Been meaning to mention this. I had the privilege, three weeks ago, of attending the Dalton School commencement at Lincoln Center. Dalton is an elite private high school in New York City. Maybe the most elite. Michael Steinhardt sent his kids there, so did Bruce Kovner (as I remember anyway). Jeffrey Epstein launched his meteor there, when he met and cultivated Ace Greenberg. Two things struck me about the charming and even-touchingly-homely proceedings. 1, there is a forcible effort on Dalton’s part to make its student body diverse. A school that could be all-rich-kids, or all-elite, or all-Jewish, is doing a lot to have a multicultural body. Dalton seems genuinely to embrace those values. I was moved by that. Ah, yes: here Dalton states that it is intentionally-diverse, and the School Head speaks of those values eloquently. This is the face of the new establishment. 2, There was not one reference to the Iraq war over 2 hours of speech and song. Charlie Gibson the ABC anchor was the commencement speaker (inoffensive, unmemorable, apart from some reminiscences of all he failed to learn at Princeton), Nathaniel Shapiro the senior speaker, Ellen Stein the head of school (Yes, my people are principals in American society), Lisa Waller the head of the high school. Not one mentioned Iraq. Lesson: American elites have no personal stake in this disaster, apart from the parlor game in which I am myself a player: Who was right in the debates of ‘02-’03? A disgrace.
(P.S. John O’Keeffe lately told me that Milton Friedman considered it his greatest achievement to have gotten the all-volunteer army, eliminating the draft. And thereby the privileged left was coopted by the ultraright… )
Related posts:
{ 38 comments }
Why should a commencement speech mention Iraq?
diversity at an elite institution means a diverse, managerial/servant class to absorb the elite's values and to serve the elite's state.
Al Jazeera English has a new documentary on the lobby–
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOvdQ7vPLn0
(I remember when a few years back the Jewish community in Newton, Massachusetts prevented the local cable company from carrying Al Jazeera news. I assume the behavior was repeated across the country.)
why mention Iraq?
Because Mr. Witty the war representes a failure of America's elite to
1. examine its role in the ME and world
2. if it is going to have an empire how do we pay for it in blood and treasure?
3. from a paleo perspective defeat is inevitable: a pro-Iran shia regime will emerge.
#4. the Dalton HS grads are often the children of the elites who planned, and advocated this disaster. They will be attending schools like Columbia university in NY whose president declared last year that " Columbia is a Jewish university." (What ar raee moment of candor!!) What role did that Jewish university play in preparing the ground work for the war? Perhaps those Dalton grads could bring some old-fashioned WASP noblesse oblige to their Jewish (and Jewified) campuses about how 4500 Americans died, 30k maimed, perhaps 4000 suicides among vets…perhaps your son could grow up differently than you and be willing to do what Weiss does: follow the facts and examine the Jewish role in these wars.
I get soooo tired of hearing about diversity! In all honesty, my life would not be any worse if I never saw another cultural, ethnic, racial, gender or sexual minority until I died.
I don't hold birth against anyone, but differences in culture, ethnicity or race hold no special priority for me. I can do without them.
America's elite has also failed to examine its role in the US and in the human and ecological world.
Those are FAR more important concerns.
The scapegoat of Israel is superfluous, in many ways an INTENTIONAL distraction from class, racial, ecological issues that are more permanent and more critical, and more neglected.
Phil posed mentioning Iraq as a litmus test, all in the name of "free speech".
The war in Iraq was based on fraud and brought about by fraudsters. They know who they are.
Noam Chomsky: An Intellectual Fraud?
http://homo-sapien-underground.blogspot.com/2008/07/noam.html
________________________________________________________
Todd, it's not that culture, ethnicity, or race has to hold a special priority for anyone, but that it shouldn't make any difference.
"The scapegoat of Israel is superfluous, in many ways an INTENTIONAL distraction from class, racial, ecological issues that are more permanent and more critical, and more neglected."
And most importantly there are actually social options that can successfully address class, racial and ecological issues.
Whereas there is really limited latitude that an effective American politician can adopt relative to Israel, even relative to Iran's increments.
______________________________________________________________
Richard Witty,
"The scapegoat of Israel is superfluous, in many ways an INTENTIONAL distraction from class, racial, ecological issues that are more permanent and more critical, and more neglected."
That would be true only if Israel and the value and necessity of its security were not thrown up in the the US as being more important than that of the US. And if we hadn't gone to war over it, and if we were not now contemplating another war in its interest.
http://www.redress.cc/americas/pjballes20080703
ON Obama.
I heard an interview with Arianna Huffington today with which I agree largely.
Politically, apparently Obama has adopted some of the Clinton political strategists, which may account for his posturing recently on Jerusalem, church-based federal social service aid, etc.
She described the Penn et al strategy school as micro-analysis of constituencies, with the assumption that elections will be close and that tightly oriented messages to specific constituencies are what makes the difference between losing and winning a close race.
Arianna described that that is likely NOT the logic in this campaign, that Obama risks losing his core message and core identity by micro-analysis of constituencies and then pandering to what they imagine is the appeal to those constituencies.
She described that his core message and identity of change and fresh analysis, is so compelling and so distinctive that to dilute it with polling driven approaches, is the one losing strategy, rather than a winning one.
She said that in her opinion either Obama will win in a landslide (60% + of electoral votes), or McCain will win in a close election with surprise states (not by polling negligence).
And that it takes him sticking to his message to get the landslide.
Certainly an Al Jazeera documentary on the dreaded LOBBY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! is the last word in truth telling. and Columbia university, where Joseph Massad hangs his kaffiyeh is what , a Jewified university. Have to love the Phil Weiss fan base. I give credit to 5 dancing Shlomos and Ed for intellectual honesty. They want to ratchet right to the yellow stars and concentration camps. No beating around the bush. But what I am curious about is this. When Phil refers to "my people" who exactly is he talking about. It appears to me that he is extremely popular with the stormfront crowd, Is that it?
"When Phil refers to "my people" who exactly is he talking about?"
Yeah. When I refer to "my people" I always check their bloodlines first.
Richard, tell me:
How could you talk about ecology without talking about the largest consumer of oil on the planet, the U.S. military apparatus?
How could you talk about "US issues" without mentioning the military industrial complex in its current day configuration (zionist interventionist hegemony – neoliberal/neoconservative)?
Charlie Gibson, I know that name from somewhere… Wasn't he the moronic apologist who claimed the media actually did their job in the run-up to Iraq?
Do you really need that schmuck to tell you that you should probably get off your ass right about now, Richard, and go plant a couple of trees?
Hell, I can do that!
"Todd, it's not that culture, ethnicity, or race has to hold a special priority for anyone, but that it shouldn't make any difference."
It would be nice if they didn't make a difference, but they do make a difference. If there is no difference in peoples, lifestyles or cultures, why should diversity be promoted? Why the call for constant social change if there is no difference between cultures and people?
Palestinian contributions to the world
Posted: July 04, 2008
2:34 am Eastern
© 2008
Yesterday morning, I listened to Israeli Ambassador Dan Gillerman describe the terrorist attack in Jerusalem in which a Palestinian construction worker suddenly turned the bulldozer he was driving into traffic, crushing everything (and everyone) in its path.
The attack took place on one of Jerusalem's busiest streets. Ambassador Gillerman noted sarcastically that the driver "courteously" stopped to let a car pull in front of him, which he then ran over and crushed, killing a woman and her baby. In another car, a woman threw her baby out the car window before the bulldozer crushed her to death. (The baby survived, the ambassador said, but was "gravely wounded.")
According to Gillerman, the construction worker was an Israeli-Arab who worked for an Israeli Arab. "He took the bulldozer, with which he fed his own wife and family, and used it to crush other families to death, simply for being Israeli Jews."
Gillerman described the attack as typical of the Palestinian contribution to the world. Of course, the ambassador was angry (who wouldn't be?). But he went on to argue his point, reminding the audience that it was the Palestinians who invented airline hijackings. The long lines at airports are another Palestinian contribution to the world, said Gillerman.
(Column continues below)
In today's political climate, one might be accused of "racism" for observing such contributions, like hostage taking, suicide bombings, and the use of innocents as human shields. After all, it is not for nothing that Yasser Arafat earned the sobriquet, "The father of modern Islamic terrorism."
But that then raises the question of what "race" I am offending? Not all Arabs are Palestinians. Is there a "Palestinian" race? Well, historically, speaking, yes. From A.D. 70 until the early 1960s, they were called "Jews," so that definition wouldn't be applicable here. And the only other definition of "Palestinian" that seems to fit the modern usage would be "member of Yasser Arafat's PLO" (which, prior to 1993, was also the working definition of "Middle Eastern terrorist").
In any case, I wanted to be fair. So I typed the keywords "Palestinian contributions" (but without the quotes) into the Google News Search and got 519 hits containing those two words. Browsing through some of the hits, I noticed that wherever the word "contributions" appeared, it was in reference to contributions made TO the Palestinians. I couldn't find any listing Palestinian "contributions" in the sense of the Palestinians being the contributors.
So, I thought I'd narrow the search: I typed "Palestinian contributions" using quotes, which forces Google to return only those documents that contain those exact words. This was what I got:
Your search – "Palestinian contributions" – did not match any documents.
Suggestions:
Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
Try different keywords.
Try more general keywords.
Try fewer keywords.
Try Google Blog Search.
Instead, I tried expanding the search to the Web. Using "Palestinian contributions" enclosed by quotations, it appears there are but 295 documents out of the billions indexed by Google daily on the World Wide Web in which those two words are used together.
I didn't read through them all, but the first hit on the top page from Yahoo! Answers was fairly representative. (You needn't take my word for it. Google it yourself.)
That one was entitled: "Please List Positive Palestinian Contributions To the World." The question was posed (six months ago!) and asked somewhat sympathetically:
I know somebody who's spreading hateful words about Palestinians, basically saying they've contributed nothing but negativity to the world. … What I'm looking for are a few positive contributions to the world from Palestinians. Please don't post any hateful "answers." I'm not looking for a political or religious conversation. Thank you!
There were but a handful of replies, but the one chosen by the questioner as the 'best answer" was this one: "How can they contribute anything … they are experiencing what some would call a genocide, and are currently in a state of apartheid … are you seriously going to worry about contributing to the world in such conditions?"
That was the BEST answer – after six months – to the question (it bears repeating) "What are a few positive contributions to the world from Palestinians?"
It might have been the best answer Yahoo! Answers got, but "Nothing. Why should they?" isn't much of a list. The Palestinians, according to the U.N., deserve statehood based on the presumption that they are a cohesive people who are stateless – rather than a mob who live outside any national jurisdiction as the result of the Israeli victory in the Six Day's War.
So, if anybody actually can list a few positive Palestinian contributions to the world – ever – in the history of the Palestinian people, drop me a line.
Google hasn't been much help.
MM,
You obviously haven't read my posts.
The thesis of "The Prize" for example is that oil is NEEDED for military purposes for high octane applications that are not possible with alchohols, hydrogen, solar, even nuclear driven steam.
Civilian energy needs do NOT require highly concentrated energy sources. Heat for example is a by-product of energy expenditure. The most efficient means to achieve motion are steam engines and electrical motors, NOT fossil fuel driven.
The fight for oil is to make it available for military purposes ultimately (even after the needed social transformation to a more rational energy policy and application).
It has NOTHING to do with Israel lobby, except as an incidental side story.
I just saw a clip of Rupert Murdoch endorsing Obama. When asked "Did you have anything to do with the New York Post endorsing Obama for the democratic party candidacy?", Murdoch said "Yeh".
The interview was a month ago, and the democratic candidacy was still being contested. So, I'm not sure if that was an actual endorsement in the general election.
"The most efficient means to achieve motion are steam engines and electrical motors, NOT fossil fuel driven."
You might want to go back and re-read your copy of "The Prize", Mr. Witty.
Short and concise from Xymphora–
"Bibi Netanyahu's 'war on terror' is a lot more complex than it looks. That's why a Palestinian driving a Caterpillar bulldozer over Jews is a 'terrorist', but when an Israeli Jew drives a Caterpillar bulldozer over an American protester or a Palestinian grandmother, it's the dead person who is the 'terrorist'. There is no way a Martian visiting earth is going to be able to understand this without a considerable amount of explanation, and the fear among American authorities was that the average American could be easily confused by a mixed message. Steven Hatfill wasn't prosecuted/persecuted by American authorities because they thought he was guilty, or even because they are buffoons. They went after him because they knew he was innocent, in lieu of going after the real culprit, a member of the 'Camel Club' whose prosecution would have been confusing to the average American. In the 'war on terror', there are some people who can only be victims."
http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2008/07/arrow-only-points-one-way.html
Sword of Gidion:
You've certainly convinced me, using Google to confirm that Palestinians are officially a useless people (like the vermin Roma before them).
I'll have to re-read Mein Kampf about the significance of those who contribute to culture vs those who don't contribute. [By the way, a lot of people believe the most important Jewish contributions lately come under the heading of 'war-mongering' against Iraq, Lebanon, and now Iran. Have Palestinians managed to warmonger on the same scale?]
I guess that explains why Israel's F16's like to create their own little krystallnacht every time they fly low over Arab residential areas, and why there is razor-wire surrounding the refugee concentration camp of Gaza.
Do you get a warm and fuzzy feeling after throwing the Palestinians into the ovens of your mind?
"The most efficient means to achieve motion are steam engines and electrical motors, NOT fossil fuel driven."
What fuel is used to create the steam? In this country, power plants create steam with coal, oil, gas or nuclear power. What else is there? Aside from the odd locomotive or two, I am not aware of any steam powered vehicles. Are you speaking of ships? I may be mistaken but I thought most ships were diesel powered these days (other than nuclear powered aircraft carriers). Someone just sent me a photo of the world's largest container ship. It had eight diesel engines.
Phil, regarding no mention of the war at the Dalton School (or in the MSM), I believe George Orwell predicted as much.
Sword of Gideon:
The United States is a meritocracy. The worthy and, above all, most intelligent of its citizens will always rise to the top. For proof, refer to one of David Brooks or Ruth Wisse's articles on the subject.
The conversion of energy to motion is far far better effected by steam power and even further better effected by electricity than internal combustion.
Engines powered by internal combustion of fossil fuels use the fuel primarily to create heat, and only a small portion of the energy in the fuel gets used to create the explosion that turns the engine.
In the system from fuel to use, even considering line losses over electric lines, an electric car realizes a 100% improvement in application of fuel consumption to motion.
Even modern trains run on electric engines. I don't know how the diesel fuel source gets converted into the electricity to run the motors. Any engineers out there?
But, the only applications that NEED the explosive power of a high-octane fuel (that also takes a LOT of energy to refine to get to be a high octane fuel) are applications that require a high degree of acceleration (planes, fast accelerating ships, ground vehicles, etc.)
I read the "The Prize" most recently 15 years ago. I know the insights that I derived from the read, Yergin's intended overarching thesis or not.
Yergin is not reported to be an advocate of "peak oil" or any theories resting on the view that fossil fuels are finite and socially costly, nor does he urge conservation or efficiency of matching energy form to end use as of major consequence.
Richard, I am not sure what happened to the theory my physics teacher had in mind, when he told us that it is a side effect of all energy application (don't know how to put it) to set free heat. (no doubt ages ago; long before the renewed –19th century industrialisation produced similar ideas–ecological thinking.)
By now we have technolgies that seem to be based on this phenomenon. If you have eg. a huge fridge in your store you can use the heat set free to produce hot heat water.
The main problem seems to be that as long as much money can be made by the usual energies, not much money will flow into research & developments of alternative ones. I don't give up hope though that the oil companies share holder's agree that it important to use some of the revenues for R&D. Finally.
Did you follow the link posted here yesterday? This seems interesting:
http//www.shrunklink.com/atyy
apart from Cheney's changed attitude or AIPAC's power games posted yesterday.
I guess I should say too, that I agree with most what you said here; I suspect that the real issues are somehow buried and the ME oil resources are what united Israeli and American interests in complex ways. "Dry out the money sources".
And yes, the "American interest" is never defined. The American interrest varies from perspective to perspective.
Two laws of thermodynamics (I don't know their identifying numbers):
1. There is NO SUCH THING as energy generation, there is only energy conversion from energy in one form to energy in another.
No energy is lost or gained net in the universe.
(In a specific system there are energy gains and losses. The earth as a system for example, exhausts energy into space, and absorbs energy from the sun. The greenhouse description (not a "theory"), that the net solar income is more or less constant, independant of human actions, but the net solar exhaust is lower with even an incrementally higher concentration of CO2, methane, water vapor in the atmosphere).
2. That energy naturally tends to degrade from a state of highly concentrated energy to a state of disparate energy. Absent the intentional introduction of energy to convert a less concentrated form to a more concentrated form (IE. refining crude oil into high octane fuel – requiring large amounts of energy to accomplish). The most disparate energy form is heat.
Energy that is in motion, is more concentrated. Energy that is in electro-magnetic fields is more concentrated.
The design of energy use optimally, then strongly considers matching the form of the energy to its use. For example, using electricity for electronics or motion makes far more sense than using it for heat.
And, as you said, using exhaust heat from one application for use in another, makes excellent design sense.
Or, using high octane fuel primarily to generate exhaust heat and secondarily to generate motion, doesn't make much sense at all, "if everyone did it".
For what its worth,
How could the Dalton president not mention the elephant in the room of our ODD energy use in this country?
Should he have? If I were to apply a litmus test to every valedictory speech, I'd have to assume that that would appear in 60%.
And, if it didn't, that that would be evidence that our academic system is corrupt. (No, that doesn't prove that.)
"How could the Dalton president not mention the elephant in the room of our ODD energy use in this country?"
I found the argument odd. Everyone of us knows what these kind of celebatory events look like.
But I don't think, Phil wants to be a leader –would any woodgather want to be?–but he definitively wants to be able to write about what is on his mind. Who made this fast shortcut? Glenn Condell?
As our dear SoG/Bill who lately enters into dialogue with himself, missed to attribute the "yellow star" correctly. Is this since he wondered, if it was a statement vacillating slightly between a joke and cynicism considering the source?
******************************************
I prefer not to go into physics, everybody told me to study it, but since my father wanted it too and I had big problems with him at the time, I didn't. My best teachers–with one female exception, who didn't understand the magic of rules and numbers, she was lost in the wilderness without the little booklets with the solutions–were math and physics teachers. … My father suggested electronics and he was right. …
"So, if anybody actually can list a few positive Palestinian contributions to the world – ever – in the history of the Palestinian people, drop me a line."
Gideon, I assume you think that just being a member of a society that has contributed a lot entitles you to equal credit.
But how does that work when your sole contribution to the world appears to be spitting bile on message boards?
Your point is excellent Polly. But strange, he seems to have some kind of jester's license for me, and I was just wondering, why that is.
Fred Hiatt's hope for America.
'So, if anybody actually can list a few positive Palestinian contributions to the world – ever – in the history of the Palestinian people, drop me a line.'
How many 'contributions' can the Inuit claim? Or the Aranda? Or the tribes of the Amazon? Does this lack consign them to subhuman status in your stunted world view?
Hmmm.. let's see now, which tribe can claim the greatest number of 'contributions'? Well blow me down! It's those good old Jews! Who'd a thunk it? What champs they are eh? First among eq… well, first anyway!
How many concertos were composed in Belsen by the way? People can't achieve if you're standing on their throat. Anyway, not everyone views the world thru this insane 'mine's bigger' mentality 24/7. Your little obsession tells us more about you than 'the Palestinians'.
God you must be embarrassing for decent Jews, just as the jihad-heads are for the Muslims. Some of us hate both of you, the ethno-religious extremities that are endangering our children.
And no two tribes on earth are more closely related genetically than Arabs and Jews. Jeez, that little factlet must stick in your craw, particularly as you appear to approach the rest of the world thru the prism of race. Both descend from the Bedouin too, what a hoot!
'But I don't think, Phil wants to be a leader –would any woodgather want to be?–but he definitively wants to be able to write about what is on his mind. Who made this fast shortcut? Glenn Condell?'
Hi Leander – to me, it matters not whether Phil wants to be a leader or feels he is one or isn't – they just are or they're not. Circumstances, time and place etc, may contribute, but generally such people feel a need to express themselves on an issue, rather than a desire or a want.
Moral and intellectual leaders like Orwell have 'the power of facing unpleasant facts'. Most of us take time to process major, world-view altering data, especially if it conflicts with or challenges long held and cherished beliefs or 'memes'. W and M are leaders too, and so is Jimmy Carter. They made the crucial connections early, got out ahead of the pack and therefore led it, whether that was intended or not.
I don't agree with everything Phil writes but I can sense a big heart ticking away under the big brain, and he is writing things others either don't have the balls to write, or they simply haven't yet reached the same stage of understanding. See Slater, Goldberg, Klein et al. On top of this he has patience (viz DickWit) and optimism in spades. Not an easy ask, under the circumstances.
If he was 20 years younger and a bit more female, I'd propose to him.
Each successive outrage in recent US history has had it's tribunes at the center – Conason/Lyons during the Clintonhunt (pace Phil's contra view, for which he has far more first-hand experience than me); Atrios/Kos during the 911 fallout; Raimondo ever since, with his skilful blending of antiwar perspectives across political boundaries, emphasising the bipartisan nature of the War Party. The Lobby issue with Iran looming is the big kahuna right now and Phil is smack bang in the guts of it.
It's good to be in one of the sidecars for such a ride.
Well its like this Glenn. Some people split the atom and cure polio. Some people kick a kick out of beheadings and honor killings.
On the evidence of your contributions here, you're more likely to be violent than split an atom or cure polio.
I don't suffer from the racism that hobbles you, but I must admit to a feeling of disgust knowing I'm of the same species.
That's an amzing statement Glenn. that your not a racist. Personally I always believed in the adage "if the kaffiyeh/swastika fits……….
Comments on this entry are closed.