it is a fact, for example, that the noble elements are inactive in combining with other elements. The process used to discover facts about the world must be describable by the investigator and repeatable by others using the same method of inquiry. At a very basic level, that is how science works. This process presupposes that nature works the same way now as it worked before and the same way that it will work later.

But a collection of facts do not comprise scientific knowledge any more than a pile of feathers makes a duck. Facts, though crucial, are intermediary. Facts must be interpreted. Scientists relate facts to formulate theory. The major usefulness of theories is to make predictions and inferences about nature, what it is and how it works and how it will work.

A theory, then, is not just a guess. A theory is how scientists express the interpreted results of many observations carried out over a long time. A theory is how scientists make sense of their collective experience. The formulation and reformulation of theory is, I think, grounded in the deep human need to establish meaning. Because we exist in nature, we are compelled at a most fundamental level to explore what nature means. Science is a very powerful and reliable way we do that. Science, and scientifically-based meaning, can no more exist apart from theory than Barry Bonds' home run record could exist apart from baseball.

That some scientific claim is "just a theory," and therefore may be dismissed, is an accusation that actually makes no sense. It's really "just a theory" that gravity holds us on the earth with a force equal to the inverse of the square of our distance from the planet, but does anyone care to jump off the Empire State Building tomorrow because, hey, gravity is "just a theory?" Our understanding of how wings keep airplanes up is just a theoretical understanding, but millions of people per month literally bet their lives that the theory is correct.

Theory is to science as money is to finance. Theory is to science as scales are to music. Theory is to science as yard lines are to football games.

Theory is to science as doctrine is to religion.

Religious doctrine is, like scientific theory, a summary of the collective experience and wisdom of the faith community. The oldest doctrinal formulation in the New Testament, for example, is Paul's affirmation of the resurrection in First Corinthians 15, of about seventy words. It is an interpretation (analogous to theory) of the collective experience (analogous to empirical data) of the disciples and some others of the risen Christ (an observed phenomenon).

I am not trying to show that science and religion are really just alike. I am claiming that Christian assaults on scientific theory expose Christianity to the same criticism, namely that the Resurrection is "just a theory," a claim treated as fact, but not provable.

Those who teach Christ's resurrection often mirror science in their method. First, they marshal a collection of facts, for example, the New Testament record. Then they try to locate these facts within a context, perhaps by appealing to Old Testament prophecies which they say refer to Christ. Often, they recount the repeated, varied affirmation of the resurrection by persons and communities through the centuries since Christ. Then they claim that the fact of the Resurrection can be known now. So claims about Christ's resurrection exist within a system of other faith claims, from which people derive religious meaning. But in the final analysis, no one can prove the resurrection so compellingly that it would be perverse to withhold assent to it.

Science or scientism?

Science is a way of knowing. But it is not the only way. Yet many people assert that it is the only way. Science fiction writer Robert A. Heinlein wrote that any proposition that cannot be expressed mathematically is mere opinion, not fact. This is, of course, not a scientific claim at all, since it is not subject to scientific method or verification. It is not science, it is scientism.

Scientism is faith in science. As the dominant world view of our day, it is considered self-validating. Scientism makes two major claims, neither of which, however, are provable using the scientific method:

(1) only science reveals the Real and only science can discover truth;

(2) scientific knowledge of reality is exhaustive, not inherently limited, is holistic and sees reality as reality really is.

Early modernity’s mechanistic view of creation was originally proposed as a way to preserve God’s agency. This view was soon supplanted by the view that knowledge about the world beyond the self was limited to what could be known through sense-perception of material things. The materialism of the modern world view is its central feature. Thus, the modern world view of scientific-materialsim simply has no natural place for God in it. hence, David Griffin quotes a “leading biologist [who] jokes that only theology may exceed exobiology . . . in being a ‘great subject without a subject matter.’”

Langdon Gilkey observed that a scientism-based cosmology maintains that “scientific inquiry represents the only relevant avenue to truth about what is real, with the result that any proposition . . . based on grounds other than those provided by empirical science is merely ‘subjective.’” Subjective, of course, means unreliable or false.

Effects of scientism

The consequences of God being squeezed out by modernity are severe. “Nietzsche’s prophecy was correct," wrote Gilkey, "a world that has lost God altogether is worse than the world that believed in the God despised by Nietzsche and the rest of late modernity.” Three negative consequences of the loss of belief in God are:

1. Social Relativism. Modern thinkers “had first thought it a release and a relief to be freed from the supposition of objective standards,” wrote David Griffin. But surely this century, “the age of atrocity” illuminates the “need for consensus of the objectivity of certain prescriptions and prohibitions.”

2. Technological Materialism. Because materiality is all there is (the material equals the real), “unconstrained competition for material resources describes much of the behavior” of modern-day persons, corporations and nations. However, “atheistic materialism simply means the replacement of one religious ultimate with another,” and it cannot be said to be an improvement (Griffin).

3. Militarism. Militarism embraces coercive power at every level of political interaction. Militarism’s orientation is that the ultimate power of the universe is blind, brute force that exercises coercive, destructive power.

Despite these consequences, science must not be theologically renounced. Science and religion are not inherently inimical to one another. Both are powerful ways of knowing which can often complement one another. For example, environmental science and ecological theology are closely allied. That the sciences do not tell us everything about reality does not mean they say nothing about it. “Accordingly,” says John Cobb, “people cannot be satisfied with theologies that relegate the revelations of science to the status of information about mere appearance.”

Next: what, really, is religion?

by Donald Sensing, 5/23/2003 09:32:00 AM. Permalink |

Imposing gun control in Iraq
It's pretty much the same as we have here

As you probably know, the American governing authority in Iraq announced a couple of days ago that,

Iraqi citizens will be required to turn over automatic weapons and heavy weapons under a proclamation that allied authorities plan to issue this week, allied officials said Tuesday.

The aim of the proclamation is to help stabilize Iraq by confiscating the huge supply of AK-47s, machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and other weapons that are used by criminal gangs, paramilitary groups and remnants of the Saddam Hussein government.

Jeff Jarvis ( whence the link) writes,

I emailed a gun-control opponent I know (and like anyway) and asked what his position was going to be about gun control in Iraq. Never got an answer.

It is an interesting conundrum. If one believes, as I do, that the right to keep and bear personal arms is a sine qua non of a free people, then Jeff's question is a good one.

In response, I would point out that the weapons listed in the news report are machine guns, a light anti-armor weapon (the RPG), and "heavy weapons." In military parlance that usually means crew-served weapons such as medium and heavy machine guns or anti-armor weapons more lethal than the simple RPG. It can also include mortars and antiaircraft guns or light missiles.

All of these things are illegal for Americans to own here. You can get a federal license to own a machine gun, but it's not cheap and they are not freely available. So one answer to Mr. Jarvis is that the American occupation policy for Iraq vis-a-vis gun control is pretty close to American law inside the US.

Glenn Reynolds notes that tompaine.com complains that the Republican-led US government wants to take "assault weapons" out of Iraqi hands but the Republican Congress doesn't want to renew the "assault weapons" ban due to expire next year. As Glenn points out, tompaine conflates semi-auto rifles with full-auto light machine guns. The military model of the AK-47 is a lightweight machine gun that can be fired either semiauto or full auto. This model was already illegal before the "assault weapon" ban was passed years ago.

Glenn adds a pithy comment, observing

that the Administration is treating Iraq like, well, a conquered nation. It's funny that this is how gun-control folks want to treat America.

To see why I scare quote "assault weapon," just read here. It's a phony term that really means nothing but "looks scary."

by Donald Sensing, 5/23/2003 08:11:00 AM. Permalink |

The real divide between Left and Right
Alan Pratt says it is the doctrine of Original Sin.

The idea that conservatives and liberals differ on original sin may seem a little far-fetched, but Thomas Sowell has written a book, A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles which supports that view. Of course he doesn't call it original sin. Instead he describes two very different visions of mankind, which he terms the constrained and the unconstrained.

"The constrained vision sees the evils of the world as deriving from the limited and unhappy choices available, given the inherent moral and intellectual limitations of human beings"

On the other hand, "Running through the tradition of the unconstrained vision is the conviction that foolish or immoral choices explain the evils of the world, and that wiser or more moral and humane social policies are the solution."

I am not sure I buy into this. The doctrine of Original Sin seems much more complex that that, and besides, the doctrine does not work today without some thorough reformulation. (However, it still works.)

I think the divide between the Left and the Right is certainly ideological (duh!) and religion does play a part. I am not even sure I would say the real divide today is between the traditional categories of conservatives and liberals, but between authoritarianism and personal liberty. On both the Left and the Right there are found people who want to compel everyone to behave as they want them to, although the behaviors of concern differ.

The issue that I see is control versus freedom. One side (with spokesperson on both the Left and Right) thinks that The People must be controlled and regimented. For example, see this post about John Kerry, who is evidently anti-freedom, IMO.

I, OTOH, am sympathetic with the idea that "that government is best which governs least," although I am far from a foaming libertarian according to this online test (link via Michael Totten). I rated somewhat conservative, somewhat libertarian.

So if I were to put that issue, authority v. freedom, into theological terms, I'd probably use Law versus Grace. Law compels, grace permits. And as Forrest Gump said, "That's all I have to say about that."

by Donald Sensing, 5/22/2003 10:53:00 PM. Permalink |

Sirens and nymphs
Chris Noble says that isolationism is a siren call, and internationalism is a nymph. Both lead to our defeat. Therefore both must be shunned because their promises of security are false.

There is no cocoon. There is no guarantee of safety. There is only the promise of America. . . .

The easy way out will always be there. At any time we can choose Isolationism or Internationalism. But they mean certain destruction of the American path. Once we fall into the clutches of either, we lose the choice to go forward our way, the American way. . . .

If we look ahead on the American path, it looks difficult and fearsome. No one is promising anything. But we will still be American. . . .

We are at a decision point in our history as a nation. The temptations are sensing victory. They are grasping at the American miracle, trying to rip it asunder. It has been nearly 80 years since they have been this close to defeating us.

Our history is watching closely, hoping we make the right choice. The light of hope has faded, beaten back some by the evils of the sirens, but it still illuminates the path of the American people.

Are we willing to follow it, despite the trials and tribulations ahead?

Or will we take the easy way out?

by Donald Sensing, 5/22/2003 03:31:00 PM. Permalink |

Putting everybody to work . . .
. . . for the government. Democratic presidential contender John Kerry wants to -

give a free public-college education for anyone who spends two years as a volunteer.

withhold federal funding from high schools that don't require students to perform public service in order to graduate.

put senior citizens to work as "Retired but not Tired."

put to work teenagers who are not old enough to work (I am not making htis up).

quadruple the size of the Peace Corps

personally lead, as president, a recruiting drive to expand the ranks of the US military.

Kerry said his programs would cost $3.2 billion annually, "which he said could be paid by closing more than $60 billion in corporate tax loopholes."

Myself, I'd be surprised if only one of these things could be done for only $3.2 billion. If he is expands the armed forces by an aggregate of only 50,000 or so (a pittance), there's a billion dollars in pay and benefits alone, right there. Add the costs of training, facilities, life support and equipment and you easily eat up most or all of the other $2.1 billion.

Joanne Jacobs (whence the link) addresses the high-school work requirement:

I envision eager youths and cheerful seniors marching off to their work assignments, singing patriotic songs. Only they're singing in Russian, for some reason.

by Donald Sensing, 5/22/2003 03:23:00 PM. Permalink |

CENTCOM's Gen. Tommy Franks to retire
The low-key four-star general who commanded American forces to victory in Afghanistan and Iraq has decided to retire from military service. His tour as commander in chief of US Central Command expires in July. But his actual retirement date has not been set. (Expect it to be coincident with his change of command.) (via Jeff Jarvis)

by Donald Sensing, 5/22/2003 02:48:00 PM. Permalink |

"Cackling with glee . . ."
Dean Esmay explains why that is what he is doing. Heh!

by Donald Sensing, 5/22/2003 02:40:00 PM. Permalink |

The Tennessee Tailgate Party
. . . is online. Have a look!

by Donald Sensing, 5/22/2003 02:37:00 PM. Permalink |

From "Air McNair" to "Weavin' Steven"
Tennessee Titans quarterback Steve McNair, 30, knows what it means to get blitzed. But last night he got blitzed the old fashioned way - through copious imbibing of distilled spirits.

"Air McNair," as sport commentators named him for his passing skills, is now known in these parts as "Weavin' Steven." Seems sometime after 2 a.m. last night a Nashville police officer saw a vehicle weaving in left and right down the road, so he stopped it. Lo and behold, McNair was driving. He blew .18 in the breathalyzer, way, way above the legal limit.

He was arraigned in night court. Titans training camp begins today. Whether Weavin' Steven made it we do not know.

McNair was charged with two offenses, including a weapons charge. One charge is the obvious: "Driving under the influence of an intoxicant." The other was, "Possession of a handgun while under the influence."

As for the former, the arresting officer filed an affidavit that said,

''Defendant was observed traveling westbound on Broadway near 5th Avenue in a black 1999 Lincoln Navigator 4dr TN tag HFX 571. He was weaving in the roadway and crossed the yellow line into the turn lane at least twice. I continued to follow him and observe his driving. After crossing 8th Ave he appeared to have difficulty keeping his vehicle in the proper traffic lane. He turned into the Exxon at 1101 Broadway and I initiated a traffic stop. He had a very strong odor of alcoholic beverage coming from his breath and first hesitated but then admitted to consuming such. His speech also sounded slurred when he spoke. His eyes were very bloodshot and watery and his pupils were dilated. He was unsteady on his feet and showed several indicators of impairment on the (Standard Field Sobriety Tests). He was placed under arrest for DUI and agreed to a breath alcohol test and registered a 0.18% (Blood Alcohol Content).''

As for the second, the officer found a loaded 9mm pistol in the Navigator's center console. McNair had a carry permit for the gun, but under Tennessee law anyone who has a carry permit may either be drunk or carry the gun, but not both together. A permit holder who is drunk violates the law.

Tennessee has recently been publicizing a crackdown on DWI. We'll see whether a wealthy sports celebrity can beat the rap.

Actually, McNair lives only about a half-mile from me (in a very wealthier neighborhood, be assured). My wife and I actually ran into him at the local Walgreen's a couple of seasons ago. He is a big guy, much larger and more muscular than he appears on TV, surrounded by even more massive linemen.

True story: one the deputy sheriffs in my county's department told me of stopping another Titans player last year who failed the breath test, although not as badly as McNair did. I don't recall the player's name. The deputy told me that the player literally asked him, "Do you know who I am? I am (name) and I play for the Tennessee Titans!"

To which the deputy replied, "Yes, sir, and I am Deputy Smith. I work for the Williamson County Sheriff's Department, and I am the guy who is going to take you to jail."

by Donald Sensing, 5/22/2003 02:34:00 PM. Permalink |

Rousing pre-battle speech-giver being investigated for war crimes
Lt. Col. Tim Collins of the 1st Battalion, Royal Irish, gave a profound and stirring prebattle speech to his troops about to invade Iraq. His speech was widely quoted and cited by many figures, President Bush and Prince Charles among them.

Now Collins is being investigated for personally committing war crimes.

Lieutenant Colonel Tim Collins, 43, stands accused of a number of "serious breaches" of the Geneva Convention after claims that he punched, kicked and threatened Iraqi prisoners of war to force information from them and that he opened fire needlessly.

The allegations are now being looked into by the [British] Army's Special Investigations Branch. . . .

Pistol-whipping an Iraqi civic leader, gashing his head;

Shooting the tyres of vehicles when there was no threat to British or American life and there were no weapons visible, in contravention of the Army's rules of engagement;

Firing at the ground near the feet of Iraqi civilians to intimidate them;

Threatening local townspeople to force them to obey his demands.

If proven the allegations would be in breach of the convention, which gives captured enemy soldiers and civilians protection during-armed conflict.

I don't know whether that is a complete list. It's a pity whether the charges are true of false. If the charges are true, then he preached hypocrisy during his speech, where he enjoined his men,

"If someone surrenders to you then remember they have that right in international law and ensure that one day they go home to their family. If you harm the regiment or its history by over-enthusiasm in killing or in cowardice, know it is your family who will suffer.

If the charges are false, the honor and career of a very fine officer have been irredeemably sullied. What can I say except that I hope justice is served well?

by Donald Sensing, 5/21/2003 10:42:00 PM. Permalink |

Weather Channel web drops the ball
I am going to see the Indy 500 this weekend, something I have wanted to do for almost 40 years. I am psyched; I would rather see the Indy 500 in person than the Super Bowl.

So I cruised over the the Weather Channel's web site to check the forecast for the race. I was pelased to see they have a page of forecasts devoted just to auto races. Here's what they list:

May. 24 NASCAR Busch Series Carquest Auto Parts 300 Race
Lowe's Motor Speedway - Concord, NC 65°F 60°F 70%

May. 25 NASCAR Winston Cup Series Coca-Cola 600 Race
Lowe's Motor Speedway - Concord, NC 77°F 57°F 20%

May. 30 NASCAR Craftsman Truck Series Race
Dover Downs International Speedway - Dover, DE 70°F 57°F 40%

May. 31 NASCAR Busch Series Dover 200 Race
Dover Downs International Speedway - Dover, DE 69°F 57°F 60%

It's a sad, sad day when the Indy 500 doesn't even make the Weather Channel.

by Donald Sensing, 5/21/2003 10:16:00 PM. Permalink |

Death at Three Bridges Station
A true story from England: Blogger Simon Brunning writes of a young woman at the Three Bridges Underground (subway) station.

I noticed that she was crying bitterly during her conversation, which went on for about five minutes. Of course, this isn't the first time I've seen someone crying in public, but she seemed unusually distressed. I thought about approaching her, seeing if she was OK. But I didn't. . . .

I got on the train, and it set off towards London.

The train stopped at Gatwick, and the power went out. Shortly afterwards, it was announced that this was due to a passenger fatality at Three Bridges. My blood ran cold.

I'm almost certain that it was the girl that I'd seen. . . .

I will never, never walk away from someone in obvious distress ever again. You shouldn't, either - it is your business. We are all responsible for one another.

Is Simon's moral issue dependent on whether the dead person was or was not the same woman Simon saw? Sylvain Galineau says he would not have attempted to speak to the woman, either:

Forget about it. Now, if she pulled out a gun and put it to her head, or were assaulted by someone else, that would be different, of course.

This being said, I do not believe for a second that "We are all responsible for one another". I am not responsible for Simon anymore than he was responsible for the sad, pretty stranger. He might feel that way in hindsight, and strongly so, but that does not imply he, or anyone else on the platform, was.

Okay, Sylvain, why does it suddenly become your problem if she pulls out a gun? What if before your train left she went to the platform's edge and acted in a way that convinced you she would jump in front of the next train? Is that different than putting a pistol to her head? And what business is it of your if she is assaulted?

Joe Katzman emailed me with the link to his posting about this incident, saying, "One for you, Donald. Got any words for Simon?"

To answer the implicit question of what I would do in a similar situation (setting aside the fact that there are no subways nearer to me than Atlanta), I will answer that as a pastor, butting in is part of my job. It's not pleasant but it is sometimes necessary.

It may be rebutted that a total stranger is not under my pastoral care (true) amd therefore is one for whom I have no pastoral authority (not true, but not exactly false). In reply, I point out that for me to speak to the woman would almost certainly be seen by her as much less "forward" than for either Simon or Sylvain, precisely because she would understand that my office gives me the right to inquire. (Some may argue that my office does not give me such a right. They are wrong.)

So Sylvain and I part company on this issue, and I agree with Simon that he and others nearby did have a moral responsibility to make an offer of assistance in some way. Perhaps she would rebuff you, snarl and tell you to mind your own d. business. So what? You nod and go on your way. If you can't handle that you're not a real man.

But maybe you would save her life.

I admit there is an implicit line-drawing problem here. Most of us observe - and engage in - self-destructive behavior of one kind or another regularly. We drive too fast on wet roads, smoke, drink to excess, eat too much and don't exercise, work too hard and too long, focus too strongly on certain activities (blogging, hmm?) or do other things that damage relationships.

So if a friend is cheating on his wife (or husband), what is our responsibility? Silent acquiescence? Intervention? It can be a tough question.

But if you think there is a clear and present problem, then Simon is right - make the offer.

by Donald Sensing, 5/21/2003 06:17:00 PM. Permalink |

Anyone who says that Bill Hobbs is a "borderline psychotic" . . .
. . . is all right by me! Seriously, Bill Hobbs now has a new writer on his blog, HobbsOnline A.M., a great guy by the name of Roger Abramson. Not only is Roger a classy fellow Methodist (of mine, not Bill's), he is one of the most politically astute people I know. I worked with Roger a lot when he was a major and regretfully underfunded player in fighting the Tennessee lottery initiative last year. It was a series of "ah, ha!" moments to hear him analyze the political scene.

In case you haven't read Bill's blog, it is cited so often on Instapundit that I wonder whether Glenn Reynolds covertly brought him aboard as a stealth co-writer. Now with Roger aboard, there's no good reason not to drop by there daily. So enjoy!

by Donald Sensing, 5/21/2003 03:24:00 PM. Permalink |

More marksmanship
Army and Marine units emphasized accurate, aimed rifle fire in the Iraq campaign much more than they had for many years before. As always, real combat exposed some deficiencies in troop training and equipment, although the new protective vest did its job well. These and other nuggets available at StrategyPage. Thanks to Geitner Simmons for the tip.

BTW, Geitner posts some information about how the old Soviet gulag system was much larger than we thought, for all you Cold Warriors out there. It's a good thing we won!

by Donald Sensing, 5/21/2003 02:30:00 PM. Permalink |

Combat air patrols resume over American cities
Radio news just reported that fighters have resumed patrols over selected American cities.

by Donald Sensing, 5/21/2003 02:02:00 PM. Permalink |

"Root causes"
Michael Totten gives the concise outline:

As the Muslim world plugs into the global economy, it becomes increasingly Westernized.

Western Civilization is liberal. Liberalism exalts the individual and throws down an anti-authoritarian gauntlet. It decouples religion from the state. It encourages atheism and apatheism.

If Islamic Civilization becomes Westernized, and thus liberalized, the tradition of submission to Islamic authority will die.

Islam, in its pre-modern version, will be finished. Muslims will become secular apatheists. An Arabic Nietzche will write "God Is Dead," and he will not be beheaded for doing so.

Western Civilization therefore is a clear and present danger to their God. The Islamist reaction is this:

Jihad for the sake of Allah.

I invite all to read the long essay I wrote about these issues just after 9/11, "Why We Were Attacked: Religious Motivations for Anti-Western Violence."

The threat that the West (the USA being the foremost western nation) presents to the Taliban and their religious ilk is the West's world view, scientific epistemology. They perceive our scientific-technological world view as an overwhelming threat not merely to their way of life, but as an actual affront to Allah, and indeed, reality itself.

Their world view is, briefly and simplistically this: there is no new knowledge about Reality to be discovered after the life of Mohammed and outside the text of the Koran. (1) In this view, the universe is a closed book. However, western "ways of knowing" make claims of new truths almost daily -- fundamental truths about the true nature of reality. The universe is, in western thought, still an open book, still being written. . . .

Thus, this struggle is not principally a clash between political systems. It is a clash of incompatible world views and irreconcilable ways of understanding the nature of reality itself. . . .

In an interview with the BBC, former American special envoy to the Mid-East peace process Peter Ross said that radical Islamic fundamentalists do not hate America because of its support of Israel. "They hate who we are," he said, "they see us a threat to their religion."

by Donald Sensing, 5/21/2003 02:00:00 PM. Permalink |

I scooped The Wall Street Journal
The lead item in today's Best of the Web Today mentions the new Pentagon radar that scans and analyzes the way people walk.

BOTW's headline? "Ministry of Silly Walks."

I beat 'em by a day, and I had a moving graphic to boot!

by Donald Sensing, 5/20/2003 09:21:00 PM. Permalink |

A new kind of reaction?
Wondering about the sounds of silence in the Arab street, the anonymous blogger of The Final Frontier observes,

Historically, the response of Muslims to Western successes, whether militarily, economic, social, or political has been to attribute their failure as retribution from Allah for lack of piety. If they had only been more faithful, if they had only prayed more earnestly, if only they had more strictly observed the Sharia, then Allah would have been on their side and the Coalition infidels driven from their lands.

When terrorists struck the WTC on 9/11, Muslims, notably in the Middle-East, attributed that "success" to Allah, where Allah rewarded the Al Qaeda adherents for their radical fundamentalism. The credibility of Al Qaeda increased ten-thousand fold that day.

Then, the U.S. and its allies struck back. So breathtakingly successful were we in Afghanistan and Iraq, that Muslims could no longer rationalize Al Qaeda's success as rewards from Allah. Clearly, Allah was not on their side.

Since our victory, for the first time, more and more voices are saying that, "No, this isn't a problem of not being devout enough, the problem is militant radicalism."

Somewhat oversimplified, but a good basic point.


by Donald Sensing, 5/20/2003 04:10:00 PM. Permalink |

"Outside the Beltway"
. . . Is the name of pretty interesting and well-laid-out blog written by a "Sardonic book editor, poli-sci Ph.D., and former army officer [who] provides uninvited commentary on politics, sports, and whatever else amuses him." Browse on by!

by Donald Sensing, 5/20/2003 04:03:00 PM. Permalink |

Science and religion - part 1
What I hope to accomplish in this part is to trace how science and religion have come to be seen by countless people as mutually exclusive, indeed, openly hostile to one another.

I am distinguishing between science and engineering; I'll define the latter as the practical application of scientific processes to make tools to by which we manipulate the physical world. Science, however, is the discipline of inquiring into the nature of the physical world itself. I know that science and engineering are related more closely than this simple distinction. I make the distinction that way because recent history (i.e., 9/11) has shown that even religious fundamentalists are quite comfortable using the tools of scientific engineering, but are overtly hostile to deep inquiries into the nature of reality. Besides which, some prescientific peoples achieved a high level of engineering, such as the Mayas and ancient Egyptians.

The Islamist terrorists who committed the infamy of 9/11 came from a culture that is non-scientific and non-Christian. I am writing from a distinctly Western basis; the West's history has been specifically Christian and the West invented science. (I would even argue that it was Christianity that made science possible.) So in these essays when I say religion, I really mean Christianity and when I am referring to another religion, I'll make that clear.

The goal of science and religion alike is to understand the nature of Reality, to uncover Reality itself. Hence, both seek to discern truth, though religion and science think of truth in different ways. In religion, truth describes the nature of God or God's moral authority. Of course, what this truth is has been, and still is, fiercely fought over (sometimes literally) by religious people.

In the Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths, truth starts with divine revelation. For the Jews it was God sending Abram and Sarah from Ur to a new land and Moses encountering the burning bush, with the apotheosis being the covenant at Sinai. For Christians, revelation's zenith was found in the person and work of Jesus of Nazareth, and for Muslims revelation came in the giving of the Quran. The source of revelation is critical to understanding what religion means by "truth." Revealed truth is definitionally inarguable as truth because it comes from God. What religious people argue about is just what is/was revealed and what it means; we don't argue that revelation occurred or that revelation is authoritative. Revealed truth is error-free, eternal and unchangeable.

(As a side note, I will add the religious people also argue over just what degree of authority revelation, especially the Bible, has. For fundamentalists, for example, revelation is ultimate authority, trumping everything else. Others consider revelation part of a larger scheme of understanding. Methodism formally uses a "quadrilateral" of Scripture, tradition, reason and experience to work through issues.)

Scientific truth, OTOH, is discovered than than revealed. Scientific truth is temporal. In fact, scientists don't really deal with "truth" at all, but with observations, facts, hypotheses and theory. All of these things are necessarily subject to error and therefore in need of correction from time to time.

Whatever truth was considered to be before the rise of empirical science, wrote theologian Langdon Gilkey, "it was thought by all—clerics, theologians, scholars, artists, philosophers, even scientists—to include ‘facts'. . . . [The] symbols of revelation, creation, Fall, and redemption were thought to correspond directly to facts about the universe and its history." Modernity, kick-started by the invention of the scientific method, began to explore truth and fact in new ways. Nature was seen to be explicable by science rather than impelled by mysterious forces. "When Newton explained the motion of planets by the universal theory of gravitation," said Carl Sagan, "it no longer seemed necessary for angels to push and pummel the planets about."

My denomination's founder, John Wesley, was a product of the early modernity of the 1700s. In those days it was accepted by clerics and scientists alike that the whole point of science was to shore up religious claims. Wesley and most other clergy favored "scientific evidence" about God, arguing that the evident order in creation required a Designer. But by the middle of the nineteenth century, about sixty years after Wesley's death, modernity increasingly squeezed God out.

Carl Sagan tells the story of Napoleon's complaint to the Marquis de Laplace about Laplace's work, Mecanique celeste. "Napoleon complained to Laplace that he had found no mention of God in the text. Laplace's response has been recorded: ‘Sire, I have no need for that hypothesis.'"

The idea that God could be hypothetical is a product of modernity, says Sagan. People who ask him whether he believes in God, he says, are really asking for reassurance that their belief system "is consistent with modern scientific knowledge." The reason, says theologian John Hick, is because "the categories of the sciences are today regarded as ultimate, rather than those of religion."

That scientific materialism is the dominant world view is demonstrated, for example, in studies attempting to validate prayer scientifically. One study, conducted in 1987 by cardiologist Randolph Byrd at San Francisco General Hospital, arranged for "intercessory prayer groups from across the United States to pray for roughly half of the 393 individuals admitted to the coronary care unit with either heart attacks or severe chest pain. This was a scientific experiment in which none of the patients, physicians, or nurses knew which individuals were receiving prayer" (Eunice Chang, "The Power of Prayer, Can Prayer Be a Source of Improved Physical Health?" Journal of the Hippocratic Society, Harvard University, Aug. 1, 1998). As a whole, the set of such studies over the years is inconclusive.

A desire for scientific validation also shows up in biblical studies. Gerd Lüdemann, a New Testament scholar, claims to have developed a "scientific" account of the resurrection. He writes, "a consistent modern view must say farewell to the resurrection of Jesus as a historical event" (What Really Happened to Jesus, Louisville: John Knox Press, 1995), 118, 130. But nowhere does he explain why a scientific account is preferable over some other account, or why it is necessary. For that matter, he never explains how a scientific account of the resurrection is even possible. His claim is not merely that his scientific account is valid, but that it alone is valid. His method is not science so much as scientism.

And scientism, or faith in science, will be the topic of a future posting.

by Donald Sensing, 5/20/2003 03:23:00 PM. Permalink |

Another kind of rock and roll
Les Jones is ready to rock in a different way than US psyops troops.

by Donald Sensing, 5/20/2003 08:17:00 AM. Permalink |

"Music hath its charms to soothe the savage breast . . . ."
Music and interrogating Iraqis;
maybe movies next?

Joe Katzman reports on American attempts to break captured Iraqi officials down into slobbering, quivering blobs of Jello by playing Metallica and Barney theme music.

THE IDEA, says Sgt. Mark Hadsell, is to break a subject's resistance by annoying that person with what some Iraqis would consider culturally offensive music. The songs that are being played include "Bodies" from the Vin Diesel "XXX" movie soundtrack and Metallica's "Enter Sandman." "These people haven't heard heavy metal before," he explains. "They can't take it." Few people could put up with the sledgehammer riffs of Metallica, and kiddie songs aren't that much easier, especially when selections include the "Sesame Street" theme and some of purple dinosaur Barney's crooning.

Meanwhile, Charles at LGF asked for other suggestions of cruel and inhuman music to play to the prisoners, of which Joe kindly gleaned the following:

Pokemon theme song; The Chicken Dance; It's A Small World After All; Shatner and Nimoy duets (saved for the hardcore prisoners); Seasons in the Sun; "Muskrat Love" by The Captain and Tenille; The Macarena.

Using bad music to persuade our enemies is not a new thing. When Manuel Noriega holed up in the Papal Nunciatura during our invasion of Panama in 1989, US psyops forces arrayed stadium-quality loudspeakers around it and blared out rock music 24/7. The music was actually intended to mask negotiations between American officers and the Monsignor at the nuncio, but the press reported it was to soundblast Noriega out by denying him sleep - or sanity, for that matter. US officers shortly explained the real purpose was to prevent long-range eavesdropping by the media of the conversations between American Maj. Gen. Mark Cisneros and Monsignor Laboa, taking place at the gate to the nuncio. The press cried foul and censorship, etc. The Vatican protested that the music was harassing its diplomats at the nuncio. President Bush finally said the tactic was "irritating and petty" and Gen. Colin Powell then ordered it ended.

But the tactic was a big hit with young Americans back home. Rock stations around the nation called the public affairs office at Fort Bragg, NC (the home base of Lt. Gen. Carl Stiner, who commanded the invasion), offering to send cassettes of heavy-rock music to be sent down to Panama. The Army's actual playlist can be found here.

Remembering that event after the US began attacking al Qaeda terrorists and facilities in Afghanistan, I held a contest in April 2002, the winner to receive my homemade CD, "The Osama bin Laden 'Hit' Collection." You can see a photo of the CD label at the link. The song list was as follow - it's the titles that are the point, not the lyrics.

01 Air Force Come;
02 Elo - Fire On High;
03 Linda Ronstadt - You're No Good;
04 Pat Benatar - Hit Me With Your Best Shot;
05 Three Dog Night - Liar;
06 Queen - We Will Rock You;
07 Eagles - Desperado;
08: Safaris - Wipe Out;
09 Paul Simon - Homeless;
10 Jackson Browne - Running on Empty;
11 Blue Oyster Cult - (Don't Fear) The Reaper;
12. Nitty Gritty Dirt Band - I Fought The Law and the Law Won;
13. The Animals - We Gotta Get Out Of This Place;
14 Baha Men - Who Let The Dogs Out;
15 Paul McCartney - Band On The Run;
16 Michael Jackson - Beat It;
17 Eric Clapton - I Shot The Sheriff;
18 Bob Dylan - Knockin' on Heaven's Door;
19. Queen - Another One Bites The Dust;
20 Jan And Dean - Dead Mans Curve;
21 USMC Band - Battle Hymn Of The Republic

What about movies? In Stanley Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange," Alex, the main character, is a violent criminal whom the state attempts to reform coercively: "Alex is forced to watch films with his eyelids clamped open with pitiless clamps, while an assistant lubricates his bulging pupils at various intervals" The films mirror the crimes he has actually committed.

So for the captured Iraqis who are so hardcore that rock and kiddie music does not work, what movies should we make them watch, to reduce them to whimpering piles of blubber?

Ishtar, anyone?

by Donald Sensing, 5/20/2003 08:12:00 AM. Permalink |

Al Qaeda's new weapon: The Ministry of Silly Walks
Seeking ever to develop new ways of intruding into the lives of Americans,

The Pentagon is developing a radar-based device that can identify people by the way they walk, for use in a new antiterrorist surveillance system.

Operating on the theory that an individual's walk is as unique as a signature, the Pentagon has financed a research project at the Georgia Institute of Technology that has been 80 to 95 percent successful in identifying people.

If the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, orders a prototype, the individual ``gait signatures'' of people could become part of the data to be linked together in a vast surveillance system the Pentagon agency calls Total Information Awareness.

But Osama bin Laden is already ready with countermeasures to defeat the new radar:



The terrorists are conducting ongoing research into an especially vicious stealth gait: the French Silly Walk (La Marche Futile). There are also confirmed intelligence reports of a man who can "bend his leg back over his head and back again with every single step."

by Donald Sensing, 5/19/2003 10:23:00 PM. Permalink |