Falafel apparently banned by Islamists in Iraq [Zealots 'Talibanizing' Iraq ban falafels, goatees at gunpoint]:
In a bizarre example of Iraq’s creeping “Talibanization,” militants visited falafel vendors a couple of weeks ago, telling them to pack up their stalls by today or be killed.
The ultimatum seemed so bizarre that, at first, most laughed it off — until two of them were fatally shot as they plied their trade.
“They came telling us, ‘You have 14 days to end this job,’ and I asked them what was the problem,” said Abu Zeinab, 32, who was packing up his stall for good yesterday in the suburb of al Dora, a hard-line Sunni neighborhood.
“I said I was just feeding the people, but they said there were no falafels in Muhammad the prophet’s time, so we shouldn’t have them either.
“I felt like telling them there were no Kalashnikovs in Muhammad’s time either, but I wanted to keep my life.”
Why Baghdad’s falafel vendors should be blacklisted while their colleagues are allowed to continue selling kebabs or Western-style pizzas and burgers remains a mystery. Some suspect it is because a taste for falafels is one of the few things that unites Jewish and Arab communities in Israel.
It is, however, just one of many Islamic edicts to hit Baghdad in recent weeks, prohibiting everything from the growing of goatee beards to the sale of mayonnaise — because it is purportedly made in Israel.
Even more bizzarely:
Another group of traders to have felt the Islamists’ wrath is Baghdad’s ice merchants, who sell large chunks of ice for storing food and chilling drinks.
In a city facing constant power cuts and summer temperatures of up to 122 degrees, the service they provide is little short of essential. Yet in recent weeks, they too have fallen afoul of the claim that their product was not a feature of life during Muhammad’s time.
Akram al Zidawi, 19, an ice seller from al Dora, thought the threats were too ludicrous to be true — until it was too late.
“Two weeks ago, he came back home saying that he had been threatened by the terrorists,” said his brother Gassan, 32. “My mother begged him to quit the job, but he laughed. He thought it was impossible they would kill him. But they came back two days later and shot him dead, along with three other ice sellers nearby.”
June 11th, 2006
The Wall Street Journal reports that melting of glaciers will increase earthquake and seismic activity. [How Melting Glaciers Alter Earth's Surface, Spur Quakes, Volcanoes] The idea is that melting glaciers changes the weight distribution on the earth’s surface and that the earth rebounds:
The reason is that one cubic meter of ice weighs just over a ton, and glaciers can be hundreds of meters thick. When they melt and the water runs off, it is literally a weight off Earth’s crust. The crust and mantle therefore bounce back, immediately as well as over thousands of years. That “isostatic rebound,” according to studies of prehistoric and recent earthquakes and volcanoes, can make the planet’s seismic plates slip catastrophically, and cause magma chambers that feed volcanoes to act like bottles of shaken seltzer.
The main evidence is from prior geologic history:
That link has reared its ugly head in the past, especially during periods of rapid climate change such as the end of ice ages. When ice sheets retreated 10,000 years ago, for instance, Iceland experienced a surge in volcanic eruptions. Volcanoes in the Mediterranean, Antarctica and eastern California also seem to have been awakened by retreating ice.
When he analyzed 800,000 years of activity from about 50 volcanoes in eastern California (the age of rocks formed from volcanic ash can be determined by radioactive dating), Prof. Glazner found that “the peaks of volcanic activity occurred when ice was retreating globally. At first I thought it was crazy, but other scientists also found evidence that climate affects volcanism.” The likely mechanism: glacial retreat lifts pressure that had kept the magma conduit closed.
June 11th, 2006
Paul Smaldino was sent my article Paranoia, depression, or a world of hope: Destructiveness and struggle for a better world by someone who liked it. He did not. In fact, he disliked it so much, he responded with the following critique (posted with permission):
This article is one a large contingency in which a liberal, educated person spells out a generic laundry list of problems with the world, grievances with the government, and then gives a two-sentence message about hope and not giving up.
Frankly, I’m sick of this. It’s wishy washy, and I think it misses the point. You can be for “Peace and Justice,” but that doesn’t change the fact that the world we live in, with very few exceptions, does not abide by any rational tenets of peace and justice. You can hope that the world will get better, you can stand on your street corner and proclaim that we should stop polluting and driving SUVs and we should give out free universal health care and we should stop all the senseless killing throughout the world. If every man, woman, and child just stopped what they were doing and yelled “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not gonna take it any more!” then the world could start on a journey to a better place. Tra la la.
But that’s not gonna happen. Not in this lifetime at any rate. Soldz identifies three components of the sad state of affairs: our massive destructive capabilities, our fear of both outsiders and each other, and our uncertainty as to what the future holds. I agree that with our country and others having access to weapons of incredible destructive power, we have all the more to fear. Just being alive and aware awakens a fear of death, a fear of loss, a fear of pain. But I think that what’s so very dangerous about the modern world is not the overwhelming uncertainty felt by many of us, but rather the overwhelming certainty felt by many of them. George Bush is certain that God wants him to do as he does. Tens of millions of Americans are certain that they will be rewarded in the kingdom of heaven for acting as they do. Pat Robertson is certain that God sent Katrina and AIDS to punish homosexuals. Many Christians believe that the end is at hand, so we can destroy the environment with impunity. Osama bin Laden is certain that God wants the infidels destroyed. The 19 men who hijacked planes on 9-11, and the hundreds of suicide bombers who kill hundreds almost every day in the middle east were certain that when they die they will be richly rewarded and that they will be greeted by 72 virgins and all their friends will be there.
If I am certain that I am right, that you are wrong, and that they creator of the universe will reward me for punishing, or even killing you, then I am a fool if I don’t. To steal (and mangle) a phrase from Sam Harris, who wrote The End of Faith, with all the biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons about, with all the constant killings and torture and mutilations happening almost daily, we can no longer afford to tolerate absolute faith, faith that is unavailable for questioning or altering, faith that he is right and she is wrong and he can, he must, kill her.
Faith is not the only enemy. Human nature alone breeds fear and distrust of the out group. American free enterprise spawns the ability to hold incalculable wealth contingent upon the sanctioned poverty of others. There are a million things that are fucked up in this country and in every country. Ignorance, intolerance, overtolerance, poverty, greed, etc. 40 years ago Kurt Vonnegut pleaded “For the love of God, be kind!” We’re not. We’re not gonna be.
I hate to be such a pessimist, but the facts are in. If you want to say you are “for peace and justice” then you have to figure out what that means. Because it’s largely an empty phrase. I’m for chocolate-covered strawberries growing from magical plants on every corner, for Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny, and for a return to unregulated stewardess uniforms on airplanes. But being “for” something is useless unless you couple that with a realistic view of the world and not only a vision of what the world could be, but a plan for getting it to be that way. Soldz says that by thinking positive we can “start the difficult process of transforming that destructive energy into a constructive force that builds ties to others and together with them creates an alternative.” Great. That kind of talk belongs on a late night infomercial. Because, like so much political rhetoric, it’s pretty much bullshit.
Thank you and good night.
I’m flattered that Paul found my little piece stimulating enough to critique. The funny thing is, I mostly agree with him. ”What to do” is the major issue. That didn’t happen to be the topic of that article, as I saw it.
At the same time, I didn’t think I was saying, “think positive,” but, rather, indicating how hard a task it will be to counter the terror which plays so well in our psyches. Paul says: “40 years ago Kurt Vonnegut pleaded ‘For the love of God, be kind!’ We’re not. We’re not gonna be.” I agree. So how do we create a decent world, given that fact? I don’t know, but I look for any indications I can find.
I hope when Paul wakes up he’ll give us some non-bullshit ideas. I look forward to them. In the meantime, dreaming of “chocolate-covered strawberries growing from magical plants on every corner” is not nothing.
June 11th, 2006