Chelicera

I'm the Daughter of a Traitor

2005-11-18T15:45:00.000-08:00

Most of my family were thrown in internment camps during WWII by FDR for the "crime" of being Japanese-American. Of course, none of those internees ever committed even a slightly treasonous act but suffered the consequences of the loss of their civil rights. On the other hand, my (now deceased) father's story is a great deal more complicated. My great-grandfather was forced to leave Japan because he was a supporter of the old order. When the Meiji restoration occurred (the emperor seized control), he was on the losing side of the power struggle and emigrated to the U.S. where he was a successful farmer. He went back to Japan and bought real estate and lived quite comfortably. His daughter and her husband stayed in the U.S. and that was where my father was born. He was sent to Japan at the age of seven to be educated. His parents stayed behind, so he was raised by his grandfather, a very strict but fair man. When the shit hit the fan in 1941, my great-grandfather publically stated that the Japanese government had their heads up their asses and would lose the war. The police questioned him but let him go. Actually, the Japanese government and military knew that it was a bad idea but, for extraordinarily stupid reasons, they went ahead and attacked Pearl Harbor anyway. Why would a government knowingly commit an idiotic and catastrophic mistake? (Sound familiar?) In any case, my father, then 14, suffered beatings and abuse because he wasn't a "patriotic Japanese citizen." Determined to prove his loyalty, he ran away from home at 16 and found work making bombs in a Tokyo factory. I suppose he may have committed high treason for this activity. His bombmaking job didn't last, however. The U.S. firebombed residential sections of Toyko, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians who were NOT engaged in the war effort. People ran for the rivers but the heat was so intense, the water boiled and they were literally cooked to death. My father saw bloated bodies floating in the water with their skin peeling off their flesh. He escaped the same fate through sheer luck. After Japan's defeat and the subsequent economic dislocations perpetrated by Douglas MacArthur, my great-grandfather lost most of his money and had to sell his real estate holdings. My father eventually decided to go to the U.S. He was still a U.S. citizen. When the Korean War broke out, my father was drafted by the U.S. Army. He served two years and was a model soldier. For the next 50 years, he worked hard, raised a family, and was a law-abiding, contributing member to society. I believe that a rational person would forgive my father's "treason." He was young, his allegiance was to the country where he was raised, he was pressured as disloyal by his peer group, and he later served in the U.S. military (a rather ironic twist, imho). This is my father's odd history with bizarre twists and shifting patriotism (or lack thereof). FDR and the U.S. government are hardly the heroes in this story, but neither are the Japanese; atrocities abound for all. So what country deserves the patriotism of its citizens? George Bush's America? HAH! Not a goddamn one deserves my loyalty, but that's a consequence of my family history and post Vietnam/Watergate cynicism.

Supporting the Troops

2005-10-23T18:00:00.000-07:00

We're coming up on 2000 U.S. military deaths in Iraq. Will anyone care? Besides Cindy Sheehan, that is. I care. I can't really comprehend why anyone would join the military with Bush as Commander in Chief and with the current crop of gutless bureaucrats who call themselves the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but I don't want these enlistees to die. I am sure that Bush and the Neocons don't care. They're incapable of any emotion except greed. Does the public care? Bush has tried to insulate them from any effects. As a result, they haven't sacrificed anything for this war except their children's future. Poll numbers show that support for the war is very low but will that translate into real anger over these pointless deaths? When so many servicemen died in the beginning of July, Bush's approval rating dropped. The public took that as a sign that the war was progressing poorly. Still, earlier this month, there were several deaths which received scant attention. If Fitzgerald issues indictments over the Plame/WMD hoax AND the insurgents manage to kill a substantial number of soldiers/marines this week, that might make a dent in public opinion. What will the next set of polls show?

I Love Texas Judge Bob Perkins

2005-10-18T13:05:00.000-07:00

My God, on Friday, Perkins is ordering Tom DeLay to be to arrested, booked and arraigned, mug shots, fingerprinting, bail, the whole works. The Republican leadership was so arrogant in their belief that they were above the law, but they miscalculated. Fitzgerald is likely to issue indictments tomorrow and Frist is under investigation by the SEC. Hey, maybe democracy isn't dead.

October is the Cruelest Month

2005-10-17T23:17:00.000-07:00

Some of my random thoughts. Washington and Iraq are heating up the rumor mill. Fitzgerald is on the verge of indicting Rove and Libby over Plamegate (possibly on Wednesday) and Dick Cheney is in the crosshairs. Cheney must be one of the unindicted co-conspirators but there are rumors of another unindicted co-conspirator. Could it possibly be Bush? Even if Bush isn't impeached, the indictment of high-level aides will weaken his presidency tremendously. Iraq's constitution is certain to be ratified which is rather interesting since the votes haven't been counted yet and statistical analysis shows inconsistencies in voting patterns. Does any rational human being believe that the vote wasn't fixed? The Sunnis have no reason to support the constitution and will turn toward the insurgents as their only legitimate voice; the U.S. keeps bombing innocent Sunni civilians and reducing their towns to rubble while the Shiites and Kurds are looking for payback on the Sunnis. The new Iraqi flag should have been blood-red. The massive earthquake hit Pakistan very hard and news reports indicate dissatisfaction with Pakistani Pres. Musharraf's handling of the crisis. Even before the disaster, Musharraf was hardly in complete control of his country. That's why he doesn't want to capture Bin Laden and turn him over to the U.S.; Musharraf would be facing open revolt in the streets of Islamabad. We're also looking at Tropical Storm Wilma which is predicted to turn into a cat 3 hurricane. It's going to be a record-breaking year and I keep wondering how many hurricanes will hit U.S. oil-drilling platforms in the Gulf of Mexico. The possible destruction of oil-rigs and processing plants is dangerous to our debt-ridden economy. In general, October is a dangerous month for possible economic collapse; mutual funds sell some of their holdings in October in order to lock in their profits for their yearly reports. Historically, in a weak and unstable economy, that sell-off has led to severe drops in the stock market. We live in exciting times.

Burning Bush

2005-10-11T21:56:00.000-07:00

The Valerie Plame case has heated up with news stories strongly suggesting that indictments are imminent. In particular, Huffington Post is fanning the flames under Bush which is particularly ominous for the Republicans. Huffington Post has graduated from Arianna's pet project to a very legitimate source of news and informed opinion. Will Cheney be an unindicted co-conspirator? It sounds like Fitzgerald has Libby by the short hairs; if so, Libby may flip and offer up Cheney. Would Cheney offer up dubya for a plea bargain? That would be so sweet. Can you impeach the president AND the vice-president at the same time? Probably not but it's a fun question. The executive branch has become too powerful and Bush arrogantly claims presidential privilege whenever anyone tries to hold him accountable for his actions. Remember Nixon and the "imperial presidency"? IIRC, Tricky Dicky wanted to dress up White House security personnel in uniforms that suggested they were guarding royalty, i.e. Buckingham Palace or the Vatican. The country has to hold the Bush Admin responsible for their misdeeds and kick them and their supporters out of office. If another incompetent, neocon-controlled president takes office after dubya, God only knows what will happen. I wrote my previous post on the fall of America as a speculation on the necessary factors for a military coup. In retrospect, I see that I failed to include the breakdown of constitutional law. If Congress fails to hold the President responsible for his illegal and unconstitutional actions, this is clearly a step down the road to disaster. How many more steps will it take?

Future History: A Wikipedia Article From The 22nd Century

2005-10-03T00:26:00.000-07:00

The Decline of the American Republic The decline of the United States was due to several factors which are obvious from the perspective of the 22nd century. However, even at the time, the weaknesses were well known; political and financial leaders chose to ignore the warning signs. America rose to economic, political, and military superiority at the end of World War II. European and Asian countries had been devastated by the damage to their cities and industrial base while the U.S., due to its relative geographic isolation, had suffered little harm. This, coupled with an educated populace, allowed their economy to achieve substantial growth, far outstripping its rivals. Allegedly, their great rival was the Soviet Union due to its nuclear capabilities and European client states. The economic "threat" of communism was far overblown since the Soviet economy was never more than a fraction the size of America's; the military threat of nuclear war was more serious but, since no sane leader would contemplate initiating a first strike under any circumstances, this horror was averted. The cost of avoiding World War III was the rise of the military-industrial complex in America. These generals, politicians, and large corporations helped launch a massive arms race which sought to deter the Soviet threat while making large profits for themselves. By the end of the republic, however, protection of the nation was forgotten and the system had devolved into little more than a method for funneling government funds into the hands of a few wealthy industrialists. With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, America appeared ready to enter a Golden Age. No longer burdened by massive military commitments, it seemed that the U.S. could afford to concentrate on its infrastructure and economic needs. Unfortunately, the founding fathers had not created a government able to handle the demands of a large and complex nation. From the beginning, the immigrant nation was beset by massive divisions of class and race. Class divisions were common to all nations of the period, but race differences and slavery, in particular, splintered the national identity. This lack of cohesion weakened loyalty and patriotism to the common good. Other nations managed to overcome these problems and accept diversity, but Americans could not escape their legacy of exploiting minority groups. Thus, when the oligarchy began their final attack on the lower and middle classes, average Americans could not organize themselves to battle this threat. The founders knew that corruption would be a constant threat to their democracy but they could not foresee how economic success would create an intellectually lazy and complacent populace. By various financial machinations, corrupt politicians increased the national deficit by issuing government bonds which would be paid by future generations. The voters were not immediately affected by this chicanery; the debt would be paid by their children and grandchildren. The populace eased their conscience by criticizing the morality and values of their offspring who "deserved" this financial burden. An honest accounting of the fiscal disaster would have required the voters to work for integrity in government and raising taxes, neither of which was popular. Deep down, Americans knew that their government was leading them astray. Wars of conquest and economic exploitation of third-world nations were commonplace and millions died as a direct and indirect result. This uncomfortable knowledge of war crimes was masked by rascism and Christian fundamentalism, i.e. "heathens" were subhuman and damned to suffer by God. Christian extremist leaders worked hand in hand with politicians to create this propaganda campaign. The efforts of religious extremists were also used to subvert and ultimately destroy the educational system. Science was no longer of value; faith and belief could "solve" all difficulties. The oligarchy found this particularly useful since an ignorant population was easier to exploit. Of course, the lack of educated workers led to the breakdown of the manufacturing sector and economic collapse. At the time of the final economic catastrophe, the U.S. military had been fighting yet another decades-long war of conquest in the Middle East in an attempt to shore up poor financial decisions and corruption by top government officials. The overstretched military was forced to send servicemen and women into tours of duty that lasted several years. Foreign mercenaries were recruited with the promise of U.S. citizenship. As a result, the military rank and file lost touch with mainstream America; the native-born citizens hardly knew their own country and the mercenaries were motivated solely by the promise of future economic rewards. When the government stopped providing basic necessities like body armor, transport vehicles, munitions, etc., the war became untenable. In desperation, a few highly placed generals decided the only solution was a military coup. *** So, what do you think? Total bullshit or scary stuff?

Musharraf Sucking Up to Pakistani Fundamentalists

2005-09-24T21:30:00.000-07:00

The unelected leader (i.e. dictator) of Pakistan, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, recently came out with a statement that denigrates the rights of women. He's playing the "blame the female rape victim" game for the religious fundamentalists. I find it very suspicious that Musharraf suddenly spews out a statement like that. Why should Musharraf suddenly throw a bone to Islamic fundamentalists with close ties to the Taliban? Granted, the fundamentalists are a very large and powerful group in Pakistan but why suck up to them at this particular time? I think he's getting nervous and he's not the only one making suspicious statements. Hamid Karzai, the president of Afghanistan, is trying to act like some type of Afghani patriot and whining about U.S. airstrikes and other abuses to civilians. Funny, it didn't seem to bother him before (snark). The Iraq War continues to deteriorate for the U.S. military and the public wants to withdraw troops. How long can the U.S. occupy Iraq and Afghanistan? If Bush cannot have both, he'll stay with the oil in Iraq. At least, he'll try. But, how much does he really care about Afghanistan? Karzai has good reason to be nervous given the fate of the last puppet ruler of Afghanistan, Mohammad Najibullah, in 1996. Click here if you want to see a gory picture. The Taliban dragged him out of a UN compound and hanged him from a street light. Recently, news reports state Iraqi insurgents have exported their guerrilla tactics and munitions to the Taliban. Thus, the Taliban have strong international support from the Middle East and from Pakistani religious fundamentalists. Granted, the recent elections seem to encourage Karzai's government and the Taliban are not the most popular group in the world, but historically, Afghanis hate foreign invaders. They've hated them for at least 2500 years and I don't think that will change in the near future. If we pull out of Afghanistan, will we keep throwing $billions to Pakistan and Musharraf? Can we even afford to keep on throwing money around with a massive budget deficit? The Iraqi insurgents will continue to support the Taliban and teach them urban guerrilla warfare. That must be making Karzai nervous. Will the Taliban teach these techniques to an insurgency in Pakistan? Is that making Musharraf nervous?

Inmates in Charge of the Asylum?

2005-09-20T13:36:00.000-07:00

Is this for real? Or just some weird prank? From the Gainsville Sun: Gov. Bush & his mystical buddy After more than an hour of solemn ceremony naming Rep. Marco Rubio, R-West Miami, as the 2007-08 House speaker, Gov. Jeb Bush stepped to the podium in the House chamber last week and told a short story about "unleashing Chang," his "mystical warrior" friend. The rest of the article is here.

Watching the Train Wreck

2005-09-18T23:51:00.000-07:00

I've been watching the HBO miniseries, Rome, but I have mixed feelings about the program. For starters, Rome compares poorly to I, Claudius which is an all-time classic in my opinion. I, Claudius was a sharp satire on government and human frailty while Rome plays it straight and relies too heavily on sex and nudity to maintain interest. The main problem for me, though, is watching the collapse of the Roman Republic; it's far too close to present-day America. I don't claim to have any formal training in Roman history but I do have some interest in the subject. In many ways, we are very close to Rome. Western culture is a direct descendent of Rome but the U.S. seems to have more in common with it than the rest of the world. Rome was an Etruscan-dominated monarchy which was alleged to be morally corrupt. The Romans claimed they revolted against the Etruscans for reasons of piety, patriotism, civic virtue, etc. The revolution resulted in a type of representative democracy which favored the aristocracy while giving a limited voice to the plebians. In some degree, this is reminiscent of the Puritans in the Colonial Era and the American Revolutionary War. In any case, Rome grew to dominate its neighbors. Her armies brought home plunder in the form of gold, slaves, and tribute. Rome conquered Egypt, whose farmers could bring in two crops per year. The grain surplus fed the Roman populace. Slaves from conquered nations fueled industry like oil does today. Rome's greatest rival was Carthage, which was eventually defeated in the Punic Wars. For Carthage, one could liken it to the USSR. After the defeat of Carthage, Rome grew far more prosperous and its aristocrats became incredibly wealthy. The vast majority of Roman citizens lived in poverty with high unemployment rates. They survived on a welfare system underwritten by war conquests and aristocrats who bought votes and support with their wealth. The people were pacified with bread and circuses, not unlike Monday Night Football and American Idol. Traditional Roman virtues decayed and sexual mores loosened. Divorce rates skyrocketed and lawyers became wealthy as Roman citizens constantly sued each other in civil lawsuits. Government corruption and cronyism was rampant. In a society like Rome which based its power on military conquest, reverses on the battlefield created fear and panic in their people. This made Roman society susceptible to ambitious aristocrats who sought more and more wealth and power. Generals battled each other and civil war raged for decades. Eventually, the senatorial ranks were decimated until there was little opposition to a monarchy/dictatorship which could provide stability to a war-weary country. Are we there yet? No, Bush is too incompetent. The U.S. military wouldn't follow him in a coup to topple the government. Who will follow Bush? In the aftermath of an economic breakdown, a demagogue could seize power by promising to reform government corruption. Bush isn't the fascist we should fear. It's the competent fascist who comes after him that scares me.

Gretna, Louisiana

2005-09-16T21:40:00.000-07:00

I was reading about the situation in Gretna, a predominately white city next to New Orleans. In order to keep the "violent and dangerous darkies" from contaminating their pure city, they've set up a roadblock manned by armed police officers. Effectively, they prevented thousands of New Orleans residents from escaping a flooded hell. As bad as this may seem, Gretna was not the only city to block escape routes. Other cities have blocked roads as well. There was a similar situation in the Great Mississippi Flood. Communities on opposing sides of the river could see the rising water begin to threaten their levees. Each side knew that if the levee broke on the opposing bank, the river would flood the other town. Their community would be saved. Both sides formed armed groups and patrolled the levees. As far as I know, no one purposefully destroyed a levee. So, in today's America, would we break our neighbor's levee?

Postscript to the Great Mississippi Flood

2005-09-11T22:12:00.000-07:00

I forgot to mention one of the more disillusioning aspects of the story: How Hoover managed to bury the story. After his investigators confirmed the abuses in the concentration camps (that was the actual term used), Hoover formed a Colored Advisory Commission made up of blacks and led by Robert Russa Moton, a very prominent black conservative leader. Their report also confirmed the allegations. Hoover was relying on his successful handling of the crisis to win the presidency; he did NOT want any scandal to ruin his reputation as the "Great Humanitarian". I'm not kidding, they actually called him that. Hoover cut a deal with Moton to kill the story. Hoover would give Moton and his friends positions in government and give small plots of land to some sharecroppers. Moton jumped at the offer. A funny thing happens when you sell your integrity to the devil. The devil bends you over and screws you in the ass. Hoover broke all his promises to Moton. In 1932, Moton threw his support to FDR (who refused to desegregate the military in WWII, by the way). Many blacks left the Republican Party and never came back. The white plantation owners lost their slaves, erm, um, "workers", who left the poverty in the south to emigrate to Chicago and other northern cities. Greenville never regained its former prosperity. Why am I flashing on Mayor Nagin and how he changed his tune about George Bush?

Blacks in America are Just a Tad Paranoid

2005-09-08T22:27:00.000-07:00

"It didn't really matter if these people were uncomfortable. It didn't really matter if they were starving. It probably wouldn't have really mattered a whole lot if a lot of 'em had died for one reason or another. They were gonna keep their laborers and that's just ruthless contempt for human beings." * Where is this from? The speaker is talking about thousands of poor blacks who were surrounded by floodwaters from a broken levee. A few white people were stranded with them. Transportation was available with room to evacuate all the flood victims but only the whites were taken to safety. The blacks were left behind without food, water or shelter. Eventually they were put in refugee camps patrolled by the armed National Guardsmen. A Republican in charge of federal government relief efforts engaged in a coverup of the refugee scandal. It was the aftermath of a natural disaster, the Great Mississippi Flood of 1927 which devastated communities from Illinois to Mississippi. In all fairness, the local, state and federal government behaved much worse in 1927 than our current leaders do today. The city of Greenville, Mississippi was controlled by a few wealthy landowners who used thousands of poor black sharecroppers to farm cotton. When the Mississippi started to flood from excessive rainfall, the Greenville landowners forced black men and boys, at gunpoint, to shore up the levee. Unfortunately, the levee broke and many people died. Whites were evacuated out danger. Blacks were evacuated to the intact portion of the levee, an 8-foot-wide swath of land surrounded by the Mississippi River on one side and the flood on the other. They had no food, water or shelter and the rain continued to pour. Several boats arrived to rescue all the survivors on the levee but the landowners intervened. They were afraid of losing their workers; once gone, the sharecroppers might decide to look for a better life. So, the few (33) whites on the levee were evacuated and the blacks were left behind. The story gets worse. Herbert Hoover, then Secretary of Commerce for Calvin Coolidge and in charge of the overall disaster relief program, came to Greenville shortly after the levee break. The landowners convinced him that Greenville should be used as a hub for distribution of relief supplies. In order to supply the labor for the federal effort and clean up the town, blacks were forced into labor camps and worked under the supervision of armed National Guardsmen who abused their authority. Word got out that the guards were raping, beating, and killing blacks. Herbert Hoover initiated an investigation that confirmed the reports. However, Hoover did not want tarnish his image as a great leader who successfully saved flood victims; he was planning on running for president. He managed to kill the story of the brutal labor camps. People wonder why blacks in America are just a tad paranoid. *Pete Daniel, Historian from Fatal Flood, The American Experience, 2001 I wrote a very brief synopsis of the incident. For more information see: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/flood/filmmore/pt.html http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/flood/timeline/timeline2.html

More Hurricanes

2005-09-05T15:32:00.000-07:00

There are two possible storms brewing, a low-pressure area off the east coast of Florida, and one south of Bermuda. The Florida one has a good chance that it will turn into a tropical depression or worse. If another hurricane hits the U.S., I don't see how emergency services will be able to cope. With the Bush Administration in charge, the results will be horrifying. Even if this particular system doesn't turn nasty, the height of hurricane season is coming up. NOAA is predicting 6 more hurricanes and, historically, 1 of 3 hurricanes hit the U.S. So, statistics indicate a good chance for 2 more hurricanes to pummel the Gulf states. People who live in those areas should gather together an emergency kit to cope with another disaster. This link gives a list of supplies for the kit.

Assigning Blame

2005-09-02T23:15:00.000-07:00

Forecasters predicted landfall and significant strengthening approximately 3 days in advance. Four out of five computer simulations showed a direct hit on New Orleans and they knew warm water temperatures in the Gulf of Mexico would increase the hurricane to Cat 4 or 5. Given the topography of New Orleans, government agencies have known for decades that a direct hit by a Cat 4+ would swamp the area and possibly kill 40,000. Shortly before landfall, Katrina swerved slightly to the east so the strongest part of the hurricane struck to the east of New Orleans; the devastation could have been even worse. I do blame the federal government for their inability to respond both prior to and in the aftermath of the hurricane. I simply cannot understand why they didn't do SOME of the following BEFORE the hurricane hit: a) Commandeer every single bus in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and use them to evacuate people without cars. On the return trip, bring in supplies to the shelters in New Orleans and other coastal areas for those who aren't able to leave in time. b) Set up refugee centers in schools, auditoriums and military bases in areas safe from the hurricane, and bring in supplies and relief workers. c) Mobilize the national guard from other states. d) Commandeer supplies from ALL the supermarkets, sporting goods stores, etc. in and around New Orleans and Biloxi, and put them in the Superdome, the convention center and other shelters. e) Fill up every available container with water. For that matter, fill every bathtub in hotels near the Superdome, and other shelters. f) Put together a command and control center to be deployed immediately after the hurricane passes. BTW, doesn't FEMA have the equipment ready to go on whenever a disaster hits? If so, why did it take so long to implement it? Approximately 25% of New Orleans residents are below the poverty line and 50% of the children live in poverty. I have not seen ANY news reports that the poor were offered the opportunity to leave. Hundreds of buses are evacuating people now; why didn't they do that before? As it stands now, the lack of a timely response WILL result in a larger death toll if the news stories are accurate. CNN and MSNBC are reporting that many people in the shelters have gone without water since the hurricane hit, and there are people still trapped in their homes by floodwater. The emergency is going into its 5th day and the refugees aren't going to survive much longer without food, water and medical attention. Bush is getting a lot of negative coverage in the media. A lot of the national guard and the Army Corps of Engineers are in Iraq but it's unknown how that is affecting the relief efforts. Former goverment aid officials are severely criticizing FEMA for bungling the emergency, however. Congress is passing a bill for $10.5 billion for relief efforts but I'm suspicious that the money will be siphoned off to various corporations; I may be overly cynical but the Bush Admin hasn't shown much integrity in awarding government contracts. In any case, a recent opinion poll shows Bush's approval ratings on handling the crisis are very negative and gasoline prices are shooting through the roof which is not adding to his popularity. The bottom line is that federal and state emergency planning and execution was lacking. Even Bush is admitting that the government response has been problematic which is an amazing admission from a man who never admits errors or takes responsibility for anything. I also posted this comment on Pen and Sword: Several months ago, the NOAA predicted a heavy hurricane season, currently projected at 20 tropical storms and 10 hurricanes where 6 of them become major hurricanes. There's a distinct possibility that the gulf states will be hit by more hurricanes before the season ends on Nov. 30th.

Lost Languages

2005-08-28T12:56:00.000-07:00

Before resuming my brief review of Afghani history, I should make a few comments concerning the Proto-Elamite and Indus Valley civilizations. Both cultures rose to prominence alongside the great civilizations of Egypt, Mesopotamia and China. Afghanistan lay at the crossroads of those cultures' trading routes. Although the Proto-Elamite and Indus Valley cultures had significant roles in the development of civilization, relatively little is known about them since their written languages have not been deciphered. The Proto-Elamite civilization developed one of the first written scripts (3050 BCE). This language is unlike Sumerian cuneiform (3300 BCE) even though the two cultures lived in close proximity. However, it is uncertain whether the Proto-Elamite spoken language was related to Elamite and no bilingual inscription like a Rosetta Stone exists. Currently, two elements are needed to decipher a written language: 1) Knowledge of the spoken language and 2) A sample of text translated into a known language or a substantial number of text samples and knowledge of the underlying culture. More than 1500 texts exist but they seem to be accounting/trade records; the text may not correlate well with the actual language. Proto-Elamite script was used over a far larger area than the kingdom of Elam. Samples have been found as far east as Afghanistan, which clearly indicates that trade extended into that region. In the case of the Indus Valley civilization writing, even worse problems prevent decipherment. Only very short samples of text exist in the form of carved stone stamps and insignia on pottery and metal objects. For whatever reason, they did not write on walls, tombs or statues, although it is likely they used some type of paper which has not survived the last 3800 or more years. In addition, the spoken language is almost completely unknown. Linguists might be able to work backwards from existing languages to obtain a "source" language but this is only theoretical. There is a great deal of interest in investigating this language since it may shed much information on the development of Indo-European languages. This lack of information is especially unfortunate since this culture was unique in several respects. Although they controlled an area larger than ancient Egypt or Mesopotamia, their rulers did not build huge monuments to their own egos, possibly due to their somewhat more egalitarian society. This may explain why the civilization was not rediscovered by western scientists until 1921. Aristoboulus, an emissary of Alexander the Great, wrote of seeing ruins in 326 BCE, but no other historical record exists. In any case, they preferred to spend their time engaged in careful city planning, and building advanced drainage and sewage systems, granaries, docks, and harbors for their trading ships. Trade was apparently an important part of their economy and Indus Valley artifacts have been found in ancient Sumerian sites. I think there is a tendency to judge a "great" civilization by the size of the monuments that it erects. However, if I were the ruler of a nation, I'd build sewage systems to avoid epidemics before bankrupting the country by erecting large and useless pyramids. Source: Lost Languages by Andrew Robinson, 2002

In case you're wondering what's up . . .

2005-08-24T21:02:00.000-07:00

T-lady has been reading my novel. Ain't she a sweetheart? Since it's humongous, she wants to read it all in one shot rather than come back to it every few days. At the rate she's reading, she should be finished by tomorrow, and back to blogging by Saturday. Doug (Mr. T-lady)

T-lady's keppy hurts

2005-08-16T21:34:00.000-07:00

Karen has been having bad migraines the last few days. Migraines that laugh in the face of Imitrex. She's planning on continuing her Afghani history; next up, Alexander the Great finds out he isn't well nigh invulnerable. I'll use this political platform to say one thing. George Bush needs to get on with his life. Preferably in the crappiest, most water bug-infested nursing home in Mississippi, cuz that's what he deserves. Thank you ;o) Doug

Crossroads

2005-08-13T23:19:00.000-07:00

Due to its geographic location, Afghanistan occupied a critical junction in the Asian trade routes, in particular the ancient Silk Road system. The Khyber Pass is one of the few roads through the mountain ranges of the Hindu Kush region. The name, Hindu Kush, may have originated from the phrase, 'killer of Indians' due the high mortality rate of slaves who died en route to auction. At one point, the pass bottlenecks to less than 10 feet wide, creating an important strategic position for an invading army. The mountains range from 11,000 to 23,000 ft., making them almost impenetrable, particularly in antiquity. In comparison, Mt. Everest is 29,035 ft. Despite the rugged environment, archaeologic evidence shows that Afghanistan has been inhabited for approximately 100,000 years by humans and neanderthals. At Aq Kupruk in northern Afghanistan, there is evidence for domestication of plants and animals dating back many millennia. Remains of early villages date to 7000 B.C. Unfortunately, due to the decades of war, scientific investigation has been severely curtailed. To the west lies present-day Iran. By approximately 6000 B.C, the Iranian plateau, encompassing eastern Iran and Western Afghanistan, was widely settled by small farming villages. Southwest of the plateau was the Proto-Elamite civilization, lasting 3200 B.C. to 2700 B.C. , but with origins several millennia earlier, and the city of Susa, dating to 7000 B.C. To the west lay the civilizations of Mesopotamia and Egypt. South of Afghanistan lies the Pakistani province of Balochistan and the Mehrgarh archaeological site, 1, 2, which was settled approximately 7000 B.C. The inhabitants were eventually able to farm wheat and barley, raise domesticated animals, and make pottery, jewelry, and figurines. From the Balochistan settlements, the Indus Valley civilization was founded, 1, 2. The Indus River Valley civilization, 2800 B.C. to 1800 B.C., is also known as the Harappan Civilization of the Indus Valley. Its earliest settlements date to 3500 B.C. Over 1,000 villages and cities have been discovered, encompassing Pakistan and parts of Afghanistan and India. This highly developed civilization had a huge trading network with Afghanistan, Persia, Mesopotamia and India. Since approximately 7000 B.C. and the birth of civilization, Afghanistan has occupied a strategic position for trade routes, invading armies, the spread of Islam, etc. Even today, Afghanistan is a geopolitical keystone. In the 1990s, Unocal was interested in building a natural gas pipeline beginning in Turkmenistan, through Afghanistan, and ending in Pakistan. In the next few days, I'll be hitting the high points of the last nine millennia. Tomorrow: Alexander the Great nearly bites it at the Khyber Pass.

Working on a short history of Afghanistan

2005-08-12T23:34:00.000-07:00

I'll start posting tomorrow starting with prehistoric Afghanistan which dates back to 100,000 BC.

Nothing Today, Tarantula Feeding Day

2005-08-11T23:05:00.000-07:00

What will it take?

2005-08-10T23:16:00.000-07:00

Bush's poll numbers on Iraq have spiraled down inexorably. In particular, the recent deaths of 14 Marines from a powerful roadside bomb have eroded public support of the Iraq War. Like the Tet Offensive in Vietnam, huge explosions and casualties can change U.S. policy. If there are successful bombings and mass casualties, the war will become more and more unpopular. Bush will be forced to change course in Iraq. Does that mean I want to see Americans die in battle? No. I've seen the photos that the mainstream media will not publish. I know what an IED will do to arms, legs, and faces, the areas unprotected by body armor. But, I wonder if anything less than widespread public outrage will stop the delusions of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the rest of the neocons. The general public won't pay attention if there aren't spectacular killings. Remember when the death of one soldier would be prominently displayed in the news? Would that even get reported today? If U.S. soldiers and Marines die at the rate of 1-2 per day, the war will just keep on going indefinitely. How long until it goes past 2,000, past 3,000, past how many more until it ends? How many Iraqi civilians will die? How many children will suffer the agonizing brutality of war? How many of our civil rights will go down the toilet? What will happen to our economy? Will al Qaeda strike in the U.S.? Bush is creating huge numbers of guerrilla fighters with extensive experience in bomb making and urban warfare. It isn't very hard to attack a subway system or a crowded mall. Must it take some spectacularly awful atrocity to end Bush's idiocy in Iraq? I hope very, very much this will not happen, but I fear for the worst.

Two Short Posts Today

2005-08-09T19:42:00.000-07:00

Finally Questioning Pentagon Reports on Iraqi Insurgents? From an Aug. 8, 2005 article from UPI: "If the U.S. Army and its Iraqi allies are killing [and detaining] as many insurgents as reports indicate they are per month, why is the insurgency intensifying instead of collapsing? " For God's sake, didn't the MSM realize the Pentagon was spewing pure crap for the last two years? I've never believed goverment statistics on the number of so-called Iraqi insurgents killed or captured. Finally, someone took the trouble to write about it. The reporter, Martin Sieff, takes care not to baldly accuse the U.S. of killing and detaining innocent civilians but I think that's exactly what is occurring. There's been more than a few accusations of unwarranted and/or illegal detentions. If the U.S. is torturing and murdering innocent civilians in Iraqi and Afghani prisons, how can you trust them to tell the truth about civilian casualties on the battlefield? Commemorations of Rascism on the Anniversary of the Nagasaki Bombing I hate Dec. 7th, Aug. 6th and Aug. 9th. I'm Japanese-American and I've had to put up a lot of rascist bullshit, particularly on those days. Guess what. I'm not responsible for what Japan did during World War II. I'm not responsible for the trade deficit or the fact that Japanese cars are better than American cars. Yet, somehow, people feel compelled to argue with me over those issues. Even some relatively intelligent people have done it, which points out that prejudice can infect nearly anyone. On a few occasions, people have spontaneously decided to tell me about Japanese atrocities during WWII; excuse me, but I'm fairly well educated and I already know about it. Those war crimes are often used to rationalize the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. 'Japan deserved it because of the Rape of Nanking and Pearl Harbor'. Too bad those Japanese civilians bore little responsibility for those actions. The media always presents documentaries and news reports on the Aug. 6th anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing but,to avoid accusations of sympathizing with the enemy, they always feel compelled to trot out the usual stories of Japanese war crimes. Exactly how does one atrocity excuse another? P.S. Please support Cindy Sheehan and her protest against Bush and the Iraq War.

Baghdad Rambo

2005-08-08T22:28:00.000-07:00

Frequently, human males overdose on testosterone, especially the now ubiquitous Hollywood variety. That makes them susceptible to stupid, macho fantasies. They don't even have the intelligence of male tarantulas who know they should run away from the large, toothy shadow that DOESN'T have good (or amorous) intentions. The machismo stereotype has probably existed since time immemorial with groups of neolithic hunters bragging about their hunting prowess and the mastodon that got away, continuing through Greek warlords claiming to be the sons of Zeus, and finally arriving in blockbuster films with muscle-bound, steroid-swigging, action stars whose "stunts" are the product of CGI effects. These manly men conquer armies single-handed. The hero needs a suitable villain, one with equal proficiency. And if he doesn't exist, you gotta make him up. Have you heard about Juba, the Baghdad Sniper? He's killed or injured dozens of U.S. soldiers over the past year or so, becoming something of a legend for his skill. So, who is this highly trained expert marksman? A former Republican Guard soldier from Saddam's elite forces? Apparently, he's a former calligrapher and shepherd who deserted from the Iraqi Army several years ago. He picked up his expertise from web searches, playing video games and watching 'Enemy at the Gates', 'The Deer Hunter', and 'JFK'. This is hardly the first time the enemy has been romanticized. For example, the Viet Cong were acclaimed for their hit and run tactics, and the vast tunnel systems they built which enabled them to plan their operations. This elusive and deadly enemy was scared to death of the U.S. Marines who were viewed as gigantic, powerful and deadly fighters. Obviously, it is easy to inflate the abilities of your enemy; your allies are a different matter. During the siege of Tora Bora, the U.S. decided to pay Afghani warlords to capture al Qaeda fighters rather than risk U.S. troops. Afghan mercenaries were less than impressed by U.S. Special Forces who they considered to be cowardly for showing fear. I don't believe that U.S. Special Forces are inordinately fearful; the accusation of cowardice may be more a question of a cultural misunderstanding rather than courage. However, the Afghani people do have a 2300-year history of bravery in battle going back to Alexander the Great's invasion in 328 BC. So, to steal from Sun Tzu, understand your enemy, understand yourself and understand your allies. Since we did't understand the Iraqis or the Afghani people, we were at least half-way screwed from the moment we invaded their countries. Bush has completed the process by continuing our ignorance so now we're totally screwed.

Dubya Plays Limbo

2005-08-07T12:11:00.000-07:00

How low can he go? The Ap/Ipsos poll, undertaken Aug. 1-3 , showed support for the Iraq War at 38%; previous polling this summer showed support in the low 40s. Newsweek's poll, Aug. 2-4, had a whopping 61% of the public disapproving of his handling of the war. 34% approved, down from 41% a month ago. 18 U.S. soldiers died on Aug. 3rd which is likely to have affected the Newsweek poll to some extent. The Iraqi insurgent groups have access to media reports; undoubtedly, they know how the U.S. public is reacting. I'm wondering if they're planning another big attack.

Weapons of Mass Delusion

2005-08-06T15:47:00.000-07:00

Where did the phrase 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' originate? During the Cold War no one ever used that histrionic phrase in television or newspapers to describe nuclear weapons. It only came into common usage during Bush's public relations campaign to drum up support for the U.S. invasion of Iraq. I started my research with Wikipedia and discovered it was first used to describe the aerial bombardment of Guernica, Spain in 1937 during the Spanish Civil War. The weapons used were conventional aerial bombs; the amount of damage was massive, not the type of weapon. After World War II, the United Nations categorized nuclear weapons as a type of WMD and the phrase then became common in arms control discussions as a general term encompassing nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. However, there is no consensus on a precise definition in the diplomatic community which renders the word useless for any type of international agreement. For example, a good arms control treaty must contain very exact language describing all details. A vague term like WMD cannot be used in such a document or, for that matter, any other type of detailed and substantive discussion. Overly dramatic terms are often used in politics and the media by demagogues who wish to curtail rational discussion. There's even a contest to judge such phrases. In 2003, "Lake Superior State University issued its 28th annual ‘extreme’ List of Words Banished from the Queen's English for Mis-Use, Over-Use and General Uselessness", which included WMD. When I first heard the phrase from an ex-alcoholic and cocaine addict, I thought, "Doesn't this sound like an hysterical rant that's designed to frighten and coerce? Why is anyone taking this seriously? Show me some evidence and a detailed analysis, and then explain why no other nation except the U.K. is backing up these statements." Unfortunately, WMD seems to have permanently entered common everyday usage. I briefly watched part of a documentary that ridiculously described a WWII Japanese submarine as a weapon of mass destruction. This versatile phrase seems perfectly designed to demonize an enemy and his weapons. How rovewellian. P.S. Happy Hiroshima Day.