Whimsley

No Attack On Iran

It is important that Seymour Hersh exposes the rumblings from various parts of the US government about a potential attack on Iran, but on this occasion I've felt for some time that it's not going to happen. It's not that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and so on wouldn't do such a thing - personally I think they'd do it in a heartbeat if it gained them a few points in the polls - but that they can't even if they want to. It's getting close to the end of Bush's second term, he doesn't have the personal clout any more, and Iraq is such a complete and utter catastrophe that the response to any further military adventurism would, I think, be swift and damning. Now this wouldn't reassure me if I was sitting in Tehran, but that's how it looks from here.

And now someone with some actual knowledge says the same thing. The Yorkshire Ranter is someone who seems to know his military logistics stuff, and also comes from God's Own County, so he can hardly be wrong, and he argues that the US just doesn't have the needed stuff in the area to carry out any attack on Iran.

His recent posts have been excellent - I especially like his unified theory of stupidity on terrorism  where he starts off with this:

I'm beginning to think that it's possible to discern so many similarities between really stupid opinions on terrorism that we can call it a theory. Specifically, if you're talking about state sponsorship, you're probably wrong, unless overwhelming evidence contradicts this. As far as I can tell, the modern version of this theory originated in the late 1970s or early 1980s. It had been about - Shakespeare has a character in Richard II allege that "all the troubles in our lands/have in false Bolingbroke their first head and spring" - but the strong form seems to have originated then.

Key features are that 1) terrorist or guerrilla activity is never the work of the people who appear to carry it out, 2) instead it is the work of a Sponsor, 3) that only action against the Sponsor will be effective, 4) even if there is no obvious sign of the Sponsor's hand, this only demonstrates their malign skill, and 5) there is evidence, but it is too secret to produce. In the strong form, it is argued that all nonconventional military activity is the work of the same Sponsor.

and his Recidivist with alert populations, where he says this:

try out the following quote from one Robert Mocny, director of the USVISIT program at DHS:

"We cannot allow to impediment our progress the privacy rights of known criminals."

The law is what I say it is, and you're either with us, or you're with the terrorists. Perhaps literally with them, in the cells. Joseph Sensibaugh, manager of biometric interoperability for the FBI, meanwhile opines that "It helps the Department of Homeland Security determine who's a good guy and who's a bad guy," targeting "suspected terrorists" and "remaining recidivist with alert populations". Not to mention the president of Bolivia and a dead bluesman, apparently.

Why does it specifically have to be illiterate authoritarianism, by the way? What does that last phrase actually mean, anyone? Anyway. Enquiring minds want to know more. What was this "pilot project"? Whose records were given to the DHS? Will they be told? What are the safeguards? Where are the guarantees?

Good questions Alex.

Scholarships: Enough With the Leadership Thing

For family reasons I've been looking at university scholarships. There are those that you get if you have a certain average, and then there are others that you have to apply for and which usually involve a mixture of scholarship and "other stuff". And that "other stuff" is almost always defined as "leadership". Like the Lo Family scholarship at the University of Toronto (http://www.adm.utoronto.ca/awd/scholarships.htm#UTscholars):

"Awarded to students who are active as leaders, are respected and considered to be well-rounded citizens in their school and community..."

Or at Queen's University, the D & R Sobey Atlantic Scholarship  requires "Academic excellence, proven leadership and involvement in school or community activities." (http://www.queensu.ca/registrar/awards/apply/apply-scholar.html). You get the idea. Of course there are exceptions (like the lovely John Macara (Barrister) award at U of T: "Preference given to applicants who can establish that they are the blood kin of the late Mrs. Jean Glasgow, the donor of this award.") but most of the time it's all about the leadership.

Now I have nothing against leaders -- all successful groups need someone to take credit for their accomplishments -- but this focus on leadership to the exclusion of all else is a crock. Apart from being ill-defined, it does a pretty good job of saying to those 17 and 18 year olds out there that there's only one kind of admirable person in the world, and that's those who join lots of things, play sports (preferably as captain or quarterback), and Get Involved. Do we really want a world full of the parentally-pushed, self-important, power-hungry egotists who fill "leadership" positions as teenagers?

So, free of charge and in search of a better future for all of us, here is a list of scholarships I'd like to see adopted by universities:

The Wordsworth Scholarship: awarded to students who have shown that they deeply appreciate the world around them and pursue independent expression of their thoughts, regardless of peer pressure.
Documentation required:
- Tear-stained copy of a letter of rejection by a former girlfriend/boyfriend
- A notebook filled with juvenile poems
- Letter banning you from school spirit club
The entrance exam will require you to sit still, in complete silence, for 30 minutes.

The Paddy Clarke Initiative Award: awarded to students with demonstrated ability to take responsibility for their own lives.
Qualifications:
- Must have lived in a two-parent home for less than half their childhood.
- Must have moved out of home at least once during their teenage years. Preference given to those who have lived in a squat.
- Preference will be given to those convicted of shop-lifting, as long as the theft was for a demonstrably useful object.

The Larkin Scholarship: awarded to middle-class students with regular parents, who have never travelled abroad. Qualifications:
- Must own and wear bicycle clips regularly
- Attendance at church or other religious institution preferred. Belief not necessary.

The Perec Prize: awarded to students who have demonstrated precocity in the realm of obscure puzzles and word games.
Qualifications:
- An essay is required which must include all of the following:
    - a list of at least 24 related items
    - a meal that is all one colour
    - a mathematical theorem
The essay must have no hypothesis or conclusion, but must include at least three words that contain all the vowels in reverse order.

The Bookworm Scholarship: awarded to students who have demonstrated intellectual curiosity by exploring the the world they live in through the medium of books.
Documentation required:
- Dog eared copy of at least three major works of literature.
- Must have read at least two books banned by major school boards.
- The ability to articulate your ideas clearly demonstrates that you really don't understand the complexity of the world and will exclude you from this scholarship.