Bhutto Returns To Pakistan: Will She Last?

Benazir Bhutto triumphantly returns to Pakistan, only to have bombs exploding near her parade route. She should count herself lucky. She’s getting more auspicious treatment, relatively speaking, then her rival, Nawaz Sharif, who was treated more like a leper than a former prime minister.

In addition, the corruption charges have been dismissed—for now—against Bhutto and her greedy, corrupt husband. She will compete in parliamentary election in a few months. And with the voting rigged in her favor, no doubt with Musharraf’s help (he’s getting quite good at this), she will become Prime Minister for the third time.

Once in office, she’ll promptly renege on her deal with Musharraf and try to dismiss him as President. In the process, she will alienate everyone from the MMA to the MQM. Karachi will become a war zone—yet again. It will all be a big mess. And to clean it all up, she’ll make some Faustian bargain with the army in order to stay in power. Instead there will be a coup. Martial law will be declared. The army, just sick of Bhutto’s many shenanigans, will reinstate corruption charges against her and either throw her in jail, or send her into exile for the third and, hopefully, last time.

Remember a leopard never, ever changes his (or her) spots. It’s an axiom no one seems to heed, especially in Pakistan.

Jorja Fox Leaves CSI: Nobody Cares

Jorja Fox, who plays Sara Sidle on CSI, is leaving the crime drama to—what else—pursue other opportunities. Will she be missed?

No one will even notice, or care.

For the most part, many of the actors on CSI, including William Petersen, who plays Gil Grissom, are, in my opinion, mediocrities and can easily be replaced. Why? Because the show is not about them. The triumph of CSI is its writing, cinematography, and directing. Finally, it’s about the process. Yes, the process. It’s the star of the show.

If CSI can be compared to one show it’s Law & Order, which has seen its cast replaced at least once, and perhaps twice or even thrice, yet it endures because the process is front and center, not personalities.

Still unconvinced? Back in 2004, Jorja Fox and her co-star George Eads, who plays the insufferable prick Nick Stokes, decided to renege on their contracts and hold-out for more money, thinking, perhaps, the producers would quickly relent. After all, the show cannot go on without them, right? And how did the producers respond? They promptly fired Eads and Fox, and did so without any hesitation. Eads and Fox, cutting their losses, sheepishly returned to the fold a few days later.

ADDENDUM: I don't know where I read this, but it seems Jorja Fox left CSI over money. She was making a sweet $100K per episode. That works out to $2.2 million over a 22-episode season, plus residuals from syndication, DVD and assorted show-related products.

The Atlantic: 150 Years Old

The Atlantic Monthly is celebrating its 150th anniversary this year. To mark the honor, the magazine is publishing an issue discussing the "Future of the American Idea". Atlantic is one of my favorite magazines—the only print magazine I subscribe to, in fact— and is filled with great writing by equally great writers. The list of contributors is a virtual who’s who of American letters. And since it’s a monthly, I have time to read it from cover-to-cover in relative peace and without the fear of feeling rushed. Can’t do that with a weekly magazine.

As a subscriber, I also have access to Atlantic’s vast archives where I can reread some of my favorite articles and discover new talented writers. Robert Kaplan is one of my favorite writers, and Christopher Hitchens’ book reviews are a joy to read. It was in the Atlantic the world was introduced to A.Q. Khan, father of Pakistan’s nuclear bomb and all around villain.

If you were stuck on a desert island and could take with you one magazine—the Atlantic should be it.

Cute But Dangerous

A few years ago, on a trip to the Grand Canyon, I encountered wild squirrels who, after years of human contact, have acquired a taste for junk food. This fellow, for example, craves Cheetos and soda.



Unlike urban squirrels, who are often shy, these squirrels are brazen and in your face.

Charlie Wilson's War

The movie, Charlie Wilson's War, looks like a good flick. Om Puri playing the sinister President Zia-ul-Haq should be a special treat. Check out the trailer.

The book, which the movie is based on, is quite a good read as well.

It will be interesting to see what Pakistan thinks of the movie since it's mostly an unflattering account of its sordid involvement in Afghanistan, including funding and arming some rather unsavory characters, many of whom are still around today, causing death, destruction and mayhem.

The Rise Of Dubai

60 Minutes has an interesting two-part segment (here and here) on the bustling, booming city of Dubai, the Singapore/Hong Kong/London/New York of the Middle East, including an interview with Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, Dubai’s visionary ruler.

Dubai is definitely a city on the move. Anywhere you go, small as the emirate kingdom is, the desert gives way to construction site after construction site, including one that will house the world’s tallest building. Artificial islands shaped like palm trees have been built. A new international airport is on the way, which will be the hub for Emirates, arguably the most wildly successful airline in the world.

Dubai is probably the most Westernized of Middle Eastern cities, with thousands of Western expatriates working and living there, joining locals in taking advantage of the city’s many beaches and thriving nightlife. Dubai is definitely not Saudi Arabia! Because of this, thousands of migrants (25,000 a month) flock to Dubai because there’s money to be had and fortunes waiting to be claimed.

But it’s also a city built on inexpensive labor. Without the contribution of thousands of hard working, often poorly paid migrants, mostly from South Asia, Dubai would be nothing more than a sleepy backwater. While anti-capitalists might crow about this, the reality is that many of these migrants are far better off working in Dubai than being mired in poverty in their home countries.

Dubai is modern and sophisticated in every sense except in politics. Dubai is still an autocracy ruled with an iron fist by a mostly benign ruler, who also has a stake in every project under the sun. Still some of the Sheik’s critics were reticent in their comments about him. Nobody seems to care, though, because things are so good.

Affirmative Action And Clarence Thomas

Nice article by James Kirchick on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas that summarizes my feelings on the matter: the vicious attacks on Clarence Thomas by vindictive liberals were hypocritical at best, and racist at worst.

How can you support a policy of racial preferences and then attack one of its supposed beneficiaries as undeserving? This, ultimately, is the intrinsic hypocrisy of the Thomas bashers. They allege that he's not competent and that the only reason he became a Supreme Court justice was because he's black. And in so doing, they level the exact same arguments against Thomas that they castigate conservatives for making about affirmative action itself. But let's face facts: A program that gives people with a certain skin color an advantage will invariably reward some who would otherwise not qualify.

Exactly. It seems the only “good” affirmative action hires, according to liberals, are those who not only meet the racial requirements, but ideological ones as well—preferably a fellow liberal. But if you’re a minority and, say, a conservative, you automatically become “unqualified” or “incompetent.” This is the type of discrimination that is practiced by liberals, but it’s not called that, of course, because there’s this nutty belief out there that liberals do not discriminate. They do.

Empire State Building Aglow In Islamic Green

This story is causing such a tizzy among wingnuts that it has them seeing green:

New York's iconic Empire State Building is to be lit up green from Friday in honor of the Muslim holiday of Eid, the biggest festival in the Muslim calendar marking the end of Ramadan, officials said.

"This is the first time that the Empire State Building will be illuminated for Eid, and the lighting will become an annual event in the same tradition of the yearly lightings for Christmas and Hannukah," according to a statement.

Michelle Malkin is calling it an act of dhimmitude. Huh? I don’t see it as an act of anything except as an acknowledgement by the United States that Muslims are an integral part of this country. It’s a sign of tolerance and respect, nothing more.

The Empire State Building, iconic as it may be, is privately-owned, so its owners are allowed to celebrate whatever holidays they wish. They already celebrate Christmas and Hannukah (and will continue to do so), so what’s wrong with celebrating Eid, one of the holiest days for Muslims?

Conservatives like Malkin seem to live in some parallel universe, where they can’t tell the difference between a radical and a moderate Muslim, so why not tar and feather the whole lot of them just to be on the safe side. And if you think about it, it’s not surprising. After all, Malkin wrote a very despicable book justifying internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II, so to better, in my opinion, justify interning Muslims in the war against terror today.

Che: A Marketing Success Story

Leftists the world over are celebrating the death of Marxist revolutionary, Ernesto Che Guevara, who died in Bolivia forty-years ago doing what he did best-- overthrowing governments and committing acts of senseless violence. He was a hardline communist, through and through, who dedicated himself to spreading revolution throughout the world; and who fanatically believed that the only way to deal with opposition, in whatever its forms, was to liquidate them. This is why liberals like Paul Berman are dismayed by all the hero worship Che receives. He writes:

The cult of Ernesto Che Guevara is an episode in the moral callousness of our time. Che was a totalitarian. He achieved nothing but disaster. Many of the early leaders of the Cuban Revolution favored a democratic or democratic-socialist direction for the new Cuba. But Che was a mainstay of the hardline pro-Soviet faction, and his faction won. Che presided over the Cuban Revolution's first firing squads. He founded Cuba's "labor camp" system—the system that was eventually employed to incarcerate gays, dissidents, and AIDS victims.

Yet Che still cuts a romantic figure: handsome and brimming with charisma. These days he's treated more like a celebrity, or a rock star, than a political figure. It helps that he's also a marketing darling, his iconic image used to peddle everything from t-shirts to key chains. Communism has been discredited, for the most part, but the cult of Che still thrives.

DVDJournal.com: Gone But Not Forgotten

I had no idea DVDJournal.com stopped publishing. What a loss! It was my favorite web site for all things DVD—from their insightful, penetrating reviews, news, and new DVD releases and announcements.

I started reading them years ago, soon after I bought my first DVD player, and have kept up with them on-and-off since. They use to publish five times a week, and then reduced to two—with a review of a new DVD release on Mondays, and on Tuesdays a list of new releases and announcements. I didn’t have to go anywhere else for my DVD needs.

They published a farewell letter, of sorts, but it’s still unclear to me why they stopped—economics, lack of interest, moving on to other projects, etc? I wished they elaborated a little more. Nevertheless, they’ll be missed.

One Of Ahmadinejad's Admirers

From a laudatory letter in The Daily Star, a Bangladeshi professes his admiration for the Iranian president.

I am writing to you in regard to the recent visit by Dr. Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, to the United States. He was subsequently invited by Columbia University to deliver a speech to interested students. I am sure you are aware of the media frenzy this event generated in America. I have listened to his entire speech at Columbia University (http://www.president.ir/en/) and as many conscientious people would agree, I believe he did a great job.

Ahmadinejad’s speech was absurd. Honestly, how can anyone believe, while keeping a straight face, Ahmadinejad when he says there are no homosexuals in Iran, or the Holocaust didn’t happen; and not wince with his unflinching support of terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas, or calling for the destruction of Israel. That much of the Muslim world, including the letter writer, believes what Ahamdinejad peddles is disturbing but not surprising.

Malaysia: No More Bangladeshis

Malaysia has decided that 300,000 Bangladeshis are more than enough and will not take in any more. Of course, Malaysia doesn’t explain why it's doing this.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Radzi Sheikh Ahmad said there were now too many workers and agents from Bangladesh in Malaysia.He said the presence of such agents who used Malaysians as sub-agents and the huge amount of money involved "are not a healthy sign, it is not good for the country".

I know manpower export is a sleazy business, and the Home Minister’s reticence explain loads; yet Malaysia still needs workers, it’s just looking elsewhere to get them.

Mohd Radzi told reporters in Putrajaya that Malaysia could obtain workers from 10 other countries such as Indonesia, Thailand, Cambodia, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Nepal and Laos.

He said the government felt that it would do to rely on these countries for workers.

Why is Bangladesh being discriminated against? Is it their work ethic, are they dishonest, cheats, liars, etc? Considering how many Bangladeshis work overseas, this is an odd stance for Malaysia to take, not to mention an unfair one.

Bangladesh Army: Don't Overstay Your Welcome

In Bangladesh, the question on everybody’s mind is: when will the army return to the barracks, where they belong?

Army Chief General Moeen U Ahmed yesterday said the troops are working to help the government and will go back to their barracks the moment the government asks them to do so.

Translation: we’ll return to the barracks when we damn well please. It’s obvious who wears the pants in this relationship, and it’s not the caretaker government.

Let’s hope the military doesn't overstay its welcome. Sure, Bangladesh is less corrupt and electricity is more abundant, and things are good in general, but the army should remember that times of instability often follow times of prosperity. The Bangladesh Army should avoid Pakistan’s mistake and leave the running of government to civilians.

Shaming China On Burma

The thugs that rule Burma have opened fire on protesting Buddhist monks, who were demanding nothing more than democratic and economic reforms, killing many and injuring scores more. This is nothing new for the military junta, who have ruled through a barrel of a gun for years.

Burma has proven impervious to pressure of any kind to mend its ways, both domestically and internationally; hence they operate with impunity and arrogance and utter disregard for the welfare of its citizens. Burma does so with the tacit support of China, who, according to French journalists André Boucaud and Louis Boucaud, treat Burma like another province, where human rights plays second fiddle to exploiting Burma’s geography and abundant natural resources.

The main beneficiary of this double game is China, upon whose military and financial support Burma depends. Chinese participation in infrastructure construction has increased the penetration of Chinese products: the construction of major roads from Loije to Bhamo, and from Tengchong to Myitkyina, will improve access to the Irrawaddy river, which will soon be a major waterway for China. This could influence leases in the port of Rangoon. An opposition news agency even suggested that Burma could become China’s 24th province.

Unfortunately, nothing can be done without China’s help (their hold on Burma is that strong). And China’s involvement has been underreported by the media and ignored by much of the world, including the United Nations. The only way to make Burma change its ways, as I see it, is to publicly embarrass China for supporting such a vile regime. Burma recent actions are already making China a little nervous, and given China’s growing profile as an economic and military power, even the tiniest of problems are magnified ten-fold. By merely increasing the volume of protests we should get the desired effect: sending a firm signal to Beijing to do something about Burma.

We can only hope for the desired results.

And what should India’s position be on this issue? Idealistically, India should give support to the protestors and sharply criticize Burma for its undemocratic ways. This would’ve been the Nehurvian way. Realistically, India, with its economy growing at breakneck speed, can do or say little less they want to jeopardize a deal they recently signed with Burma to build a natural gas pipeline.

On the other hand, China is building intelligence and naval bases in Burma, one of a string that will eventually surround India, including the Pakistani port of Gwadar, that are designed to strategically strangle India. So a natural gas pipeline, like the one proposed with Iran (via Pakistan), could, down the road, pose more of a threat than a benefit.

UPDATE: The folks over at Sepia Mutiny have provided the answer: in accordance with its national interests, India will say nothing about Burma except to monitor the situation a little more closely. So realpolitik it is! Nothing morally wrong with protecting one’s national interests, of course, but it’s still a bitter pill to swallow.

Mahmoud Looked Like A Fool: That's A Good Thing

This article by Jesse Walker, editor of Reason magazine, gives, in my opinion, the best take on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s speech at Columbia University, which has the right-wingers in a tizzy. These paragraphs says it best:

But free speech is at issue, because this tempest gets to the heart of a key argument for the open marketplace of ideas: the idea that hearing what other people have to say and confronting their ideas is good, and that doing so makes us not weaker but stronger. "This event has nothing whatsoever to do with any rights of the speaker," Bollinger said as he introduced his guest, "but only with our rights to listen and speak. We do it for ourselves."

That is why the petty tyrant who spoke at Columbia emerged bruised instead of beaming. Because the people who posed questions were free to ask those questions, and because they were free to hear his answers. They had an enormous opportunity, and they made the most of it. Only a coward would see such an opening and fear catastrophe.

If Ahmadinejad’s goal was to score some political points, as many right-wingers are contending, he failed miserably. By the end of the speech, Ahmadinejad only made himself look like a fool. This happens when you espouse idiotic ideas, like the ones Ahmadinejad fervently believes in, and are not use to getting challenged by people or second-guessed by the media.

Columbia President Lee Bollinger got a lot of flack for inviting Ahmadinejad in the first place, but more than made up for it with his fervent attack on Ahmadinejad, including calling him a “cruel and petty dictator.” No, the genius of Bollinger is this: by inviting Ahmadinejad to Columbia, who, like all dictators, like their egos stroked (and often), Bollinger was able to deftly maneuver a rather shrewd and slippery character into the spotlight, forcing him to endure ridicule and a barrage of critical questions about his tyrannical regime. The stunned look on his face was priceless.

Honestly, I don’t know what Ahmadinejad was expecting when he accepted an invitation by Columbia to speak there. A fawning crowd, perhaps? A standing ovation? If he wanted that, he should either go home to Iran or speak at an anti-war rally sponsored by A.N.S.W.E.R.