Back in my teens, when I considered myself to be in the forefront (adolescent version) of the anti-war movement, I have to confess that I thought it was all very cool. Very hip. We had the whole counter-culture thing in a neat package that involved fashion, hairstyles, music (and it was great music), poetry, art, theater, you name it. Oh and, of course, er, recreational substances. "We" were on the cutting edge of just about everything.
Except, of course, common sense and informed, rational thinking. As I grew up (it took a while) and tried to keep that edge sharp, the whole "peace and love" thing started to come into a different sort of focus. Unilateralism on that front started seeming less and less appropriate or realistic. Even, perhaps, counterproductive. But I was part of a generation that took the absolute correctness of it all pretty much for granted and was growing increasingly nostalgic for the days when it was more relevant. Among the generations following mine, a sort of envy started developing that they couldn't have been there and done that, too. And it started to worry me a little that the cool-ness and hip-ness of it all just seemed to keep growing the further away from reality the movement seemed to get.
Now it's all spun completely out of control. I don't recognize the furious, malicious, mendacious and utterly irrational face of today's "peace movement." In its intolerance, its conformity, its vicious hatred, its antisemitism and its fundamentalist holier-than-thou bombast, in its violence, it betrays just about every principle that the "peace movement" I knew was supposed to stand for. Take this item posted at Little Green Footballs today. Or this one. Or a hundred more over the past several weeks alone. Charles comments on the flagrant immaturity of these "protesters," and it's funny. That's exactly where I was going with this post before I wandered over to LGF for fodder.
Dennis Kucinich was on Hannity & Colmes last night droning his latest mantra on the necessity of impeaching the President. Something about it being illegal to threaten aggression against another country and so Bush must go for suggesting that this country might need to resort to force against Iran. (Kucinich doesn't seem too concerned about Iran's own threats of aggression against other countries, but that's another topic.) You can find some of his incoherent and legally confused ramblings on the subject here, including his assertion that "[t]here is no solid, direct evidence that Iran has the intention of attacking the United States or its allies" -- an assertion which has already been belied by events today. The seizure this morning by Iran of as many as 15 British sailors for allegedly trespassing in Iranian waters is nothing new, actually. A somewhat similar incident took place in 2004, but ended without injury or escalation. But this sort of activity on the part of Iran is actively encouraged by the likes of Kucinich and his kooky admirers. The man is a disgrace.
While I've been buried in deductions, credits and exemptions for the past two weeks, I've managed to fall blissfully behind on a number of stories that would have disturbed even the little sleep I've been getting. This one, in particular, was covered in all its gory details by Judith Weiss this morning, and I pretty much managed to get caught up on it. Do follow the links, especially this one to Wednesday's ZOA Middle East Report (you can also find the link on my sidebar over there ---->), in which Steve Feldman and Lori Lowenthal Marcus interview both Steven Erlanger and Richard Landes. It's a good show.
Meanwhile, in the good news department, it seems that Ahmadinejad's visa got lost somewhere in transit and he's canceled his speech before the UN tomorrow. Good. But we'll see what happens with that. The story keeps changing.
Shabbat Shalom.
