Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Jihadin wrote: Social networking devices...twitter on cell phones...not much of the interenet. Slice of the world is here on Dakka. Besides americans and europeans living in the ME have you seen anyone else post here that was actually from/in the ME?
I'd assume Space Marines don't play all that well in Gaza. Tabletop wargaming is largely the pursuit of pasty white gentlemen.
I dunno. I didn't get the impression that 'net access was all that hard to come by when I was in that neck of the woods.
SYDNEY – Riot police clashed with about 200 protesters at the U.S. Consulate in Sydney on Saturday as demonstrations against an anti-Islam film produced in the United States spread to Australia.
Ten Network television news showed a policeman knocked unconscious as the mostly male crowd hurled bottles and other missiles. Many of the protesters were wearing Muslim dress.
Police used pepper spray against the protesters, who chanted "Obama, Obama, we love Osama" and waved placards saying "Behead all those who insult the Prophet."
A total of six police officers were injured, including two who were taken to a hospital. Two protesters were treated for police dog bites and 17 others for the effects of pepper spray, police said in a statement. There were no details of their condition.
Eight people were arrested on charges including assaulting police and resisting arrest.
Police said they were unsure who organized the protest.
"There was little or no organization or control of what they were doing, and their actions were disgraceful," police Superintendent Mark Walton said in a statement.
Prime Minister Julian Gillard said the protest was unacceptable.
"Violent protest is never acceptable — not today, not ever," she said in a statement.
U.S. diplomatic posts around the world have been targeted in recent days by protests against the film "Innocence of Muslims," which ridicules the Prophet Muhammad.
Continues to spread
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Mannahnin wrote: Republican politicians certainly came out and condemned The Last Temptation of Christ as a way to score political points. Censorship was discussed as a possible legitimate response to it.
I don't recall anyone shooting rocket launchers at anyone else over The Last Temptation of Christ.
Google will not remove the YouTube video that has been cited as the spark for demonstrations raging across the Middle East and North Africa, the company announced Friday.
The decision comes following a White House request for the trailer for ‘Innocence of Muslims’ to be reviewed under the company’s policies.
The Obama administration was not explicitly asking YouTube to remove the film, but to check if it meets their standards.
"The White House asked YouTube to review the video to see if it was in compliance with their terms of use," Press Secretary Jay Carney said.
The company determined that the video was within guidelines.
"We work hard to create a community everyone can enjoy and which also enables people to express different opinions," a Google spokeswoman said. "This can be a challenge because what's OK in one country can be offensive elsewhere. This video -- which is widely available on the Web -- is clearly within our guidelines and so will stay on YouTube. However, we've restricted access to it in countries where it is illegal such as India and Indonesia as well as in Libya and Egypt given the very sensitive situations in these two countries."
The trailer for "Innocence of Muslims" has been used as a rallying cry by those attacking U.S. embassies and consulates around the world. Several top lawmakers, though, have questioned whether the film -- in the case of the deadly attack on the consulate in Libya -- was used as a cover to execute a pre-planned attack on American officials.
Critics have accused the Obama administration of putting too much focus on the film itself, and faulted the administration for continuing to condemn it.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in a ceremony Friday marking the return of the remains of the four Americans killed, again described that video as "senseless" and "unacceptable." But she also called on leaders in those countries to stop the violence.
"The people of Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Tunisia did not trade the tyranny of a dictator for the tyranny of a mob. Reasonable people and responsible leaders in these countries need to do everything they can to restore security and hold accountable those behind these violent acts," she said.
Meanwhile, The Associated Press reports that federal probation officials are investigating the California filmmaker linked to the video. He had previously been convicted of financial crimes.
I agree. To much effort by the Obama Admin on this video keep bringing the video to the forefront.
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Mannahnin wrote: Republican politicians certainly came out and condemned The Last Temptation of Christ as a way to score political points. Censorship was discussed as a possible legitimate response to it.
I don't recall anyone shooting rocket launchers at anyone else over The Last Temptation of Christ.
So it' is only violence, injury, and property damage related to a film release if it is in Egypt or Libya, isn't in the US, and involves Rocket Launchers?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/15 16:10:50
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
Still trying to work out why the German embassy got attacked!!
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Coming in the middle of the American campaign season and timed to coincide with eleventh anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, the violence now shaking the Middle East has inevitably turned into a US domestic issue. I’ll write about that as the situation unfolds, but at the moment it seems most important to think about what is happening over there — and then to think about what this might mean for US policy or politics.
This is not a subject I can write about dispassionately. Many of the places now appearing in the headlines are places I’ve been: from the consulate in Chennai, where I attended an iftar event with a group of American diplomats and some leaders from the Islamic community in that storied and beautiful city last month to embassies in Cairo, Khartoum, Tunis and elsewhere that I’ve visited over the years. Many of the diplomats there are people I know, and in all these places I’ve gotten to know religious, intellectual and cultural figures and had the chance to talk to students and others about their concerns. Violence that takes place somewhere when you know people on both sides of the barricades is always painful to think about.
With images on TV of smoke billowing from US embassies and angry crowds assembled outside, more than ever, I am grateful all the time for the service of the brave people who voluntarily represent the United States in places where at any moment their lives can come under grave threat.
If Americans are going to understand what’s going on and process it effectively, the first thing we’ve got to realize is that this isn’t all about us. The riots in Cairo are basically part of a local power struggle. Radical Salafists are in a power struggle with the Muslim Brotherhood; attacking the US embassy forces President Morsi (as the radical strategists presumably expected) to side with the US, however slowly or reluctantly. That’s a win for the radicals, who want to tar the Muslim Brotherhood as soft appeasers who side with the Americans against their own outraged people.
Striking at the embassy pushes Egyptian politics in a more radical direction short term, and over the medium term it weakens the Muslim Brotherhood and strengthens the more radical groups. After these last attacks, you are not going to see many tourists or foreign investors traipsing to Egypt anytime soon. The already struggling Egyptian economy has taken a hit that will cut employment. That’s going to hurt, and it’s going to reduce the popularity of the government, much to the benefit of the radicals who hope to replace it.
In many other places, from the West Bank and Gaza to Yemen and Tunisia, the protest movements are also more important for what they mean in local politics than about global policy. Radical movements and imams who work with them seized eagerly on the Youtube film to generate popular outrage and use mob anger to make a public statement. Moderates who speak against violence or try to cool matters look like American puppets; this is the kind of issue the radicals love, and we can expect them to milk it for all it is worth.
It’s hard at this point to assess how much of this was at least quasi-spontaneous public reaction and how much reactions were stimulated and even shaped by organized radical groups. In Cairo, there seems to have been a mix of angry street protesters demonstrating more or less at random and organized activists with a much more definite agenda, but we will not really know the answers for some time — if ever. However, not all that many Middle Eastern Muslims are in the habit of trolling Youtube for blasphemous videos. That the protests came when they did and that in at least two cases (Egypt and Libya) well organized cadres used those protests to make more dramatic actions strongly suggests that something more than simple spontaneous outrage was at work.
Libya looks even more like a planned operation. There, radicals apparently allied to Al-Qaeda in some vague way and possibly cooperating with Qaddafi loyalists made what appears at this point to be a well planned, coordinated military strike against the consulate in Benghazi. Here the timing seemed clearly less about the film than about the 9/11 anniversary, and it looks more like a message from hard core radicals rather than explosion of popular rage.
Again, we will know more as the smoke clears and at this point we are talking about possibilities rather than conclusions, but ruling out some kind of planning in at least some of the incidents on the basis of what we now see is naive.
In any case, the biggest worry now may not be further attacks on US embassies and consulates in the region; security is very tight at those facilities now and unless something very unusual happens, crowds may gather outside the walls, but perimeters will not be breached. There are no guarantees, but the US has been thinking hard about these issues since well before 9/11.
The biggest bomb in the region right now, and let us hope and pray that it doesn’t go off, involves the relations between Coptic Christians and Islamic radicals (and the mobs they can command) in Egypt. The news is only slowly getting to Egypt that the film — one of the stupidest pieces of hack work I myself have seen — was made by a Coptic Christian in the US. When and if the film is actually viewed in its 14 minutes of amateurism and low production values, its intention to vent the rage and frustration some Copts feel about their treatment in Egypt will be clear. It is an angry, embittered and perhaps not very spiritual Copt’s view of the way Islam treats his community — and a cry of anger and frustration.
This is the kind of provocation — even though by a marginal member of the community and disavowed by the leaders — that can light firestorms of communal violence and cleansing. That is what Egypt must watch out for right now, and if you don’t like watching crowds marching against the US embassy, imagine what could happen if angry mobs with clubs, axes and guns head into the Christian neighborhoods of Cairo.
Episodes of mass violence and killing of religious minorities throughout the former territories of the Ottoman Empire — from the Danube to the Euphrates and the Nile — have been all too common in the last 150 years. Sometimes the victims have been Muslims (most recently in Srebenica but between 1850 and the aftermath of World War One there were plenty of expulsions and massacres of Muslims as Ottoman power retreated from Europe); on an even larger scale in the modern Middle East they have been Christians and, sometimes, Jews and adherents to variant forms of Islam. If anybody wants to think about worst case scenarios in Egypt, this is the one to look at. Armenians, Chaldean Christians, most recently the Christians in Iraq: it has happened before and though one very much wants to discount the possibility, things like this could well happen again.
The person who comes out of all this looking smartest is Samuel Huntington. His book on the “clash of civilizations” was widely and unfairly trashed as predicting an inevitable conflict between Islam and the west, and he was also accused of ‘demonizing’ Islam. That’s not what I get from his book. As I understand it, Huntington’s core thesis was that while good relations between countries and people with roots in different civilizations are possible and ought to be promoted, civilizational fault lines often lead to misunderstandings and tensions that can (not must, but can) lead to violence and when conflicts do occur, civilizational differences can make those conflicts worse.
The last few days are a textbook example of the forces he warned about.
The Islamic value — and it a worthy one on its own terms and would certainly have been understandable to our western predecessors who punished blasphemy very severely — of prohibiting insults to the Prophet of Islam clashes directly with the modern western value of free expression. To the western eye (and it’s a perspective I share), a murderous riot in the name of a religion is a worse sin and deeper, uglier form of blasphemy than any film could ever hope to be. To kill someone created in the image of God because you don’t like the way God or one of his servants has been depicted in an artistic performance strikes westerners as an obscene perversion of religion — something that only a hate-filled fanatic or an ignorant fool could do.
When acts like this take place all over the Islamic world, the message to many non-Muslims is that the Islamophobes are right: Islam as a religion promotes hatred, bigotry and ignorance. This will be held by many people to be a revelation of the “true” face of a violent religion. Or, alternatively, some will say that while Islam might be a good enough religion taken alone, Middle Easterners are savage and ignorant haters who cannot be trusted and whose culture (rather than their religion) is one that blends intemperance and stupidity into an ugly stew of hate.
At Via Meadia we don’t think either Islam or Middle Eastern culture can be so simply categorized; that’s not my point. My point is that the gap between Muslims and non-Muslims has grown wider; the reaction of the western world and the Islamic world to these recent events drives us farther apart. The gulf of suspicion between the worlds has grown deeper. Europeans will worry more and be less welcoming to Muslim immigrants. Many Americans will draw closer to Israel, be more concerned about any signs of increase in the US Islamic population and have a harder time trusting the Muslims in our midst.
Those reactions in turn will make Muslims in Europe, North America and the Islamic-majority parts of the world feel more suspicious, more threatened and more alienated.
These are some of the chains of causation Huntington was thinking of when he warned that the world faced the possibility for this kind of clash. The Obama administration has worked very hard to reduce the chance of this kind of division, but it seems clear at this point that a few hours can undermine the efforts of many years.
Unfortunately, Islamic radicals are deliberately hoping to promote a clash of civilizations in the belief that a climate of polarization will strengthen their political power in the world of Islam. Attacking the embassy in Cairo is an effort to push Egyptian opinion in a more radical direction, but the radicals hope that this is part of a larger push that will bring them to power across the Islamic world. Like Boko Haram in Nigeria, which hopes to provoke a religious war with the Christians partly in order to achieve power in the Muslim North, radicals use the prospect of a clash of civilizations to further their own cause throughout the troubled Islamic world.
The US and more generally the west (including Russia, so perhaps I should say the “Christian world” instead) has tried several approaches to this situation and so far we haven’t been happy with the results. Confrontation, reconciliation, cooperation: there are good arguments to be made for them all, but in practice none of them seem to make the problem go away.
I’ll return to this topic in the next few days, but one thing should be absolutely clear to Americans. Since 9/11, we’ve had two presidents who attempted to deal with our problems in the Middle East. Both presidents notched up some achievements — but neither president got the job done.
The gap between American opinion and opinion in much of the Islamic world is as wide now as it was when President Obama flew to Cairo; things are not getting better.
Interesting article. Has anybody noticed that over the years, the middle east has shifted from Arab nationalism to radical islam? The cold war obviously changed a lot, but anybody on this site with an informed view on this (or anybody else for that matter) care to comment? From a political studies point of view it's quite a fascinating subject.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
A German newspaper later reported that the protesters were agitated about "pictures of Mohammed being ridiculed and defiled in Germany". One of our sixteen states has a small fringe right-wing party that had some posters for a short period of time featuring something that could be seen like that, I guess. Sooo - a bit like the US case. Small group of dumb xenophobic idiots doing their thing and the whole country gets blamed.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/15 17:49:53
Wonder if anyone in congress is toying with the idea to benchmark those countries
edit
I think some are close to that idea
Washington Democrats and Republicans are questioning U.S. taxpayer aid to the Middle East amid anti-American riots in the region and the fatal attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
One of the first attacks occurred Wednesday at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, a country that has received $1.6 billion in each of the past four years. Egypt has since 1979 been the second-largest recipient of U.S. aid, following Israel. Roughly $1.3 billion of that annual aid goes to Egypt’s military, according to Congressional Research Service.
Four Americans were killed Wednesday in the Benghazi attack, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.
Like Egypt, Libya was part of the political uprising that started in late 2010 known as Arab Spring in which residents in the Middle East brought down long-standing dictatorships. However, residents have struggled in the aftermath to bring democracy and political stability to the region.
The U.S. has since the start of the uprisings in Libya in early 2011 given that country more than $200 million -- including $89 million in humanitarian assistance and $25 million from the Defense Department, according to Congressional Research Service.
Several Capitol Hill Republicans have since the recent anti-American attacks started calling for either a stop to such aid or at least tighter restrictions, despite the Obama administration saying that cutting off support would not resolve the “complicated” Middle East situation.
“The American people are tired of this,” Sen. Rand Paul said Thursday on the Senate floor. “Our Treasury is bare. There is a multitude of reasons why we should not continue to send good money after bad.”
Paul, R-Ky., said such action should be taken in Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Pakistan. And he has proposed an amendment that would require those countries to help in the investigations of the attacks on U.S. embassies in Yemen and Egypt and the consulate in Benghazi.
Yemen received $64 million this year, compared to $134 million last year, according to Congressional Research Service.
“Not one penny more for Libya or Egypt or Pakistan until they act as our allies,” Paul continued. "Some say we have to keep sending it. Fine, let’s send it when they act as our allies. Let’s send it when they start behaving as civilized nations and come to their senses.”
Paul’s remarks follow Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying the attack was the work of “a small and savage group – not the people or government of Libya.”
She also acknowledged that Americans were likely asking: “How could this happen in a country we helped liberate, in a city we helped save from destruction? This question reflects just how complicated and, at times, how confounding the world can be.”
Still, some House Republicans had a point of view earlier this week similar to Ryan’s, suggesting that they would vote Thursday against the continuing resolution to keep the government running, in an attempt to cut off aid to Egypt and Libya.
“It would show a tremendous amount of leadership from this administration, in light of the recent developments, if the president were to come back and demand that the amount of money that is in the [continuing resolution] for Libya and Egypt be stripped,” said Louisiana GOP Rep. Jeff Landry, according to The Hill Newspaper. “That would be tremendous leadership.”
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/15 17:50:31
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Jihadin wrote: Wonder if anyone in congress is toying with the idea to benchmark those countries
edit
I think some are close to that idea
Spoiler:
Washington Democrats and Republicans are questioning U.S. taxpayer aid to the Middle East amid anti-American riots in the region and the fatal attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
One of the first attacks occurred Wednesday at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, a country that has received $1.6 billion in each of the past four years. Egypt has since 1979 been the second-largest recipient of U.S. aid, following Israel. Roughly $1.3 billion of that annual aid goes to Egypt’s military, according to Congressional Research Service.
Four Americans were killed Wednesday in the Benghazi attack, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.
Like Egypt, Libya was part of the political uprising that started in late 2010 known as Arab Spring in which residents in the Middle East brought down long-standing dictatorships. However, residents have struggled in the aftermath to bring democracy and political stability to the region.
The U.S. has since the start of the uprisings in Libya in early 2011 given that country more than $200 million -- including $89 million in humanitarian assistance and $25 million from the Defense Department, according to Congressional Research Service.
Several Capitol Hill Republicans have since the recent anti-American attacks started calling for either a stop to such aid or at least tighter restrictions, despite the Obama administration saying that cutting off support would not resolve the “complicated” Middle East situation.
“The American people are tired of this,” Sen. Rand Paul said Thursday on the Senate floor. “Our Treasury is bare. There is a multitude of reasons why we should not continue to send good money after bad.”
Paul, R-Ky., said such action should be taken in Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Pakistan. And he has proposed an amendment that would require those countries to help in the investigations of the attacks on U.S. embassies in Yemen and Egypt and the consulate in Benghazi.
Yemen received $64 million this year, compared to $134 million last year, according to Congressional Research Service.
“Not one penny more for Libya or Egypt or Pakistan until they act as our allies,” Paul continued. "Some say we have to keep sending it. Fine, let’s send it when they act as our allies. Let’s send it when they start behaving as civilized nations and come to their senses.”
Paul’s remarks follow Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying the attack was the work of “a small and savage group – not the people or government of Libya.”
She also acknowledged that Americans were likely asking: “How could this happen in a country we helped liberate, in a city we helped save from destruction? This question reflects just how complicated and, at times, how confounding the world can be.”
Still, some House Republicans had a point of view earlier this week similar to Ryan’s, suggesting that they would vote Thursday against the continuing resolution to keep the government running, in an attempt to cut off aid to Egypt and Libya.
“It would show a tremendous amount of leadership from this administration, in light of the recent developments, if the president were to come back and demand that the amount of money that is in the [continuing resolution] for Libya and Egypt be stripped,” said Louisiana GOP Rep. Jeff Landry, according to The Hill Newspaper. “That would be tremendous leadership.”
So it' is only violence, injury, and property damage related to a film release if it is in Egypt or Libya, isn't in the US, and involves Rocket Launchers?
Essentially, yes.
Drink deeply and lustily from the foamy draught of evil.
W: 1.756 Quadrillion L: 0 D: 2
Haters gon' hate.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: Just sayin', what happens when one of those emitters get hit by an RPG? I'd assume they stop working, yes?
Sure, that's what was the initial concerns... but they're built to withstand an RPJ tho (if that's even possible?)
The big advantage of these things are the range... so, it may not be practical you emplace these things at the embassy. But, on a military installation? Yeah, it'll work.
Working as an analyst in 81-83, helped to prepare more than few PDBs for Reagan. I’ve been writing about this on my site and other places saying that there was no way they didn’t know something, I just found it hard to believe that “no credible threat” existed for this anniversary of 9/11. There’s been threats on every other anniversary. First when they say “credible” it doesn’t mean, nothing is out there. The term is archaic. First intel is gathered and then analyzed, (what we did), the product is then prepared for the consumers, – the President, VP, etc. Of course the PDB is a specialized document, a summary. But when intel is “credible” in the day it meant you could source it to a specific person, group, eyes on, etc. Today that woudn’t be the case. Threats are delivered via social media and not always traceable to a hard source. Yet they cannot be simply ignored. Now we learn via Fox that there were indeed relatable incidents leading up to the attack.
I call tell you that Intel types are pissed right now, they warned and it wasn’t heeded. I fully expect some leaks to come forward in the coming weeks.
Amb. Stevens was much loved and people are not going to let administration spin sweep his unnecessary death under the rug.
There is only one thing wrong with that idea.
It´s non lethal!
Or at least it needs a big red button where it says "lethal setting" on in case those apes go ahead and murder embassy personel again in the future and considering the incredible IQ levels of those scum it´s hardly a matter of if but when.
You mean like "set phaser from stun to kill"?
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2012/09/15 21:45:31
Kanluwen wrote: Please stop reposting blogs as if they're some sort of reputable source.
The fact that the blogger suggests the term "credible" is an archaic term shows that there is no value, whatsoever, in reading his opinions.
You didn't even read all of it... so... cheers.
Uhhuh.
The individual whose blog you reposted uses his supposed credibility as an analyst under the Reagan administration to suggest that there is "no way" that the current administration was lax on their intelligence gathering and analysis.
The man even then says that "we learned via Fox that there were indeed relatable incidents leading up to the attack".
So where did we learn that? When did we learn it? I haven't seen anything on any major reputable media outlets, of which I most certainly do not consider Fox fitting that criteria.
The individual whose blog you reposted uses his supposed credibility as an analyst under the Reagan administration to suggest that there is "no way" that the current administration was lax on their intelligence gathering and analysis.
The man even then says that "we learned via Fox that there were indeed relatable incidents leading up to the attack".
So where did we learn that? When did we learn it? I haven't seen anything on any major reputable media outlets, of which I most certainly do not consider Fox fitting that criteria.
Reaally... you don't think it's strange that they're retroactively remove the original statement?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/15 22:18:44
First of all, the tagline of the blog in question?
It's worrying that you would choose a site which uses this as the tagline:
Dad always said, "Speak with authority - people will assume you know what you're talking about, even if you don't." I assume he knew what he was talking about.
Secondly, it's very likely that the piece in question was removed because of the fact that they're trying to depoliticize what happened.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/09/15 22:30:16
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
