Comments are back


by Donald Sensing, 7/31/2003 07:59:00 PM. Permalink |

More on Women in Islam
Why asking, "What do Muslims believe?" is a toss-up question.

Several comments and several emails to me point out that Muslims are not as kindly disposed toward women as I seem to imply in this post. (Of course, the comments feature is missing for the time being.)

One of the difficulties in writing about "what the Muslims believe" is that there is bound to be a a fair amount of diversity of thought in a religion that claims a billion or so adherents. Unlike Catholicism, which has about the same number of adherents, there is no hierarchical structure in Islam and no body to set official, binding doctrine. (Shiite Islam has something of such a structure, but its branch is a minority.)

Of course there is a lot that all Muslims believe, of whatever stripe: that Mohammed was the "seal of the prophets," for example, that the Quran is the actual, literal word of Allah, and that every Muslim is obligated to live out the "Five Pillars of Islam" - strict monotheism and the finality of the prophethood of Muhammad; daily prayers; giving of alms; fasting, especially during Ramadan; a pilgrimage to Mecca at least once.

Even so, there is a lot of variety with Islam because, like every religion, there is a great deal of cultural shaping of how it is practiced in different places. Hence, Muslims who live or were born in the West tend to be much more tolerant than their Arab brethren of their faith (not including, though, ghettos of immigrant, unassimilated Muslims such as France has).

In particular, I am increasingly learning that a very large part of what we have tended to think of as "Islamic" has been less religious and much more cultural. Until quite recently, in historical terms, Islam and Arab were almost identical. But today the population "center of gravity" of all Muslims in the world lies to the east of Kabul. Arab Muslims are a clear minority, worldwide, though they continue to wield enormous religious power because the Quran is in Arabic and the religion's holy sites are in Arab lands (some, though, are in non-Arab Iran).

The highly respected scholar of Arabism, Raphael Patai, sheds a great deal of light of the Islam v. culture issue in his landmark book, The Arab Mind. Not a post-9/11 book, it was first published in the late 1970s and was updated not long ago. It is a truly compelling read. In it, Patai explains how the Bedouin culture still predominates Arab societies today, and how bedouinism in many ways came to dominate Quranic teachings. In fact, they are warp and woof together.

Case in point: In the Spring 1998 issue of Parameters, Ralph Peters explained the "Seven Signs of Non-Competitive States." Says Peters:

The greater the degree to which a state--or an entire civilization--succumbs to these "seven deadly sins" of collective behavior, the more likely that entity is to fail to progress or even to maintain its position in the struggle for a share of the world's wealth and power. Whether analyzing military capabilities, cultural viability, or economic potential, these seven factors offer a quick study of the likely performance of a state, region, or population group in the coming century.

These key "failure factors" are:

a. Restrictions on the free flow of information.
b. The subjugation of women.
c. Inability to accept responsibility for individual or collective failure.
d. The extended family or clan as the basic unit of social organization.
e. Domination by a restrictive religion.
f. A low valuation of education.
g. Low prestige assigned to work.

Peters' framework for successful states or non-competitive ones is their ability to be a player in the world economy, but it is interesting to note that all seven of these factors are prominent in Arab countries, as Patai, writing 20 years prior, explains in detail. And again, these analyses were prior to 9/11/2001.

But there is nothing particularly Muslim about this list, and non-Arab Muslims around the world cannot be fairly said to share them, except perhaps here and there. So when my faithful correspondents write to respond to me, "Yes, but," or that women in a certain place are second-class citizens (or third or fourth), I reply, yes - and in other Muslim places that is not the case. Which is "really" Muslim? Answer: they all are.

And that's exactly the problems in trying to say "what Muslims believe" or what they do. There are significant differences among Muslim societies, and they all claim to be true Islam. Even so, there is a growing divide, I think, between Arab Islam and Islam of the rest of the world, especially that practiced in the West. I have posted several posts about that this month. See here, also here and here.



by Donald Sensing, 7/31/2003 04:27:00 PM. Permalink |

Comments are disabled
Until Haloscan gets its act together, I have disabled comments. I know it's a free service, but sheesh. BTW, no comments are missing; I have simply removed the java from my template. When I return it, the comments should all be back.

by Donald Sensing, 7/31/2003 03:25:00 PM. Permalink |

Today's Marine Moment
In honor of my son enlisting in the Marine's delayed-entry program yesterday, here is the USMC Answering Machine (1.96MB, MP3 file).

by Donald Sensing, 7/31/2003 03:02:00 PM. Permalink |

God, pain and suffering, continued
Here is, "God on Trial," the next installment of my series of sermons on the problem of evil, or theodicy, from the Greek for "justice of God." It is perhaps the vexing problem of Christian faith.

The inquiries I have previously posted are:

God and lethal tornados

My Buddy God.

Here is an excerpt of God on Trial:

In Elie Wiesel's play of the Holocaust, "The Trial," a man named Berish is a survivor of a massacre in which most of the Jews had been killed in the village of Shamgorod. Afterward, Berish and some Jewish actors stage a trial of God, with Berish acting as the prosecutor. He speaks as witness for all the slaughtered: "Let their premature, unjust deaths turn into an outcry so forceful that it will make the universe tremble with fear and remorse!"

Berish's play is interrupted by the news that the murderers are returning to finish the job. A village priest offers to baptize Berish so he can truthfully claim to be Catholic. Berish refuses, saying, "My sons and my fathers perished without betraying their faith; I can do no less." He insists that this decision does not suggest a reconciliation with God. "I lived as a Jew," he exclaims, "and it is as a Jew that I shall die – and it is as a Jew that, with my last breath, I shall shout my protest to God! And because the end is near, I shall shout louder! Because the end is near, I'll tell Him that He's more guilty than ever!"

I hope to have the fourth and final installmment, how God answers Job, posted soon.

by Donald Sensing, 7/31/2003 02:38:00 PM. Permalink |

Does Islam teach that women don't have souls?
This is the question asked by correspondent Marilyn:

I was taught in Sunday School that Muslims believe that women do not have souls. I have a Catholic friend, a Jewish friend and a Baptist (southern) friend who were taught the same thing. We range in age from 40-60.

No one is willing to discuss this issue. My one Jesuit friend hotly denies that this is Muslim doctrine (but he is VERY PC and left-wing). The only information I can get from various websites seem to say that this is propaganda spread by the "Church Fathers" whatever that means.

The Church Fathers were the successors to the apostles who shaped the Church until the end of the fourth century. Since Islam was n ot founded until hundreds of years later, the Church Fathers never addressed it.

Like your friend, I was raised Southern Baptist, but I was never taught that belief. Of course, I was never taught anything about Islam in Sunday School.

Acording to a Western-based Islam web site, Submission.org, women are equal to men in Islam.

Every Westerner thinks that Islam is very chauvinistic and oppressive towards women. In Islam of today as practiced by most traditional sectarian Muslims, this is very true [note the dig against Arab Islam - DS]. However, in true Islam (Submission), as revealed in the Quran, nothing could be farther from the truth.

God treats men and women as spiritual equals., Quran 3:195 tells us :

"Their Lord responded to them: "I never fail to reward any worker among you for any work you do, be you MALE OR FEMALE, YOU ARE EQUAL TO ONE ANOTHER........."

Many of the Muslim countries who claim to follow Islam are treating women as a second class citizens, and some of these women accepted this situation thinking that is what Islam (Submission in English) is advocating. As mentioned previously, God, in the Quran made a complete spiritual equality between men and women, See 3:195.

Another set of holy writings in Islam is the Hadith, basically commentary upon the Quran, but not officially considered to be the equal of the Quran. (That is, only the Quran is held to be the actual word of God.)

The Hadith is not so friendly toward women, saying at one point, "Women are naturally, morally and religiously defective." (Another problem, though, is that there seems to be no accepted "standard" Hadith, so not all Muslims consider this particular commentary to be valid commentary.)

Even so, Submission.org says the Quran states plainly:

The spiritual equality between men and women is reiterated in 4:124, as follows:

"As for those who lead a righteous life, MALE OR FEMALE, while believing, they enter Paradise; without the slightest injustice"

and again in 16:97:

" Anyone who works righteousness, MALE OR FEMALE, while believing, we will surely grant them a happy life in this world, and we will surely pay them their full recompense for their righteous works."

and yet again in 40:40,

[40:40] Whoever commits a sin is requited for just that, and whoever works righteousness - MALE OR FEMALE - while believing, these will enter Paradise wherein they receive provisions without any limits.

But there may well be a significant number of Muslims who believe that women do not enter Paradise. There is a lot of folk religion in Islam, just as there is in Christianity.

by Donald Sensing, 7/31/2003 09:14:00 AM. Permalink |

I'd pay real money to do this
An Austrian daredevil has become the first person ever to fly from England to France without benefit of aircraft, except the one that took him to 30,000 feet over Dover, where he stepped into the void and glided to the continent. The wing is a carbon-fiber wing.



This is a lot cooler than the gliding suit Lara Croft uses in the current Tomb Raider movie. I'd love to try it out!

by Donald Sensing, 7/31/2003 08:53:00 AM. Permalink |

Stupid signs for stupid people
Jeff Jarvis has flippin' had it with big government nannyism ninnyism both!

by Donald Sensing, 7/30/2003 07:44:00 PM. Permalink |

Why recall Gray Davis?
California politics can be rather, uh, interesting. Today on the radio I heard Gov. Gray Davis (Democrat) explain why the successful recall drive there was another attempt of the Republicans to steal the election. Davis was returned to office last November. He said the recall drive began only 30 days later, too soon, he claimed, for his administration to have accomplished anything. He claimed the will of the voters was being thwarted.

That's somewhat disingenuous, I think. One, the state's constitution allows for recall and specifies what has to be done for them to take place. Recalls cannot take place in accordance with the will of the voters, as detailed in the constitution. Second, the voters get to decide the outcome. When they go to the ballot box their will shall be done, and who knows - they may return Davis to office.

Until today, I had never heard of Marc Valdez, who wants to be elected governor of the Bear State. His campaign's site turned up in my referrer logs. I have no idea of the state of his campaign. Just for kicks and grins, here is part of his response to the question of why Davis should be recalled:

Let me be the first to state that Gray Davis is certainly a capable politician. By far, he is the best fund raiser the state has ever seen. But ultimately, raising money is not his job. His job is to govern. His temerity in dealing with the power crisis when it first raised its ugly head in December, 2000, followed by his panic the following summer, did not give the electorate much confidence in his governing abilities. The electorate preferred Davis over Simon last year, but the simple magnitude of the budget deficit this year has really shaken their confidence.

His stance on a number of issues is here. For example: his position on public education:

The first role of education, then, is to show students different ways of thinking, beyond whatever parochial community they were born into, where the students might find fulfilling ways of life. This is a process that does not 'take a village.' When the 'village' comes calling, wondering why Johnny is reading Huckleberry Finn, the teacher must send the village away. No matter how many good people a community has, their collective impulses are usually bad for education.

Valdez also says about his sexual orientation, "Even though I like show tunes, and prance about in tights, I'm not gay."

BTW, my mention of his campaign here is not an endorsement or recommendation - it just kind of struck me as interesting. He lists only three "right" blogs on his site (plus two "left" ones): mine plus Tim Blair and Andrew Sullivan - pretty heady company for this simple Tennessee preacher.

Update: So far, 123 Californians have taken out papers to run for governor. The ballot will be in October.

by Donald Sensing, 7/30/2003 07:37:00 PM. Permalink |

A Really Big Day
As a retired military officer, I am empowered to administer the oath to persons enlisting in the armed forces. Today I had the privilege of enlisting my son, Stephen, into the United States Marine Corps.

Click here to see a MPEG video of the event. The video file is nine MB, as small as I could get it. On a broadband connection, it'll take about a minute to load.

. . . .

Update: I took a look at the USMC web site and found a section for parents of Marines. It has this Q&A:

Will my child be someone different when boot camp is over?

Answer: Don't worry. Your child will be the same person after boot camp, just a greatly enhanced version.

Heh!

by Donald Sensing, 7/30/2003 04:29:00 PM. Permalink |

More on "if the Left had won the day"
Vanderleun imagines what it would be like if the Left and its protests had won the day and Saddam Hussein and his regime had remained in power.

by Donald Sensing, 7/30/2003 03:26:00 PM. Permalink |

New site for Michael Totten
Michael Totten has new web digs. The new address is http://michaeltotten.com/. He says he will soon publish an essay on the difference between a Leftist and a liberal. It's a distinction I make myself, but I have never gotten around to writing what I think is the difference. I await Michael's post about it with anticipation.

by Donald Sensing, 7/30/2003 03:20:00 PM. Permalink |

The Great Flag Debate
Opposing views on Public Displays of Patriotism

The real-world Air Force NCO who blogs under the name Sgt Stryker has taken serious issue with Trent Telenko's essay on what reactions to displays of patriotism reveal about the ones who react. As Stryker is responding, I suggest you read Trent first, then Stryker.

However, here is Trent's "money graf':

You can smoke out who is what by how they react to public displays of patriotism (PDP). Those who feel "threatened" or "oppressed" by "simple minded and vulgar" displays of real American patriotism are America haters. People who feel that way are against the very concept of America and American liberty. Most activist Democrats are in this group and they have a positively "vampire-to-garlic reaction" concerning PDP's. They are also, in the main, Transnational Progressives.

I think Trent's point is that there are people who take umbrage at others who openly express patriotism or non-discreetly display emblems such as flags. Trent thinks that the umbrage takers are themselves anti-American and wish to attentuate American sovereignty by enmeshing it in a web of international structures, hence, transnational progressivism, a term coined by political analyst John Fonte.

Stryker, OTOH, thinks that Trent has gone off the deep end:

I guess that makes everyone in America except Comrade Telenko and his Politburo of Patriotic Purity an America hater, including most everyone I've served with and the majority of regular Americans who went out and fought WWII.

Stryker cites the work of historian Stephen Ambrose to show that the World War II generation, especially its veterans, eschewed the kind of PDPs that Trent refers to. Wrote Ambrose, "GIs didn't like to talk about country or flag and were embarassed by patriotic bombast."

My father and my father-in-law are both World War II vets. My father-in-law saw heavy ground combat; he made eight combat amphibious assaults in the Pacific. My dad did not see combat even though he served aboard a battleship and an aircraft carrier in the Pacific theater. I would say that Ambrose's observation is pretty accurate. Both men are very patriotic, but they hardly talk about it. I don't recall that either wearing so much as a flag lapel pin on their business suits. Privately, they probably agree with the sentiment, "America, love or leave it," but they don't say it, and they don't plaster, "These colors don't run" bumper stickers on their cars.

They have already proved to themselves and to all who know them that their patriotism is bought and paid for. No symbols need be added. I knew a lot of men of their generation as I grew up. Their lack of PDP was the same.

Yes, I know these are the men who formed the American legion, the VFW, and who wear embroidered garrison caps commemorating their service. But not every day, maybe only three or four days per year. Triumphalist displays seem to bother them. I think the reason is that they saw too many men fall or knew too many who never returned - or who were maimed or returned to years of agony in VA hospitals or were never "quite right." So the men and women of my father's generation are emotionally repulsed by sentiments such as the recent hit song that that crows, "We'll put a boot in your" butt, "that's the American way."

They don't think so. Their attitude is very much like that expressed by Capt. Dick Winters in Ambrose's landmark book, Band of Brothers, chronicling a company of WW 2 101st Airborne Division paratroopers. After a fierce firefight, Winters promised God that if he got Winters out alive, he would find a piece of land somewhere quiet and live the rest of his life in peace. And that is what Dick Winters did; he lives on a farm near Hershey, Pa.

Overt flag waving does tend to make military members edgy. As Stryker explains [saltiness edited out]:

I've found that those who engage in the most "crass, shmaltzy, politically vulgar and oh so in your face partisan-patriotic" demonstrations of patriotism also tend to be all talk and little walk. They're hollow. They're the same people who'll wave the flag and spout inanities 'til Armageddon, but when it comes down to actually having to . . . sacrifice - they'll hang their head, make circles in the dirt with their toes and mumble the standard litany of lame excuses. Before you know it, they're [heading for] the horizon. If you're lucky, you might hear them say as they recede from view, "You take care of it! I'll be cheering you on from a safe distance."

I feel the same way. Yet I also grasp what Trent is talking about. One thing I have learned since retiring from the Army eight years ago is how the common assumtptions of military communties and active-duty members are not shared in the civilian world. The sense of camraderie and common purpose just isn't there. Stryker feels no need to engage in "crass" PDPs because all of his community feels as he does: we're here, what more do you want? And they are right.

But Trent has a point, too. There are some people in the wider civilian world who really do hold that America is the leading cause of the world's troubles and that supporting America is betraying the human race. And those people are offended by displays of patriotism; I wrote about their political ideology here. Yesterday, Andrew Sullivan carried an excerpt written by "Norman Geras, a Marxist who rejects the blanket anti-Western orthodoxy now prevalent on the British and American left." Why, asks Geras, do so many of ideological colleagues take such delight in every setback for American or British forces?

For some, because what the US government and its allies do, whatever they do, has to be opposed . . ."

But even so, I think that Trent overstated the case somewhat, and I would have to align myself with Stryker on this matter.

Update: Michael Williams has some pertinent thoughts.

. . . And here's the DVD . . .

by Donald Sensing, 7/30/2003 07:02:00 AM. Permalink |

Pakistan bans Newsweek magazine
Article of upcoming book about the Quran infuriates Muslims;
German scholar says Quran was not originally in Arabic

A book called, Challenging the Quran, by a German scholar writing under the pseudonym Christoph Luxenberg is due for publication this fall. The current edition of "Newsweek" has an article about the book that has kicked up a firestorm of debate because Luxenberg contends that the Quran's text of today is not the same as was originally written. (Seeing that Salman Rushdie was sentenced to death by Muslim clerics for his book, The Satanic Verses, the German's use of a pen name seems pretty prudent.)

Lux, as other scholars refer to his pen name, contends that the Quran was originally written in Aramaic. As in Hebrew, the use of vowels in writing Aramaic and Arabic is a relatively late development. In fact, Arabic was not written at all until about 150 years after the death of Mohammed, founder of Islam. Hence, Lux claims that the original text was not in Arabic, but Aramaic, a Semitic language related to both Hebrew and Arabic.

When read as an Aramaic text, much of the Quran changes. Says Newsweek:

In a note of encouragement to his fellow hijackers, September 11 ringleader Muhammad Atta cheered their impending "marriage in Paradise" to the 72 wide-eyed virgins the Quran promises to the departed faithful. Palestinian newspapers have been known to describe the death of a suicide bomber as a "wedding to the black-eyed in eternal Paradise." But if a German expert on Middle Eastern languages is correct, these hopes of sexual reward in the afterlife are based on a terrible misunderstanding.

ARGUING THAT TODAY'S version of the Quran has been mistranscribed from the original text, scholar Christoph Luxenberg says that what are described as "houris" with "swelling breasts" refer to nothing more than "white raisins" and "juicy fruits."

But that's not the half of what infuriates Muslims who are aware of the book's premises.

Even more explosive are readings that strengthen scholars' views that the Quran had Christian origins. Sura 33 calls Muhammad the "seal of the prophets," taken to mean the final and ultimate prophet of God. But an Aramaic reading, says Luxenberg, turns Muhammad into a "witness of the prophets." i.e., someone who bears witness to the established Judeo-Christian texts. The Quran, in Arabic, talks about the "revelation" of Allah, but in Aramaic that term turns into "teaching" of the ancient Scriptures. The original Quran, Luxenberg contends, was in fact a Christian liturgical document [emphasis added] - before an expanding Arab empire turned Muhammad's teachings into the basis for its new religion long after the Prophet's death.

It's important to remember that the Quran does not occupy the same religious place in Islam as the Bible does for Christians. For Muslims, the Quran is much more analogous to what Christ is for Christians - the supreme and actual revelation of Allah.

Even so, one may ask, "What's the big deal?" The tenets of Christian faith have come under critical scrutiny - if not actual attack - for many decades now. The Jesus Seminar, for example, consists of about 70 members (only a handful are bona fide scholars, though) that claims to have refuted almost every Christian doctrine about Christ. (The Seminar's home page is here, and a critque of its methods is here.) Yet Christians haven't lit torches, grabbed pitchforks and marched off to lynch the heretics and blasphemers.

The difference is that for the Bible, textual analysis began within the community of the faithful as a way better to understand the Scriptures and how the word of God is a guide for contemporary life. The fact that the Hebrew and Greek texts were translated into other languages from the beginning of the Church made the interpretive task imperative. As I wrote in my essay, "Is Christianity more user-friendly than Islam?"

We use the language of our culture to describe God to ourselves, but we also agree that the revelation of God cannot be limited only to our own cultural context. God is greater than our culture or any other. God is present in our culture and in some way in all cultures. That means that at the heart of Christian faith is pluralism. Christianity does not hold that all religions are equally valid ways to salvation, quite the opposite. But most Christians do hold that there are many valid ways within Christian faith to encounter God.

I would also add that Christians have always held that the meaning of the Bible is mediated to the faith community. At the minimum, Christians have understood that the third person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit, is active in leading the faithful to understand the Word and apply it to their particular circumstances. Usually, the Church is itself said to mediate the holy texts. In Catholicism, for example, the authority of the Church is equal to the authority of the Bible (a doctrine that was one of the complaints of John Calvin and Martin Luther). In my own denomination, United Methodist, the meaning of the Scriptures is mediated through discernment within human reason, the church's traditions and the experiences of both Christian individuals and faith communities. Other denominations understand mediation in different ways.

But there is no formal recognition in Islam that the Quran's text is mediated, or even can be mediated. As I wrote,

The Quran is held to be the very word of Allah. The Quran is in Arabic [at least today's version of it is, by Lux's thesis]. Even though three-fourths of the world's Muslims are not Arab, Muslim missionaries have never validated other languages or other cultures. A professor of Islamic studies at The George Washington University once told me that the Quran is the Quran only in Arabic. No non-Arabic version of the Quran is valid. Also, the five prayers per day that Muslims must pray facing Mecca may be uttered only in Arabic. Early Muslim scholars wrote that the willingness of Christianity to embrace other languages was a major defect of Christianity and was evidence of the falsification of the Christian message, a view still nearly universally held by Muslims.

That's why linguistic analysis of the Quran is anathema to Muslims: The Quran contains the actual utterances of Allah, transmitted error-free to Muhammed by the angel Gabriel. And the word of Allah was given in Arabic. It is a basic tenet of Islam that the text has been passed down since his day completely without change.

That is why even Muslims who understand Christian faith very well incorrectly think that our willingness to engage in textual crtitcism of the Bible proves that we don't really believe in it. If we really thought it was true, we would simply accept it, not dissect it. In fact, analysis of Christian and Jewish texts by Christians and Jews is used by Muslims to claim that the Bible's testaments are in fact corrupt - a tenet of Islam for many centuries, now buttressed by modern scholarship. The corruption of the biblical texts was put aright by the giving of the Quran to Mohammed.

So it is a true bombshell to claim, as Luxenberg does, that it is the Quran that is textually corrupted, and that the original text cannot be retrieved with certainty, and that a reasonable reading of a likely version of the original actually buttresses Judaism and Christianity rather than refutes them.

I will buy Luxenberg's book when it appears in English, if for no other reason that his courage must be rewarded.

Update: Austin Bay emails,

Don, I will buy Luxenburg's book as well, and read it with great interest. I studied the Quran under tutelage (early 1975). I made it through 30 surahs in some detail and received a great deal of instruction about Islam. Of course, I used an English text and was told the only true text was Arabic. One of my Muslim teachers (both Pakistanis, one with a graduate degree from Oxford) read the Quran to me in Arabic. In Arabic the Quran is mesmerizing -- a flowing lyric poetry of the highest order. I didn't understand a word but it did not matter A Quranic reading I heard in Istanbul in 1992 had the same effect, a melodic elixir. Muslims find exegesis an utter anathema because they believe Mohammed transcribed the literal words of Allah. The Aramaic proposal, however, sounds plausible. What a smack at Bin Laden and his pals.

Indeed.

by Donald Sensing, 7/29/2003 05:54:00 PM. Permalink |

Background checks? Okay for gun nuts, not for good people . . .
. . . like reporters, right? Well, no. It seems that the Pennsylvania government requires annual background checks on reporters who wish to go onto state property to cover the happenings on the government. In Chicago, they have to undergo both background checks and fingerprints checks.

And all the sudden reporters are coming up with the same concerns that they so flippantly dismissed when the background checks didn't involve them:

"Who would have access to these background checks? It's hard for me to believe the police department will do background checks and not put that information in a file. Who will get it? An alderman with a grudge? Even if there's nothing illegal (in the background check), who knows what will show up? You should see the messages I'm getting from members. The scenarios are endless."

It's amazing how they're just now starting to realize that government doesn't always keep its promises. They're now starting to realize that having the FBI amass a great big file on you isn't as great an idea as them getting a big file on the nutcase down the street.

hat tip: Chris Noble.

by Donald Sensing, 7/29/2003 04:39:00 PM. Permalink |

Telemarketers sue to stop "Do not call"
The American Teleservices Association, representing telemarketers natuionwide, has sued in federal court to strike down the "do not call" regulation and agencies.

"This truly is a case of regulatory overkill," said Tim Searcy, ATA executive director. "The FCC ignored its obligations under the federal law and the Constitution to carefully balance the privacy interests of consumers with the First Amendment rights of legitimate telemarketers."

Says Chris Noble (whence the link):

They have a right to try to sell their product, but to say that they have a First Amendment right to call my phone, that I pay for, to get rude and nasty because I don't want the scam of the day that they're trying to push - well let's just say that, in my opinion, their First Amendment right ends when they push the last button in my phone number.

I see Chris' point, but I am a little uneasy with using the power and funds of the federal government to block the calls, even though I hate getting them as much as anyone. It strikes me a nanny-ism.

by Donald Sensing, 7/29/2003 04:06:00 PM. Permalink |

More on reforming Islam
Yet another Muslim voice for the reform of Islam, this one belonging to a teacher at the University of Maryland. Imad A. Ahmad is trying to show that Islam, free markets and civil liberties are quite compatible.

As I have observed before, the real vigor of Islam is found outside the Arab lands and is especially strong in the West (here and here.)

by Donald Sensing, 7/28/2003 10:11:00 PM. Permalink |

How's this for gratitude?
L.T. Smash relates this story:

Three servicemen had just finished dinner at a restaurant in Kuwait, when they were approached by a group of local women.

"Excuse me, Mister," one of the younger women said, "My Mother does not speak very good English, but she would like to say thank you for killing Uday and Qusay."

The men were taken aback both by the uncharacteristically forward nature of these Kuwaiti women, and by the sentiment that was expressed. But they nodded politely and smiled.

The youngest of the three servicemen grinned, and replied, "Tell her Saddam is next!" She did so, and the older woman smiled, held up her hands, and cried "Inshallah!"

In other news, the number of women raped by Uday has remained at zero for six days now.

by Donald Sensing, 7/28/2003 10:02:00 PM. Permalink |

Mel Gibson, Jesus Christ and critics
Mel Gibson's upcoming movie about the passion (suffering and death) of Jesus Christ is garnering a lot of controversy. There is a lot of buzz that the movie is at least latently anti-Semitic: "The Jews killed Jesus."

In fact, Gibson's production company was contacted by "the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). Fisher's counterpart at the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), Eugene Korn, also weighed in. They assembled an ad hoc group of professors-- four Catholics, two Jews, all scholars of the New Testament--to review the script together with Fisher and Korn, who themselves hold doctorates." This according to respected New Testament scholar Paula Frederikson. "Shortly thereafter, at their invitation, I also joined the group." Her article originally appeared in The New Republic, but you can read it at my link without going through registration.

I do not know Paula, but I do know very well another of the reviewing scholara. Amy-Jill Levine was my New Testament professor at Vanderbilt Divinity School. When the inaccuracies of the script were pointed out, Gibsons defenders turned their guns toward A-J, as her friends call her. They singled out . . .

. . . for mention one member of our group, Amy Jill Levine. The reporter had gone to her website and indignantly pulled one of her self descriptions: "a Yankee Jewish feminist." (Lest Levine's remark be misunderstood, let the record state that she was born in New Bedford, Massachusetts and spends her summers grieving for the Red Sox.) Levine is a chaired professor of New Testament studies at Vanderbilt's divinity school and the author of prize-winning studies on early Judaism, Christian origins, and the Gospel of Matthew. Still, nothing in particular distinguished her from the rest of us except, perhaps, the humor of her self-description and her recognizably Jewish name.

I'll write more about this later, suffice it is to say that I am plenty ticked off that A-J was made a particular target. She is a wonderful person and a fantastic teacher.

Yes, I was taught New Testament in seminary by a Jewish woman. And my Christian faith is the stronger for it.

I last saw A-J in June, when she attended our Annual Conference's ordination service, having been invited by one of the ordinands, a student of hers. We discussed her returning to my church to lead another seminar, which she did a few years ago. Now I know the topic: Who killed Jesus and why?

by Donald Sensing, 7/28/2003 05:23:00 PM. Permalink |

Quote of the day
Said a Fox News anchor on how much Bob Hope was worth: "Dick Cavett said Bob was worth $400 million, and that was twenty years ago when that was real money."

As far as I am concerned, $400 million is still real money!

It reminds me of what former North Carolina Sen. Sam Ervin Sen. Everett Dirksen once said about federal spending. "A billion here, a billion there, and before long you're talking about a lot of money." (Correction of quote source from multiple sources.)

by Donald Sensing, 7/28/2003 04:51:00 PM. Permalink |

How Bob Hope almost made me rich
As you know, a great American, Bob Hope, died today at age 100. There breathes not a military member of the last 60-plus years who does not mourn. Bob had a solid career going as a vaudeville comedian turned movie star before he began visiting American troops in combat zones in World War II. In the 1930s, he was one of the highest-paid actors in Hollywood.

He didn't have to go to the troops, but he did. He went so far forward that his life was in danger on more than one occasion, . And he didn't stop until he was almost 90. He visited the troops in Saudi Arabia during Desert Shield and, if memory serves correctly, later went to the broken-up Yugoslavia to entertain troops there.

Bob Hope entertained the troops for so many decades that some American service members who saw him were the grandchildren of others who had seen him, a long time before. Heck, maybe even great-grandchildren.

I was assigned to Headquarters, XVIII Airborne Corps, when Bob put on a show in 1987 at adjoining Pope Air Force base for the airmen and soldiers of the two bases. I was serving as the chief of public information for the Corps and Fort Bragg. Because the show was actually to be presented at Pope, we didn't have a lot to do with staff work for getting everything ready. I didn't see the show because the word came down that the show was for the soldiers, by golly, and there better be a scarcity of headquarters staff pukes there.

My office was deluged with calls from locals who wanted to get tickets. The commanders of Fort Bragg and Pope AFB did invite some persons of local importance, but not very many. Bob Hope's folks - speaking for Bob himself - had made it very dadgum clear that he was not there to gladhand local county commissioners. He was there to entertain the troops.

I was offered some very substantial bribes honoraria by some folks of the entertainment world to get them tickets. I was called by some first-tier figures in the music and movie industry who wanted to see the show. Some of the offers were jaw dropping.

They say every man has his price, and those folks were darn close to finding mine. But I didn't have any tickets to give away, not even one for myself. But if I had possessed only a few, I could have made quite a lot of money had I been so inclined and well, so dishonorable.

Very shortly before show day, we got word that President Reagan had invited himself to the show; being the commander in chief, he got to do that. Actually, Bob had been a good friend of Reagan for a long time, and on the show day the president was already scheduled to be in the air returning from somewhere else, California, I think. So he flew in and took the stage with Bob and the two men did a little routine their staffs had worked out. Frankly, their lack of rehearsal showed! But the troops loved it.

by Donald Sensing, 7/28/2003 04:45:00 PM. Permalink |

TypePad announcement this Friday
So I am informed by Jack White, who has been beta-testing it: "TypePad will make features, pricing, and so on over the next five days, with pricing on Friday. Check the TypePad site regularly."

by Donald Sensing, 7/28/2003 04:15:00 PM. Permalink |

Mexican cartel "agriculture" in national forests
An American in Europe is a new blog done by an American named Craig Brelsford, who lives in the Netherlands. He writes of why camping in American national forests can be dangerous. It seems that the forests, long used by American pot growers, have been invaded by Mexican pot cartels.

by Donald Sensing, 7/28/2003 04:13:00 PM. Permalink |

Raid on the Hussein Brothers showed a profit
The US government has announced it will pay the bounty of $15 million each for Usay and Qusay to the man who fingered them for US forces on July 22.

That makes the raid a $70 million profit maker. It seems the two men had $100 million in cash with them when they went.

by Donald Sensing, 7/27/2003 02:26:00 PM. Permalink |

More on whether Bush is truly a conservative
I indicated here that the question was open. Another notch in the "no" belt: He's a bigger spender of your and my hard-earned coin than even Jimmy Carter was.

by Donald Sensing, 7/27/2003 02:14:00 PM. Permalink |

God, faith, and suffering
I posted earlier about the problem of suffering, a post brought about by a news report of a man who lost his wife and children when a tree fell on their car as they traveled. That post garnered a fairly intense debate in the comments section that in my mind shows why the problem of pain, suffering and evil is one of the greatest barriers to Christian faith.

I linked then to a 1998 sermon that I preached shortly after tornados tore through Nashville and other towns, killing some people and wreaking much damage. The sermon is based on part of the book of Job in the Jewish Scriptures.

Continuing, here is a follow-up sermon on Job. It is the longest book in the Bible and no one sermon can possibly cover it. I preached a series of three sermons on Job two years after the tornados. I call it, "My Buddy God."

There are two more in my series on Job that I'll post when I get them reformatted for the Web. They are:

God on trial

The end of "happy church"

by Donald Sensing, 7/27/2003 02:02:00 PM. Permalink |

New logo for One Hand Clapping?
Reader Alan Pratt suggests I would be interested in this graphic, for which actual instructions for making a working model can be found here.



Nice pic! However, I am not a "Zen Methodist," despite the name of my blog. When I moved this site off the Blogspot server to Cornerhost.com, I explained the origin of the title, "One Hand Clapping."

by Donald Sensing, 7/26/2003 08:02:00 PM. Permalink |

Well, I'm not quite sure what to say about being nominated to this high office
When I returned from the trap tournament today there was an email waiting from reader Richard Heddleson alerting me to my nomination as Secretary of Defense War over at Smallest Minority. It seems there is a move afoot to get Glenn Reynolds to occupy the oval office. And people were wondering, naturally, who would be his cabinet officers and other high officials. So here is the list, so, far, of nominations of those folks.

Richard also points out that it's not too late for Glenn to establish California residency, get elected governor there this October, and be in fine position to hit the trail for the White House later.

So someone nominated me for the post formerly known as Secretary of Defense, now apparently renamed SecWar. For some reason, my ordination orders were seen as a plus for that office, don't ask me why.

I note that Steven Den Beste was properly nominated for Secretary of State. Hmmm . . . I wonder whether we'd get along better than Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld.

Well, yeah.

by Donald Sensing, 7/26/2003 04:12:00 PM. Permalink |

A bad day at the range is better than a good day at the office
Went to the Maury County Gun Club today to shoot in a trap tournament. For those of you who may not know what trapshooting is, go here.

I didn't shoot spectacularly well, but had fun. For some reason I hit more long-range targets than short-range ones. Go figure. I was using the Beretta AL 391 Parallel Target, 12-gauge semi-auto gun that I bought last month at the Tennessee state championship tourney.

[sarcasm] And today, I was amazed - amazed, mind you - at how polite everyone was. It must have been because we were all heavily armed. [/sarcasm]

by Donald Sensing, 7/26/2003 03:55:00 PM. Permalink |

Best read of today
If you don't read anything else today, read this (via Sparkey). It is the first-person story of a 9/11 widow who visited American troops in Iraq.

by Donald Sensing, 7/26/2003 03:07:00 PM. Permalink |

British myths about American GIs
A British journalist who was embedded with US infantry during the Iraq campaign explodes some of the myths the Brits back home believe about American soldiers. No, he says, the GIs are not unprofessional amateurs:

I accompanied foot patrols in Baghdad as early as April 13, only days after Saddam's presidential palace was taken. The unit carrying out these patrols was also assigned to escort SAS troopers around the city. The SAS men told me how impressed they were, not just with the Americans' willingness to learn from them, but with their training and self-control.

Neither are the American troops lavishly equipped, overfed, vehicle-bound, trigger happy, immature, comfort-loving, insensitive yokels, cowboys and louts. RTWT. Hat tip: Matt Bruce.

by Donald Sensing, 7/26/2003 03:04:00 PM. Permalink |

A brigade commander in Iraq writes about it
The Braden Files publishes a letter from the commander of 1st Brigade, 1st Armored Division:

We are fighting former regime-backed paramilitary groups, Iranian-based opposition, organized criminals, and street thugs. We have stood up governing councils from neighborhood to district to city level. We have conducted humanitarian action in numerous areas to include repair of electricity, water, sewer, hospitals, and schools; created refuse collection systems; and built numerous recreational facilities (particularly soccer fields). We have cleared hundreds of tons of UXOs and weapons caches. I have already hosted Fox News, ABC, ITN, UP, Reuters, the New Yorker, and an Indian news service. On any given day I deal with the political realm of the Coalition Provisional Authority, the humanitarian realm of the NGOs, and the military realm of firefights/improved explosive devices/snipers/mortar attacks. . . .

We are doing some excellent humanitarian work, but it doesn't make the news because all the press wants to talk about is the attacks. . . .

The people we kicked out of power can't stand our success, however, and will do everything they can to try to make us fail. Thus the ongoing gun battles in the streets.

There is also a lot of organized crime here. I have flashbacks to "The Godfather" all the time. As the military commander of eastern Baghdad, I feel like Don Corleone...or maybe a ward boss on the south side of Chicago. . . .

I have a reserve MP company out of New York working for me, and they are doing a fantastic job. The company commander is a New York City prosecutor in his other life. . . .

It's 116 degrees here today . . .

by Donald Sensing, 7/25/2003 05:19:00 PM. Permalink |

Where are Foreign Area Officers when you need them?
Today the American officials in Iraq invited some independent reporters and video crews into the refrigerated tent where they were permitted to videotape the corpses of Uday and Qusay Hussein, killed this week in a gunfight with American soldiers. The display followed the release of photos of the corpses a day ago.

For today's taping the two bodies had been cosmetically altered from the day of their deaths and from their appearance in the still photos already released. Qusay was killed wearing think beard, which he had not worn before the American invasion. His beard was present in the photos, but he had been shaved clean for today's taping.

Uday's beard had also been trimmed sharply so that it was very short, as he wore it in times before the invasion. Again, different from the photos.

But the real kicker was that both men's faces had been heavily retouched by embalmers.

Rocco Paccione, a funeral services director, said fixing up the faces was necessary to convince Iraqis the men are dead.

"You must remember that the general population of the area is accustomed to seeing them as they were," Paccione told Fox News. "What the embalmers and the military has done is to try to create the appearance that they had prior to death to convince the people in the area that's who this really is."

While the goal is admirable, there's a problem.

But while it may be common in the United States, the move is unheard of in the Arab world. That could affect Washington's efforts to quash Iraqi conspiracy theories that the bodies are not in fact those of the once powerful and hated sons of Saddam, who is believed to be still in hiding in Iraq.

One of the military specialties of the US Army is Foreign Area Officer, a specialty that requires detailed training and education in specific cultures, nations and societies. Surely burial customs are part of that training! I wonder whether the Army's commanders in Iraq consulted with their FAOs before applying embalmer's putty and makeup to the bodies.

Maybe they did and decided to go forward, anyway. "You roll the dice and take your chances," as the saying goes.

In other relevant news, Japan is ready to send troops to Iraq.


by Donald Sensing, 7/25/2003 03:43:00 PM. Permalink |

What Arab scholars say about the deaths of Uday and Qusay
James Joyner summarizes what two Arabs scholars and one Arab newsman said. It's not a long post, so read the whole thing. What is remarkable is how they turned the topic into penetrating looks at what is wrong with their own societies and how the reactions to the Hussein brothers' death illuminates it.

I have said before (and here) that the only Arabs who feel secure enough to offer blunt critiques of Arab culture and countries are Arabs who don't live there any more. All three of these men live here in America.

by Donald Sensing, 7/25/2003 03:23:00 PM. Permalink |

Comprehensive list of Iraq campaign dead online
I mentioned this in next post down, but thought I'd make it more explicit. CNN maintains a daily-updated list of all American British service members killed in Iraq, whether by enemy action or some other reason.

by Donald Sensing, 7/25/2003 02:56:00 PM. Permalink |

I know my site is loading slow
And MSIE tells me that it is "Done, but with errors on the page." I have examined the site's code line by line and can't find an error, but I am no codemaster, either. Until I do find it, please accept my apology for the slow load.

by Donald Sensing, 7/25/2003 02:40:00 PM. Permalink |

Flying Howard Johnson home - real or urban legend?
A retired Air Force major general yesterday emailed me the text of a story - not his own story - being circulated that has all the earmarks of urban legend.

I want to tell you of an experience I had last night flying home from Atlanta. The pilot came on the intercom and went through the usual announcements telling us that "we're just east of Montgomery cruising at 28,000 feet" and "you've picked a beautiful night for flying, just look at the gorgeous southern sunset out of the right side of the plane".

He then, however, said this: "Please bear with me as I deviate from the script, but I want you all to know that simply by coincidence you have been granted both the privilege and honor of escorting the body of Army PFC Howard Johnson, Jr. home tonight. PFC Johnson was killed in Iraq defending the freedoms we all enjoy, and fighting to extend those freedoms to the people of Iraq. We are also accompanied by PFC Johnson's cousin, Marine Major Talley, who has been chosen by the family to escort PFC Johnson home. Semper Fi!"

The plane quickly became very quiet, but soon erupted in thunderous applause that lasted for several minutes. It was quite moving, to say the least. As I sat there thinking about what the pilot had said, and visualizing PFC Johnson's dead body riding below me in the belly of that plane, I noticed a couple of things. Two rows in front of me sat a father holding his daughter, an infant, and they were practicing "ma-ma" and in the row behind me was another young boy, probably 2 or so, learning to count to 10. Now obviously both are too young to realize we're at war, or that one of our dead was with us, but it made me think, and this is the point: These warriors, mostly young, all volunteers, everyday are prepared to give their lives for our future, for a safer, more secure future for people they don't even know, all based on the principle that fighting and dying for this country is worth it. You all know and agree with this, but not everyone does, so I would ask that if you meet anyone that's not "on board" with this philosophy, i.e. the protesters, that you "correct the situation".

By the way, the flight ended with all of us deplaning only to lin