A foray into the world of tech-reporting

A while back, I picked up a MXL 992 microphone on a whim after stumbling across a blowout sale at musicians friend. Been trying it out for odd things here and there… and thought I’d contribute to the greater web community by giving them some sample audio.

At any rate, I’m proudly up on Amazon.com as well.

I think I should just start a podcast… I have the gear… maybe Pris and I should do a debate format. What do you think?

The eery creep of sharia law…

I would be remiss if I did not post at least a few snippits of the amazing article over at CityJournal.  It is a wealth of history and analysis of the many ways in which the west is capitulating to radical islamists–particularly in various media outlets. Here are a few particularly relevant portions… a teaser if you will:

Or consider the riots that gripped immigrant suburbs in France in the autumn of 2005. These uprisings were largely assertions of Muslim authority over Muslim neighborhoods, and thus clearly jihadist in character. Yet weeks passed before many American press outlets mentioned them—and when they did, they de-emphasized the rioters’ Muslim identity (few cited the cries of “Allahu akbar,” for instance). Instead, they described the violence as an outburst of frustration over economic injustice

Last year, when “Undercover Mosque,” an unusually frank exposé on Britain’s Channel 4, showed “moderate” Muslim preachers calling for the beating of wives and daughters and the murder of gays and apostates, police leaped into action—reporting the station to the government communications authority, Ofcom, for stirring up racial hatred. (Ofcom, to its credit, rejected the complaint.) The police reaction, as James Forsyth noted in the Spectator, “revealed a mindset that views the exposure of a problem as more of a problem than the problem itself.”

So it goes in this upside-down, not-so-brave new media world: those who, if given the power, would subjugate infidels, oppress women, and execute apostates and homosexuals are “moderate” (a moderate, these days, apparently being anybody who doesn’t have explosives strapped to his body), while those who dare to call a spade a spade are “Islamophobes.”

How I got Iraq RIGHT

Slate.com has been running a number of articles by intellectuals once supportive of the Iraq war… who now admit (or were gently coerced by Slate) to admit they were wrong. In response, I thought I’d join Christopher Hitchens and come out with a post on why I got Iraq right… and why I still support it. “Why waste your time?“, you ask? Well, I was having dinner with a couple from Europe a few weeks (well, now months) back. Late in the evening, the conversation turned to international politics; U.S. military policy in Iraq came to the forefront of the conversation. I’m not out to make enemies, so after various prevarications, I concluded that although I thought the arguments for war were compelling, I couldn’t stand how expensive the war had become–taking a clearly indifferent middle ground. As I reflected on the conversation, it became clear that as time has passed and circumstances on the ground in Iraq have changed, so my need for more articulable set of policy positions.

In beginning this process, a broad view of the middle east is necessary. The Middle East, specifically Iraq (but by no means limited to Iraq) was (and would still be) in the process of implosion had we done nothing. It was inevitable that Iraq would have collapsed eventually. There was certainly ample indica of this, whether you looked at the chaos Saddam’s sons would have brought after their father’s death, the religious tensions we have unearthed in the absence of a repressive ruler, or simply the deterioration of the country’s infrastructure caused by years of sanctions and Saddam’s indifference toward his own people.

Continue reading