Fellowship of Punditry

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Cul Heath

Mick Arran

Jeffrey Barbose

Inspector Lohmann

Eric M. Fink

Michael Lane

Rep. Mark B. Cohen

The Fellowship is accepting new members. Inquire within.

The Sages

  • David Weinberger
  • Jon Lebkowsky
  • Jay Rosen
  • Rebecca MacKinnon
  • Nova Spivack
  • Dan Gillmor
  • Jim Moore
  • Lawerence Lessig
  • Ed Cone
  • Jeff Jarvis
  • Joi Ito
  • The Titans

  • Talking Points Memo
  • Oliver Willis
  • Burnt Orange Report
  • Jim Hightower
  • Wonkette
  • Political Animal
  • The-Hamster
  • Matthew Yglesias
  • Pandagon
  • Altercation
  • Informed Comment
  • Donkey Rising
  • The Decembrist
  • Buzz Machine
  • Orcinus
  • Brad Delong
  • Eschaton
  • The Left Coaster
  • Pacific Views

    Distinguished Colleagues

  • Tom Burka
  • The American Street
  • wood s lot
  • Rox Populi
  • Scratchings
  • Blond Sense
  • Cut To The Chase
  • Bad Attitudes
  • Rook's Rant
  • Dohiyi Mir
  • Stout Dem Blog
  • A Violently Executed Blog
  • American Leftist
  • Easy Bake Coven
  • Southerly Buster
  • Abuddhas Memes
  • Post-Atomic
  • Van Ramblings
  • Friends of the Fellowship

  • Texas Native
  • Chuck Currie
  • To The Teeth
  • Radically Inept
  • In Dark Times
  • Serial Blogonomy
  • The Bone
  • Public Domain Progress
  • Alien Intelligencer
  • Research Associates

  • Blogged In the Desert
  • One Fine Jay
  • Jessica's Universe
  • Selective Amnesia
  • In Grown Brain Stem
  • Immolation.org
  • Somewhere over the rainbough
  • Politikult
  • Political Puzzle
  • Dear Free World
  • Twenty Something
  • Thom:WebLog
  • Random Act of Kindness
  • A Skeptical Blog
  • The Common Man
  • Progressive News

  • The American Prospect
  • World Press Review
  • Alternet
  • In These Times
  • Common Dreams
  • Media Channel
  • History News Network
  • Tom Paine
  • Z-Magazine
  • Breaking News

  • Associated Press
  • Reuters
  • BBC Newswire
  • World NEws

  • The Guardian (UK)
  • The Independent (UK)
  • The Financial Times (UK)
  • Pravda (Russia)
  • La Monde Diplomatique (France)
  • Arab News (Saudi Arabia)
  • The Age (Australia)
  • China Daily
  • The People's Daily (China)
  • The Korea Herald
  • Think Tanks

  • CEIP
  • The CATO Institute
  • Center for America Progress
  • Federation of American Scientists
  • Progressive Policy Institute
  • Council on Foreign Relations
  • The Brookings Institution
  • The Foreign Policy Association
  • Blogging Resources

  • Principia Cybernetica
  • The Fallacy Files
  • Fact Check
  • 50 Ways To Improve Your Blog
  • Poynter Online's Writers ToolBox
  • News Thinking
  • The Scout Archives
  • WebReference.com
  • Into the Blogosphere
  • George Orwell

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    Political language -- and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists -- is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.

    In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever.

    But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.

    Sometimes the first duty of intelligent men is the restatement of the obvious.

    Whatever is funny is subversive, every joke is ultimately a custard pie... a dirty joke is a sort of mental rebellion.

    In our age there is no such thing as 'keeping out of politics.' All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia.

    All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome.

    At fifty everyone has the face he deserves.

    Most people get a fair amount of fun out of their lives, but on balance life is suffering, and only the very young or the very foolish imagine otherwise.

    John Stuart Mill

    Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.

    The amount of eccentricity in a society has generally been proportional to the amount of genius, mental vigor, and moral courage it contained. That so few now dare to be eccentric marks the chief danger of the time.

    The general tendency of things throughout the world is to render mediocrity the ascendant power among mankind.

    Whatever crushes individuality is despotism, by whatever name it may be called and whether it professes to be enforcing the will of God or the injunctions of men.

    A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

    Mark Twain

    Don't let schooling interfere with your education.

    All generalizations are false, including this one.

    A classic is something that everybody wants to have read and nobody wants to read.

    Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

    Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society.

    The Public is merely a multiplied "me."

    Only kings, presidents, editors, and people with tapeworms have the right to use the editorial "we."

    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.

    Only one thing is impossible for God: To find any sense in any copyright law on the planet.

    Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes you nothing. It was here first.

    Winston Churchill

    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.

    Don't talk to me about naval tradition. It's nothing but rum, sodomy and the lash.

    Never hold discussions with the monkey when the organ grinder is in the room.

    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.

    However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.

    In war as in life, it is often necessary when some cherished scheme has failed, to take up the best alternative open, and if so, it is folly not to work for it with all your might.

    Otto Von Bismarck

    When you want to fool the world, tell the truth.

    I have seen three emperors in their nakedness, and the sight was not inspiring.

    Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.

    Be polite; write diplomatically ;even in a declaration of war one observes the rules of politeness.


    A witty saying proves nothing.

    If God created us in his own image, we have more than reciprocated.

    When he to whom one speaks does not understand, and he who speaks himself does not understand, that is metaphysics.

    I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it.

    To succeed in the world it is not enough to be stupid, you must also be well-mannered.

    Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.

    It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.

    The best way to be boring is to leave nothing out.

    Karl Marx

    Philosophy stands in the same relation to the study of the actual world as masturbation to sexual love.

    All I know is I'm not a Marxist.

    The writer may very well serve a movement of history as its mouthpiece, but he cannot of course create it.

    Wednesday, June 23, 2004

    "Soldiers" of Terrorism

    By Nick

    "The World Has Changed, But Our Mindset Has Not."
    From RAND Review: Redefining the Enemy
    By Brian Michael Jenkins
    Mr. Jenkins is a senior adviser to the president of the RAND Corporation and one of the world’s leading authorities on international terrorism.

    The most immediate threat we face is terrorism. The global jihad being waged by al Qaeda and like-minded Islamist fanatics draws upon these historical roots:

    -Muslim reactions to colonial rule

    -continued military defeats at the hands of the West

    -a deep sense of humiliation and desire for revenge
    failures of governments and economies in North Africa, the Middle East, South Asia, and Southeast Asia

    -increased emigration and the isolation and alienation often felt by marginalized immigrant communities

    -a growing sense of unity among all Muslims fed by charismatic communicators, like Osama bin Laden, who use images of suffering—in Bosnia, Chechnya, Palestine, and Iraq, reinforced daily on Arab satellite television—to indoctrinate followers
    the common sense of purpose and lasting connections created by the ultimately successful jihad against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.

    We avoid the construct, but it is for America’s current jihadist foes a religious war starting centuries ago and lasting until judgment day. It is this mindset that has been grafted upon the tactics of contemporary terrorism. The two now flow together, applying jihadist codes of operation to a terrorist repertoire. It is a powerful and dangerous combination.

    Today’s terrorist adversaries have no intention of matching America’s superior military capability. They intend to exploit its vulnerabilities. Like all religious fanatics, they see themselves as morally superior, armed with the sword of God, commanded to wage a holy war. They see Americans as soulless, spineless, materialistic beings, unwilling to make sacrifices—people whose sole measures of well-being are the Dow Jones average and retail consumption, desperate for the peace and tranquility that the terrorists can deny.

    The 9/11 attacks had cascading effects on the economy. Total direct and indirect costs amounted to hundreds of billions of dollars, and the effects are still being felt in some sectors. Terrorists have recognized the potential of economic warfare. They speak about this potential more often, although they have yet to fully exploit it.

    Tomorrow’s terrorists might become more adept in this endeavor. They could attempt to destroy our economy through terror alone—periodic devastating attacks, perhaps years apart, that will ensure the credibility of their continuing threats in the years in between. They already are becoming more adept at shaping our perceptions, exploiting the global news media to conduct "effect-based operations" in which they observe and measure how their own chatter and threats provoke security alerts that impose costly security measures and disrupt the economy.

    Power is descending. Violence is escalating. In 1974, I wrote that the power to kill, destroy, disrupt, cause alarm, and oblige societies to divert vast resources to security is descending into the hands of smaller and smaller groups whose grievances, real or imaginary, it will not always be possible to satisfy. The irreconcilables, fanatics, and lunatics—who have existed throughout history—have become an increasingly potent force to be reckoned with.

    Subsequent events have borne this out. Over the past three decades, terrorists have multiplied the number of their victims by an order of magnitude every 15 years. In the 1970s, the bloodiest terrorist incidents involved tens of fatalities. By the 1990s, hundreds were being killed in the worst incidents, and these occurred more frequently. In 2001, the number reached the thousands, and today we fear scenarios in which tens of thousands might die.

    Killing on this scale is hard to do. Conventional explosives alone won’t suffice, nor will chemical weapons, unless used in massive quantities, or radiological attacks. Only biological or nuclear weapons can attain this level of lethality.

    The exchange ratios are aligned against us. As we concern ourselves more with avoiding collateral casualties, even conserving the lives of enemy soldiers, our terrorist foes are more willing to carry out large-scale indiscriminate attacks. While our tolerance for friendly casualties has declined, terrorists have turned their religious conviction into a weapons system based on their readiness to die.

    Increasingly, we are at war not with enemy states or enemy armies but with small groups of people or with specific individuals: fugitive terrorists, drug traffickers, warlords, dangerous dictators, rogue scientists. We find ourselves in the domain of manhunts, lethal takedowns, and individually targeted killings. The nature of these missions blurs military operations with law enforcement, changes the rules of engagement, and increases the requirement for precision, whether in economic coercion or in the application of military power. That, in turn, increases the demands on intelligence and the ability to rapidly exploit it.

    Yet powerful institutional barriers to fundamental change remain. In the armed forces, there is still a tendency to view the current situation as an anomaly—as the "other war" as opposed to the "real war," as missions to be consigned to specialized units rather than to main forces, as opportunities to gain valuable field experience but not a compelling argument to radically alter how we organize to fight. We adapt incrementally. Given our great strength, that may suffice. But one wonders. It is nowhere written that we will win.

    Bronze Age kingdoms, from the Mycenaeans to the Hittites, waged chariot warfare. When relatively primitive challengers fielded hordes of lightly armed foot soldiers, they changed the nature of warfare itself. The technologically advanced chariots became obsolete. Within a period of only several decades, the great Bronze Age kingdoms themselves collapsed, great cities were destroyed, commerce was significantly disrupted, and much of the civilized world slid into a dark age that lasted 400 years.

    Today, we confront an array of enemies whose diverse interests are served by obviating U.S. military superiority, destroying American cities, and disrupting commerce. These are not the "wars" we would prefer. They are not the ones that fit into our planning scenarios. Nor are they the contests where we necessarily have the obvious advantage. To the contrary, they are the ones that compel us to rethink our assumptions, to reconfigure our forces, and to reinvigorate our alliances.
    Links to Required Reading on Counter-Terrorism:
    Countering al Qaeda: An Appreciation of the Situation and Suggestions for Strategy, Brian Michael Jenkins, RAND/MR-1620-RC, 2002, 41 pp.

    Deterrence & Influence in Counterterrorism: A Component in the War on Al Qaeda, Paul K. Davis, Brian Michael Jenkins, RAND/MR-1619-DARPA, 2002, 105 pp.

    posted by Nick at 6/23/2004 11:10:00 PM |

    Comments: Post a Comment

    About US

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.usImage Hosted by ImageShack.usImage Hosted by ImageShack.usImage Hosted by ImageShack.us

    "Netpolitik is a new style of diplomacy that seeks to exploit the powerful capabilities of the Internet to shape politics, culture, values, and personal identity. But unlike Realpolitik — which seeks to advance a nation’s political interests through amoral coercion — Netpolitik traffics in “softer” issues such as moral legitimacy, culturalidentity, societal values, and public perception." - The Rise of Netpolitik

    PUN-DIT (n) : A learned man; a teacher; a source of opinion; a critic: a political pundit.

    Recent Posts

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

    Nick: "Soldiers" of Terrorism |


    Birthplace of The Progressive Blog Alliance

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
    Leave a comment here to join.

    The Bots