November 19, 2004

Nazis are from Mars, Fascist Jihadists are from Venus

Posted by Jeremy Brown

This is my first guest post on Michael's blog so I don't mind explaining myself a little before I tell you what the title of this post means. The first thing is that I am very much in favor of a two state Israel/Palestine solution. But to me this means two independent, democratic states, each intolerant of terrorism.

I'm no knee jerk supporter or opposer of Israel and I'm wary of Arial Sharon's motives, but I think the security wall was a necessary measure. There is a lot that's right with an ugly wall that helps save innocent people from being brutally murdered. What I dislike about the wall is that it has violated the 1967 borders it should have stayed within.

And I shouldn't have to state this for the record, but I oppose fascism, terrorism, and anti-Semitism regardless of context. This gets back to the title of the post.

But first, here's an example of anti-Semitism in one of its oldest formal manifestations: the 'blood libel' (an all-purpose method of demonizing an entire race or religion by spreading the idea that they sacrifice babies to drink their blood for religious rites. So this too makes context irrelevant, though blood libel seems to have endured as a form of anti-Semitism almost exclusively).

If anti-Semitic blood libel was good enough for 1st century Greece then why shouldn't it still be happening in 21st century Westchester, NY (via Solomonia):

This Saturday (Nov. 20), a fundraiser will be held at the Westchester County Center in White Plains, New York, raising money to bring a Palestinian art exhibit to the New York metro area. Here's one of the paintings from the proposed exhibit (previously shown in Houston, TX), portraying Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon collecting and boiling a young Palestinian's blood:

sharoncooking2.jpg

Also included in the exhibit would be art and text that glorifies terrorist murder:

[t]o several of the artists, the subject of the martyrs is an all-important topic. A true martyr is anyone who gives his life in service of his people, including...suicide bombers that attack Israeli civilians.

I can anticipate the objections some people will have to my characterization of this, so let me say that I have little patience for those who denigrate the Palestinian populace as a whole. But I can think of no greater insult to a nation, race, or creed than to purport to represent the soul of its culture through the words and images of its most sociopathic element. Let's see Palestinian art that tells ugly truths, that challenges comfortable assumptions, by all means. But -- does this really have to be said? -- let's please not make apologies for the murdering fascistic militants who are just as poisonous to the future of a free Palestine as they are to the future of Israel.

To continue with this notion that there is no socially redeeming form of fascist terror, no kinder gentler terrorism, I was going to share a few thoughts about the murder of Margaret Hassan and the strange things a few people are saying about her killers, but I've taken up a lot of real estate here already. I'll just say that Robert Fisk is deluded to the point of dementia if he is truly trying to parse out the relative levels of compassion between one group of terrorist kidnappers and another.

Other abducted women were freed when their captors recognised their innocence.

But not Margaret Hassan, even though she spoke fluent Arabic and could explain her work to her captors in their own language.

If anyone doubted the murderous nature of the insurgents, what better way to prove their viciousness than to produce evidence of Margaret Hassan's murder?

What more ruthless way could there be of demonstrating to the world that the US and Interim Prime Minister Iyad Alawi's tinpot army were fighting "evil" in Fallujah and the other Iraqi cities?

At best this is a case of confusing survival strategy with journalism (in the same way that you might want to know which guard at Auschwitz was less likely to summarily shoot you than some of the others but you'd be wrong to impute compassion or human decency to such a person) and at worst it's...well it's classic Robert Fisk. Here's a bit more from Norm Geras.

Posted by Jeremy Brown at November 19, 2004 12:31 PM
Comments

What I dislike about the wall is that it has violated the 1967 borders it should have stayed within.

An excellent post. Well written and fertile with material to either pick apart or agree with.

But what "borders" are you referring to? That boundary is an armistice line and has no legal authority. It's not a border. Remember, the land in question is disputed land, from the river to the sea. As I see it, you should thank Sharon for keeping to those boundaries, for the most part, even if it crosses over in some sections. He has no legal, or even moral, obligation to the Green Line; and in fact, given the intrangigence of the paleos, they don't deserve it.

Posted by: David at November 19, 2004 09:37 AM

Good post, and I look forward to reading your guest posts here while Michael is away.

I've been arguing on my own blog with someone who thinks it is the proper "liberal" thing to take the Palestinians' side, which I find ridiculous, because if you look at pretty much every liberal political position, Israel is much closer to it then the Palestinians or any Arab state for that matter. I go into more detail here:

http://www.mikesilverman.com/2004/11/illiberal-comment-on-post-below-had.html

Posted by: Mike Silverman at November 19, 2004 09:53 AM

I think that the biggest issue may be, simply, that many people have trouble differentiating a "David vs. Goliath" struggle and some forms of terrorism. It seems a popular form of dementia that the underdog is probably being 'repressed' (because that is often the truth). At some level, it is understandable for Palastinians to want their own country. Certianly their differences with Isreal are better suited to International Diplomacy than Civil Law. It is even understandable to me, that nationalistic men who are seriously outgunned may consider alternative forms of warfare to secure their own nation.

What takes it beyond the realm of acceptable is the complete disregard for childrena nd civillians. Earlier this week, during an interview, one Iraqi said that he tries to make sure everyone distinguishes between nationalistic Iraqis fighting, what they precieve to be, an invading army and Terrorists. He differentiated them by their targets. Terrorists attack Iraqis, Americans, Citizens, they kidnap innocents and lop off their heads. Whereas nationalistic Iraqis, are the guys shooting at armed combatants.

I tend to agree. If a Pali bombs a millitary checkpoint, I consider it a matter of war. If they bomb a bus, thats just terrorism.

Unfoprtunately, it seems that many Americans cannot differentiate. Many on the left see it all as Just War and many on the right see it all as Terrorism.

It's an interesting view into their psychological makeup, I think.

Welcome to Mr. Tottens Blog, don't worry if you find blood in the water... we're used to it. ;-)

Ratatosk, Squirrel of Discord
Muncher of The ChaoAcorn
CHatterer of The Words of Eris

POEE of The Great Googlie Mooglie Cabal

Posted by: Ratatosk at November 19, 2004 10:15 AM

"I'll just say that Robert Fisk is deluded to the point of dementia......---Jeremy

Hi Jeremy.Welcome to the scene.Your first posting was right on the money for me.Of course anything that mentions Fisk and dementia in the same sentence is invariably going to be welcome in my world view.What was truly offensive,about Fisk's latest exercise in lunacy was his snide and cowardly almost-a-suggestion that the US and Allawi might well have been involved in the butchery of Mrs.Hassan.
I find that I cannot possibly know enough about the complex issues of our time to be able to discuss, meaningfully, the subtle issues of world reality,but I do acknowledge the distinction between 'moral' and 'immoral'.That sounds arrogant I suppose in these sophisticated times,but to my mind,sawing off people's heads or shooting a decent woman in the head are EVIL beyond hope of correction.In a way,I guess that is why I support GWB in his policies.He appears to make policy on the basis of 'no truck or trade'with the forces of darkness,and simplistic though that is,it just grabs me and won't let go.To modify a quote from an iniquitous source ( I think it was Roehm): 'Whenever I hear someone talk in terms of nuance,I just want to reach for my revolver'.

And I used to be a bleeding-heart liberal, AND I live in Canada which as we all know aspires to be France and is well on the way.Shudder
Anyway welcome to the club,and I look forward to your future comments.

ps---- I promise that you get a pass on the "war of intellectual attrition",so pull up a chair,kick off the shoes,open up a cold one,and enjoy the visit.

Posted by: dougf at November 19, 2004 10:22 AM

" If a Pali bombs a millitary checkpoint, I consider it a matter of war. If they bomb a bus, thats just terrorism."

If you consider Isreal a friend, then both are actions by an enemy. Those who are against Isreal (or the US) see both as justified actions. This seems to be the bigger distinction.

Posted by: Winger at November 19, 2004 10:43 AM

Winger,

Interesting observation, from my personal point of view however:

I refuse to see anyone as an enemy, simply because they are fighting for their own nation. I do not believe that Isreal is in the right in this Pali vs Isreali conflict. However, simply because I agree with the Pali goal (independant nation), I must distinguish between the means they use to reach that goal (valid malitary action vs terrorism). I think (but of course do not Know) that some number of Pro-Palis think similarly... Unfortunately, many Pro- Palis forget to add the caveat.

As for being friends with Isreal. I have no opinion. I personally think that alliances with any nation are out of line with the original plan for US International Relations.

"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none."
Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1801

Washington was also known to be against political parties and more generally any "entangling alliance".

I think that the UN is a great example of exactly why such alliances are troubling to a nation. In many matters our hands are tied by alliances with nations that do not share our goals. Isreal is, in my mind, much the same. Without the alliance, I believe we could mediate between the Palis and Isrealis with a much better sense of impartiality.

Of course, Jefferson has always been considered contraversial, as have his politics... I suppose that we Jeffersonians will remain in such a position for a long time to come :)

Ratatosk

Posted by: Ratatosk at November 19, 2004 11:03 AM

I think in trying to make distinctions between terrorism and war, important though they are we lose sight of important points:

The Palestinians are making war, and the question of whether that war is justifiable or not rests on what the goal of that war is and whether war itself is necessary... And it's important to separate the reality of their situation from the fictional situation projected by their war propaganda.

...

The fact is that the Palesinians made their point that they can cause the Israelis pain long ago. The Isrealis would be willing to make any reasonable settlement at this point (the polls made this clear long ago), so the only reason that there is still an occupation is that Israelis also know that the Palestinians have no intention of ending their war no matter what they're offered. The Palestinians have made that point clearly enough that the Israelis get it even if people who pay more attention to propaganda than to reality haven't.
----------
Conclusion: The problem isn't terrorism, the problem is that the Palestinians are fighting an immoral war.

Those pictures are WAR PROPAGANDA. Whether they celebrate terrorism or not is almost irrelevent. That they are antisemetic is par for the course. The US may be more civilized in how we conduct our wars and our nearly nonexistant war propaganda operations than, say Nazi Germany, but Palestine ISN'T. That's the depth of depravity we're looking at, something that should be completely familiar if we just stop expecting the world to be as modern as we are.

It's just war propaganda, and those people just hate. It's simple.

Posted by: Joshua Scholar at November 19, 2004 11:06 AM

And just in case there's anyone here naive enough to believe the "they're just fighting occupation" canard, let me make what I wrote more explicit. Logically the reason for the war can't be "to fight the occupation" when the only reason for the occupation is to lessen the number of terrorists who successfully attack Israel.

Israelis really don't want to occupy anywhere.

The Palestinians know perfectly well that there would be no occupation if they stopped making war and they know perfectly well that there would be no wall if they hadn't refused to end the war.

What is the purpose of the Palestinian's war? -
Keep in mind the purpose is chosen by the leaders. This is a war not random violence.

Arafat's purpose, as impossible and unrealistic as it sounds was complete ethnic cleaning. That's why the insane indoctrination of children and the like - he wanted to insure that his people hated SO much that they will EVENTUALLY, LONG AFTER HIS DEATH complete his dream of genocide.

Hama's purpose is similar, but if you read what Shiek Yassin wrote, you'll also find out that they have a LONGER term goal as well - to invade the entire world and impose Islam on the whole planet (actually Yasin said "universe").

So all we need to do to end the Palestinian conflict is to kill all the Jews or relocate them to some other continent, and then convert the entire planet to fundimentalist Islam. Easy. I don't know why Sharon hasn't made peace yet.

Posted by: Joshua Scholar at November 19, 2004 11:20 AM

Ratatosk, read above. The Palestinians aren't "fighting for their own country" that's the propaganda for the bumkins. The Palestinians leaders know that their primary goal so far has been to make sure that violence never stops and that their own people never get anything comfortable like peace and a country. They want ethnic cleansing not peace. They're fighting to PREVENT peace. The Israelis would LOVE to end "the occupation" which only exists to minimize the attacks from the intransigent, they would LOVE to be able to just get out, and let the Palestinians have some land. So the Palestinians aren't fighting to have a state, they're actually fighting to prevent their people from having a state.

But we're drowning in the war propaganda that the Arabs produce and we don't have the descrimination to tell the truth from the lies.

Posted by: Joshua Scholar at November 19, 2004 11:27 AM

Nazis are from Mars, Fascist Jihadists are from Venus

And Robert Fisk is from Pluto.

Jeremy, great post.

Posted by: SoCalJustice at November 19, 2004 11:27 AM

That word is "bumpkins" not "bumkins". Preview is my friend.

Posted by: Joshua Scholar at November 19, 2004 11:28 AM

"I refuse to see anyone as an enemy, simply because they are fighting for their own nation."

But what if they are fighting YOUR nation? Or a friend of your nation?

PS: The Palistinians will get their nation-state when Isreal finishes walling them off. And it will expose the Palistinian leadership for the parasitic maggots they are.

And one should not deal with maggots (especially those that rip off and murder their own people) - see the Pinoche discussion below.

Posted by: Winger at November 19, 2004 11:34 AM

Jeremy – thanks for the post – interesting stuff. It’s nice to know more about your site and Solomonia.

I agree with Joshua - the Palestinians are fighting a war. Most Palestinian fighters are trained and financed by terror-supporting Middle Eastern states, including the twin pillars of violent jihad, Iran and Saudi Arabia. These states have often expressed their willingness to fight their war against Israel down to the last Palestinian. This fact is probably the biggest impediment to peace.

The group sponsoring this exhibition, the WESPAC foundation, admits that many museums in the New York area refuse to sponsor this exhibit.

WESPAC is a member of the ‘Peace and Justice’ Action network. Other members of this Peace and Justice network include the Muslim American Society, which, according to this article in the Chicago Tribune, was formed by the radical Islamist Muslim Brotherhood to recruit young paramilitaries in the US.

From the Chicago Tribune:

"Over the last 40 years, small groups of devout Muslim men have gathered in homes in U.S. cities to pray, memorize the Koran and discuss events of the day.
But they also addressed their ultimate goal, one so controversial that it is a key reason they have operated in secrecy: to create Muslim states overseas and, they hope, someday in America as well.
These men are part of an underground U.S. chapter of the international Muslim Brotherhood, the world's most influential Islamic fundamentalist group and an organization with a violent past in the Middle East. But fearing persecution, they rarely identify themselves as Brotherhood members and have operated largely behind the scenes, unbeknown even to many Muslims."

Other Muslim groups mentioned by Solomonia have connections to the Muslim American Society, including the Islamic Society of Boston, which is currently pushing the idea of sanctions against Israel. The MAS appears to be sponsoring their summer camps and 'empowerment sessions'.

Posted by: mary at November 19, 2004 11:58 AM

Fisk may be from Pluto, but I would tell him most of his work is from Uranus.

Posted by: Deuce at November 19, 2004 11:58 AM

>>Israelis really don't want to occupy anywhere.

Yeah it would be so much easier if those pesky and smelly Palestinians just disappeared.

Posted by: ben hur at November 19, 2004 12:42 PM

ben - that was supposed to be a rebuttal?

You're doing sarcasm wrong. You have to say something that makes the position you're mocking seem ridiculous otherwise it doesn't work.

But I realize that if you were capable of rebutting my arguement or narative you would have, so I'll just take your post in the spirit it was offered and count you as someone who is in favor the Palestinian's war and wishes he could find a reason to support his opinion.

Thanks for sharing! :)

Posted by: Joshua Scholar at November 19, 2004 12:54 PM

Joshua,

Only time will tell if the Pali's are willing to listen to peace negotiations. I think, but certianly do not know, that if Isreal and Palistine meet at the bargin table and form a reasonable accord, the Pali people will force their government to abide by it. I doubt the average Pali wants war anymore than the average Isreali.

In fact, a study of history shows that its almost never the general population that wants war, usually its those who benefit most from the outcome of the War... even in Revolutionary America this was the case.

It should be obvious to anyone that there is a distinct Islamo-nihilist contingent, willing to die in order to spread the influence of Islam. However, the existence of such groups does not mean that all or even most Arabs agree with this thinking. Thats one thing that seems to be quite apparent from our situation in Iraq.

Of course, in all honesty, one cannot discount the fervor in which humans can adopt dogma. After all, while most europeans could have cared less about the Holy Lands, the political and religious leaders of the time used dogma (and whips) to raise large armies. The same could be true of Islam today. Only time will tell.

Ratatosk

Posted by: Ratatosk at November 19, 2004 01:18 PM

Tosk: They will have no choice but to negoitate for whatever they can get when they are walled off. The jig will be up.

Hence why they seek to stop the security fence.

Posted by: Winger at November 19, 2004 01:29 PM

It's nice to come back from several hours away from my computer to find so many intelligent and supportive comments. Thanks so much for the kind words, everyone; it really helps. Hell, Michael may have to fight me off this blog with a stick when he gets back. He'll have to pry the 'post' button from my cold, dead hands.

Posted by: Jeremy Brown at November 19, 2004 02:10 PM

"In fact, a study of history shows that its almost never the general population that wants war, usually its those who benefit most from the outcome of the War... even in Revolutionary America this was the case."

True enough, but its almost impssible to wage a war if your population is actually AGAINST you. If the British parliment had made some fairly easy concessions to the American POPULATION, popular support for the revolution would have evaporated.

The questions for the middle east have to be:

1) why do the populations of the arab countries (specifically palestinians in this case) continue to put up with this - indeed, allow their sons and daughters to be co-opted? Is it more than just fear of the rebels among them?

2) What could we/Israel offer to the common people to change their allegiance - not to Israel, just away from the PLO and the rest?

Focusing on the leaders misses the point.

Posted by: Scott at November 19, 2004 02:43 PM

why do the populations of the arab countries (specifically palestinians in this case) continue to put up with this

Before WWII, why was Europe basically divided between the extremes of communism and fascism? Why did many people appear to support oppressive dicatorships?

What could we have offered the German people to change their allegiance - not to the US and to non-Aryans, just away from the extremists?

Back then, we focused on the leaders, and it was an effective response.

Posted by: mary at November 19, 2004 03:17 PM

Jeremy - great to see you on one of my OTHER favourite weblogs, and a stunning start to your sojourn.
Fisk - dougf has already pointed out his attempt to paint Allawi and the US into the murder of Margaret Hassan. Well, you can reflect on this in two ways. One is seen in Chris Bertram's comment at Harry's Place that Fisk is subject to a certain kind of comment on certain kinds of weblogs. The other way might be to consider how some journalists fall into the trap of requiring the actions of men and women, of events, to reflect always the political outlook of the journalist; of requiring that no event include material that might exist outside of their own agenda and preoccupations. Robert Fisk's writing gave birth to that occupation of a more innocent age, "fisking"; his latest sends a colder kind of air in, however, and I don't know what the appropriate response is. There was always a kind of laughter at the back of Fisking; none now.

Posted by: James Hamilton at November 19, 2004 03:19 PM

Thanks, James.

Posted by: Jeremy Brown at November 19, 2004 08:04 PM

"What I dislike about the wall is that it has violated the 1967 borders it should have stayed within."

Why? the country that has been attacked has the right to choose the most defensive landscape. Ex: At the end of WW2 Germany lost territory. They started it and they paid the price.

Posted by: lucklucky at November 19, 2004 08:19 PM

luckylucky I agree especially since I have heard expert sources claim that the 67 boarders are hard to defend. Not being a military expert, I have to take an expert's word on this.

For some reason the Arab/Palestinian's narrative on this has generally been instantly accepted and there has been no consideration of an alternate view. I believe that the UN and even the EU instantly jumped in and made statements condemning both the existance of the wall AND it's path.

It bothers me that the Palestinian's spokesmen have shown to be liars over and over, and yet it is always their narrative that is instantly accepted the world over and sane criticisms are instantly considered beyond the pale and not to be aired in polite company.

Posted by: Joshua Scholar at November 19, 2004 09:39 PM

It is myth that the Palestinian militants ever had any interest whatsoever in living in peace with the Jews. They are solely devoted to pushing the latter into the sea. Nothing else will satisfy them. Also, they are true believing nihilists who care little about developing a viable society where the citizenry primarily worries about the funding of new roads, the color of the high school building, how to pay for the retirement benefits of its civil servants, and other relatively mundane matters. A Yasser Arafat receives existential satisfaction only when he is indulging in violent behavior. Am I saying that all Palestinians are nihilistic? No, but the moderates are too fearful of the extremists to challenge them. We must do the moderates a favor---and jail or kill the radicals. Nothing less will bring peace to the region. This is the mandatory first step. Everything else is of secondary importance.

Posted by: David Thomson at November 20, 2004 03:11 AM

Jeremy,
Nice post, how come I've never seen your blog linked anywhere before this?

Posted by: sam at November 20, 2004 03:41 AM

Off-Topic---

This seems like a great idea to me.I encourage everyone to sign up. Just the right thing to do.

http://www.petitiononline.com/as123/petition.html

Posted by: dougf at November 20, 2004 08:52 AM

I found this article at christianactionforisrael.org

Its called "UN planned state of Israel as a Still-Birth".

Here's the link:

christianactionforisrael.org/un/stillbirth.html

Pretty sobering IMHO

Posted by: Caroline at November 21, 2004 08:55 AM

Actually for completeness that should have been

http://www.christianactionforisrael.org/un/stillbirth.html

Posted by: Caroline at November 21, 2004 09:11 AM

When the speaker and he to whom he is speaks do not understand, that is
metaphysics.
-- Voltaire
Loan http://www.epaycash.com

Posted by: Loan at December 16, 2004 09:19 AM

Surprise due today. Also the rent.
Payday Loans http://www.paylesspaydayloans.com

Posted by: Payday Loans at December 17, 2004 05:36 AM

austin club swingeradd dating link singleadd dating single siteadd dating single urladult chat roomadult chat room javaadult chat room ukadult chat roomsadult chat rooms australiaadult chat rooms in the ukadult chat rooms in ukadult chat rooms ukadult chat rooms xxxadult chat sexadult chat siteadult chat sitesasian and indian dating agencyasian australian datingasian black datingasian black dating interracialasian black dating male womanasian black dating man online womanasian black dating man womanasian black dating womanadult asia finder friendadult bbw finder friendadult black finder friendadult bookstore finderadult canada finder friendadult cgi com finder friend memsearch p searchadvice dating manadvice dating man marriedadvice dating man olderdating services in san diegodating services in san franciscodating services in torontodating services internetdating services jewishdating services kiss comdating services los angelesdating services massachusettsfree dating and chating sitefree dating internet web sitefree dating personal sitefree dating personals sitefree dating sitefree dating site canadianfree dating site europefree dating site for usafree dating site for womanbbw personals ncbbw personals photobbw personals plusbbw personals plus.combbw personals swingerbbw personals ukbbw personals yahoobbw photo personalsbbw picture personalsbbw sex personalsblack bbw personalscanadian bbw personalshouston bbw's personalspersonals bbwpersonals for bbwplus size pantyhose bbw personalsuk bbw personalsdating template webdating latino site webdating married site webdating international site webdating russian site webdating find site webdating national site webdating nigerian site webdating free services webdating free sex site webdating free site teen webdating own site webbest dating online site webdating page webdating latin site webcam dating video webdating free site uk webcanada dating site webadult lesbian personalsadult local personalsadult london personalsadult married personalsadult missouri personalsadult msn personalsadult new personals zealandadult nude personalsadult online personalsadult personal friend finderadult personalsadult chat avenueadult chat camadult chat camssecret anal moviessexy anal moviesultra anal movies

Posted by: fds at May 5, 2005 08:29 AM
cool blog - thanks for the service

online casino

Posted by: casino at June 28, 2005 02:29 AM

Greetings From NY !

Posted by: casinos at July 7, 2005 12:42 AM

viagra
cialis
levitra
meridia
xenical
propecia

Posted by: online casinos at October 7, 2005 12:16 AM

kosmetyki naturalne
kosmetyki
mieszkania w Warszawie
agencja reklamowa

Posted by: ap at December 1, 2005 09:23 AM

freetimes
jidds
fabrykapoe
sfworks

Posted by: artse at December 23, 2005 02:51 AM
Post a comment













Remember personal info?






Winner, The 2007 Weblog Awards, Best Middle East or Africa Blog

Pajamas Media BlogRoll Member



Testimonials

"I'm flattered such an excellent writer links to my stuff"
Johann Hari
Author of God Save the Queen?

"Terrific"
Andrew Sullivan
Author of Virtually Normal

"Brisk, bracing, sharp and thoughtful"
James Lileks
Author of The Gallery of Regrettable Food

"A hard-headed liberal who thinks and writes superbly"
Roger L. Simon
Author of Director's Cut

"Lively, vivid, and smart"
James Howard Kunstler
Author of The Geography of Nowhere


Contact Me

Send email to michaeltotten001 at gmail dot com


News Feeds




toysforiraq.gif



Link to Michael J. Totten with the logo button

totten_button.jpg


Tip Jar





Essays

Terror and Liberalism
Paul Berman, The American Prospect

The Men Who Would Be Orwell
Ron Rosenbaum, The New York Observer

Looking the World in the Eye
Robert D. Kaplan, The Atlantic Monthly

In the Eigth Circle of Thieves
E.L. Doctorow, The Nation

Against Rationalization
Christopher Hitchens, The Nation

The Wall
Yossi Klein Halevi, The New Republic

Jihad Versus McWorld
Benjamin Barber, The Atlantic Monthly

The Sunshine Warrior
Bill Keller, The New York Times Magazine

Power and Weakness
Robert Kagan, Policy Review

The Coming Anarchy
Robert D. Kaplan, The Atlantic Monthly

England Your England
George Orwell, The Lion and the Unicorn