New York Times Op-Ed Page

I just read Roger Cohen’s new op-ed in the New York Times. Apparently, he spent New Years in Brazil (he had great things to say about it- like everybody who visits but has never lived there), where he resolved to act more Brazilian; which is to say, not be angry at the existence of other human beings. Among other trifles that a normal person wouldn’t spend any time thinking about, he pledged to not get annoyed when he hears people say “wait on” when they mean “wait for.”

He also vowed not to be irked by "globalized brunch" (um, what the fuck is that?), "offshore wind turbines" (???) or "Brian Williams’s bristling chest."

Of all the terrible things in this world, these are things that really get your blood boiling, Roger? Do you have some latent homosexual thing with Brian Williams's chest? You’re at the top of your profession. You write for the New York Times, one of the most prestigious papers in the world. Moreover, you're an op-ed columnist. That means you get paid big bucks to sit on your derrière and share your opinions. Success isn’t everything but why do you seem like such a miserable person?

In related news, on yesterday’s Op-Ed page I read these fateful words: Thomas L. Friedman is on book leave.

Wow.

Now, I have great respect for Tom as a reporter (yes, I’ve been reading his columns for so long I can use his nickname). His work covering Lebanon and Israel in the 80’s is jaw dropping and his first book, From Beirut to Jerusalem, although dated, is a very informative primer on the Middle East.

From his past columns I can only guess he’s jumping on the Al Gore wagon and his upcoming book will be about Environmentalism/the Green Movement. If Gore won a Nobel Peace Prize for making a documentary, I’m sure Tom should have a shot at the prize for writing a book, too.

If my sarcasm in the last paragraph wasn’t sufficient, I’ll go into detail about why I no longer rate Tom. Firstly, His writing style and royally-fucking-up of similes and metaphors leaves a bad after-taste. But he’s also a globalization/free market evangelical. For Tom, economic globalization is an unalloyed positive. There is no nuance or any caveats. He travels the globe, lounges at five star hotels and chats with CEOs, then writes about how great globalization is for the world.

Then there’s Iraq. He was a big proponent of the War during the months leading up to the invasion, and swayed many people who were on the fence over to the pro-War side. I’m not a far left liberal (anymore), but the war was a very bad idea and in Beirut to Jerusalem it would seem he would argue against it (especially because, even before the 2003 invasion, he admitted in his columns that he thought Saddam probably didn’t have WMD). He would reason that we shouldn’t go into Baghdad for the same reasons neither we nor Israel should have gone into Beirut.

Some how that logic went out the window. I have never seen anybody raise this issue with him (whether on TV or in print), but I suppose he would use the standard "September 11 changed everything" response. This is an evasive answer, no one ever specifies what exactly 9/11 changed. Many times the more broadly people speak, the less they're actually saying.

For a hilarious article about Tom by Matt Taibbi, click here.

Indiana Jones part IV

I grew up on movies. I didn’t just watch Disney stuff either; by the time I was five I had already seen films like Casablanca and Lawrence of Arabia. So you can imagine my excitement when I found out that one of my early childhood heroes is returning to the big screen this summer. No, not Ari Ben Canaan, I’m talking about Indiana Jones.

In May, 2008 the fourth installment of the Indiana Jones franchise is slated to hit theatres. The movie’s called Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. The plot’s been kept completely secret (I couldn’t find any real information from a google search, anyway), but it has been revealed that Indy’s son is focal point of the script. Indy had a son?! What?! And it’s not that Chinese kid from Temple of Doom?! Should be interesting.

Let’s hope Sean Connery has a big role, too. He absolutely made The Last Crusade.

Brazilians going back to Rio

The New York Times ran a story a few days ago about undocumented Brazilian immigrants living in the United States heading back home in large numbers.

This is a fascinating story, check it out. (see link here)

al Mutanabi Quote

"When a lion shows its teeth, do not assume he's smiling at you."
-al Mutanabi (medieval Arab Poet)

Annapolis

I’ve been meaning to post this for a while now, but the Annapolis Conference/
Meeting/whatever-you want-to-call-it finally happened yesterday. Both Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (also known as Abu Mazen) pledged to negotiate an agreement to end the Israel-Palestinian conflict by the end of 2008. They even shook hands.

I’m skeptical. First of all, weak leaders cannot make concessions and stay in power, only strong leaders have the political capital to do so. Neither Olmert nor Abbas are strong leaders. Abbas has lost control of Gaza to Hamas, and only has tenuous control of the West Bank. (As a side note, Abbas is universally hailed as a moderate but is also a Holocaust denier. Until recently I thought that “Moderate” and “Holocaust denier” were mutually exclusive, I guess not.)

Meanwhile, Olmert’s popularity sank after the 2006 War in Lebanon (which most see as botched), he’s under investigation in a number of corruption probes, and is so unpopular he can only envy Bush’s 28% approval rating. Neither leader can afford to make unpopular decisions and hold on to power, but most importantly, the decisions would not be seen as legitimate.

Let’s take a look at some of the issues from the Israeli side.

Israeli Settlements in the West Bank. The settlements and outposts (illegal settlements) give Israel a terrible image abroad and inflame Palestinians. Nevertheless, the settlers have huge lobbying power in the Israeli government (akin to the NRA’s power). Olmert should at the very least suspend the building of all new settlements. But if he were to do just that his parliamentary coalition would fall apart.

Then there's the Palestinian Right of Return. This is a HUGE stumbling block, much more so than most people think. About 800,000 Palestinians were displaced after the 1948 Israeli War of Independence. There are presently over 3 million descendants of these refugees (mostly living in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon) and they are a cause-celebré among the European Left. What is often times forgotten is that these people were displaced during a war their leaders in fact initiated. But forgetting that for the moment, the problem is that the Palestinians are demanding the descendants of these 800,000 refugees have the “Right of Return” into Israel.

This is unfeasible for Israel and furthermore is contradictory to the Two State Solution. The Two State solution provides for a Jewish-Israeli state, and a Palestinian-Arab state. Each side would give up whatever claim it believes it may have to the other’s land. So, each side would have Right of Return to their own land; no Palestinian would have Right of Return to Israel because they’ve given up claim to it.

Next up is “the Wall/Security Barrier,” what Jimmy Carter and others see as a symbol of “Apartheid.” I disagree. The security barrier was actually an idea of the Israeli Left and the Israelis began constructing it in 2002 as a response to the second Intifada. Now, one could certainly argue that it should be constructed along the Green Line and not cut deep into Palestinian territory, but without a doubt the barrier saves lives. It prevents Palestinian terrorists from infiltrating Israel and blowing themselves up in buses and pizzerias, which in turn prevents the Israeli military from invading the West Bank to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure - as happened in 2002 with a lot of collateral damage.

Anyway, you can agree or disagree but you know where I stand. I’ll add more about the whole thing later, if you’re really interested in the conflict I encourage you to read articles from Bitter Lemons. This website presents the thoughts and analyses of journalists, intellectuals, policy figures, and others from both sides of the conflict. It’s a forum for discussion and ideas, rather than negotiation.

Spanish Cartoonists Fined 3,000 Euros for Making Fun of the Royal Family

Those European political cartoonists, first they desecrate Mohammed, now it’s the Spanish royal family. Last July Spain passed the “cheque- bebé” law, which awards 2,500 Euros ($3,450) to couples for having a baby. Shortly afterward satirical magazine El Jueves ran a cartoon on its cover (shown right) depicting Prince Felipe, and his wife, Princess Letizia, having sex; and the Prince saying, “this is the closest thing to a job I’ve ever had!”

However, the government didn’t find the cartoon very funny. The two cartoonists responsible for the picture, Guillermo Torres and Manel Fontdevilla, were charged with defamation and bringing injury upon the royal family.

Today in Madrid a judge found the two guilty and fined them each 3,000 Euros. That’s not a small sum of money for these guys who probably aren’t millionaires, I hope they win on appeal. Click here for more information (in Spanish).

But what about this cheque-bebé law anyway? The Spanish government is basically paying people to have sex. As it turns out, this is now a common practice among many European nations. The EU is rapidly aging and this could become even more of a problem down the road for them.

This is an actual photo of the Prince and Princess. A gust of wind caused a "wardrobe malfunction" at some official event in 2006.

Marcelo Birmajer: the Argentine Woody Allen

“Argentina is full of Jews,” so said a lot of people I met in my South American travels a year ago. Actually, there are about 200,000 Jews in Argentina, a country of about 38 million people. A community? Yes. A country full of Jews? No. However, there are more Jews in Argentina than in any other Latin American country, and Argentine Jews take a big role in the country’s media and politics.

Take for example Marcelo Birmajer, who wrote El Abrazo Partido, a critically acclaimed movie which came out in 2004. Birmajer is Jewish and has been dubbed Argentina’s answer to Woody Allen. El Abrazo Partido is an interesting movie set in El Once, Buenos Aires’ Jewish neighborhood, and is about a 20-something Jew trying to get a Polish passport so he can immigrate back to Europe. Here’s an interesting feature from Haaretz (a prominent Israeli newspaper) about Birmajer, his writing career, and the contradictions of being Jewish in Argentina.

Cristina Kirchner President of Argentina

Argentina’s Presidential mansion is called the Pink House, and now that name has new meaning. For the first time in its history, Argentina has elected a female President. Two weeks ago Cristina Fernández de Kirchner won the Argentine elections, gaining about 45 percent of the vote (compared with 23 percent for the closest runner up).

She is commonly called “Cristina” and many compare her to Hillary Clinton- and on more than one level. Her husband, Nestor Kirchner, is the out-going President. Nestor was elected in 2003 and still enjoys strong approval ratings, yet he chose to step aside to let his wife run. Kind of weird, right?

Or perhaps Machiavellian. Argentine law does not set a term limit, but it does stipulate that a President can serve no more than two consecutive terms. Supposedly, The Kirchners plan to heed off the inevitable lame duck years of the second term by handing the Presidency back and forth.

Presently there is no real Argentine opposition (they’re worse than the Democrats in 2004) and, providing the Kirchners can handle this juggling act and their popularity remains high, their power will never diminish.

However, take the Kirchner strategy with a gigantic caveat which more than one Argentine has remarked to me. Predicting what will happen in Argentina in five years is like predicting what will happen in the U.S. in 100 years.

Here’s a decent post election analysis from the Guardian.

Brazil to host 2014 World Cup

Last week FIFA announced that Brazil will host the 2014 World Cup. This shouldn’t come as any surprise as Brazil were the only country to formally place a bid. I think this is great news for soccer. The World Cup tournament hasn’t been to South America, where the game is lived most passionately, since Argentina lasted hosted in 1978- that’s a pretty long time.

Furthermore, Brazil truly has a special relationship with the Beautiful Game. They are the only country to have won five World Cups and consistently produce wonderful players a la Ronaldinho, Robinho and Kaká.

It should be a truly special World Cup (the last two have been disappointing) and I hope to be reporting on it from Brazil.

Yalla ya Nasrallah

In July, 2006 Israel went to war with Hezbollah, a Shiite terrorist organization led by Hasan Nasrallah. Soon after the war began a certain song became ubiquitous on both Israeli and Lebanese airwaves: Yalla ya Nasrallah (loosely translated to Bring it on Nasrallah).


CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE VIDEO

In Israel the song became a rallying cry and at the same time lightened people’s tense minds. In Lebanon the Israeli Defense Forces periodically hacked into television stations to broadcast the song.

As an addendum, here’s a pretty good post war analysis. It’s from a German newspaper, but was written by an Israeli Journalist.

Garry Kasparov's International Relations Analysis

A few nights ago former World Chess Champion Garry Kasparov was interviewed on the Bill Maher show. Apparently he’s running for President of Russia, he has little chance of winning (he is very vocal about not liking Putin), but he offered an interesting take on International Relations.

Putin and Iran have been cozying up to each other and many blame this on the Bush Administration’s foreign policies. They argue that all Bush really does is unite people against us (Chavez also is warming up to Iran, and there has been a huge surge in anti-Americanism worldwide). However, Kasparov stated that Putin is in fact making a very calculated move. The Russian economy heavily relies on oil production. If oil prices fall so does the Russian economy, which would give Putin a lot of internal problems.

To ensure that oil prices are high he supports Iran. Iran is de-stabilizing the Middle East. It is attempting to get nukes, it is financing (at least in part) the Iraqi Shiite insurgents, and talks of invading Israel; indeed Iran might be the U.S.’s next target. This leads to marketplace uncertainty, nobody can very accurately predict how much oil will be on the market in the future, which leads to high prices.

This also sheds light on Chavez, who's pseudo-socialist economy also needs high oil prices. But why does it always seems that the U.S. foreign policy establishment is playing checkers while other countries are playing Chess?

Quote from Don Quixote

"It is better to lose with too many cards than too few, because 'this knight is reckless and daring' sounds better to the ear of those who listen than 'this knight is timid and weak.'"
-Don Quixote, Chapter XVIII

Hebrew: the Aleph

The symbol to the left is the Aleph, the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet and it’s the most appropriate way I could think of to begin this entry. It’s been gnawing at me for a while now that I don’t speak Hebrew. I’m Jewish (although I don’t know whether I’m a believer) and I’m a Zionist, so I should speak the Jewish language. With that in mind I signed up for a beginner Hebrew class at the 92nd Street Y and last night I began my Hebrew Odyssey.

After the typical introductions the instructor, a young Israeli woman who speaks perfect English, started speaking in Hebrew. I now know first hand the frustration and turmoil my English students experienced last year in Chile. The only words I was able to make out were “Shalom” and “Ivrit” (Hebrew).

Learning this language promises to be much more challenging than Spanish. English and Spanish share a vast amount of words due to the huge influence Latin and French played on the English language’s development. Hebrew, on the other hand, has very little in common with English (or Spanish for that matter).

By the end of the session we had already learned a lot. Well, we learned a tiny bit, but it really felt like a lot. I’m looking forward to the homework.

There's Nothing New Under the Sun

This is a link to an article about a modernist style painting done in present day Syria around... 9,000 BCE.

40th Anniversary of the Killing of Che Guevara

His back was to the wall and his head was held high as he spoke his last words, “be easy and aim well. It’s a man you’re going to kill.” Then, on October 9, 1967, Che Guevara was executed in a rural Bolivian school house. The bullets pierced his arm, his shoulder and his heart. Today marks the 40th anniversary of Che the human’s death and the birth of Che the symbol. Although it’s barely mentioned in the American media, it’s a pretty big story in the Spanish language press.

Most of us know Che Guevara superficially through his romantically heroic image emblazoned on t-shirts and Motorcycle Diaries, a 2005 movie starring Gael García Bernal about Che's youthful adventures. Indeed, in 2004 a very conservative friend of mine told me he admired Che because he fought for “freedom.” Sure, his image sells a lot of T-shirts, but who was Che Guevara? He was a leader of the Cuban revolution; but he was not Cuban and Che wasn’t even his real name.

He was born Ernesto Guevara de la Serna to an upper middleclass family in Rosario, Argentina (a city about 3.5 hours from Buenos Aires) in 1928.

He was a sickly kid and after graduating from high school studied to be a medical doctor. Upon graduation from medical school he began traveling. He practiced medicine pro-bono throughout Latin America until the early 1950’s when he met Fidel Castro and Co. in Mexico. He and his then-wife joined the Cuban independence movement. On December 2, 1956, the Cuban revolutionary forces set sail from the Yucatan peninsula on a rickety boat to fight against Cuba’s (then American backed) dictator Fulgencio Batista and conquer Cuba. They engaged the Cuban army in guerilla warfare on the Eastern side of the island. To be sure, they were not the only band of revolutionary fighters, they were one of many. But they were the most visible fighters and Fidel in particular was a hugely charismatic figure.

Ernesto transformed into Che while fighting in the Cuban jungle. Che is a popular term in Argentina, it means “hey/yo” and sometimes “dude,” and it’s a term Cubans do not ordinarily use. Guevara naturally used this term a lot and, to poke fun at him, his Cuban comrades began to call him “Che.” It quickly became his nome-de-guerre.

The Revolutionary forces toppled the Batista dictatorship on January 1, 1959 and Ernesto the sickly child was long gone. Out of the jungle emerged Fidel, his right hand man Che, and their band of fighters.

Fidel was able to maneuver himself to the lead among the various revolutionary factions and quickly consolidated control. Che took responsibility for executions, and was responsible for killing hundreds of people at the Cabaña prison. He killed Batista loyalists (and their families), ‘capitalists’ and dissidents who spoke out against the new Fidel-led regime. Many took to calling him “the butcher of Cabaña prison.”

He was a staunch, dogmatic communist and admired Joseph Stalin. He approved the killing of innocents, even children, if it strengthened his communist cause. He also dreamed of having “one, two, three Vietnams,” to kill as many Americans as possible and have a global communist revolution.

In 1967 Che left his wife and five kids in Cuba and traveled to Bolivia, where he hoped to spark a Communist insurgency. However, he never fermented local Bolivian support. On October 8, 1967 Bolivian forces, with the help of the CIA, captured Che. Forty years ago today he spoke his last words. Then Che was executed in a small school house in La Higuera, Bolivia. Perhaps Capitalism’s ultimate revenge is that his image is now used to make profits. But think before you wear that T-shirt.

(Does Che remind you of anyone in particular? How about Ayman al-Zawahiri? Al Qaeda’s number two and a qualified medical doctor.)

Christopher Columbus: A Portuguese Jewish Spy?

Today is Columbus Day. It’s a national holiday, but I’m stuck at work (at least I’m not broke like I was last year). Depending on who you are, you are either: 1 celebrating his discovery of the New World, 2 protesting the post-discovery era, or 3, you don’t really give a shit.

Anyway, when I was 13 I read a magazine article that alleged Christopher Columbus was… Jewish. Ever since that fateful day in my adolescence I’ve been fascinated by Columbus’ life story. He is one of history’s most famous figures, yet we actually know very little about the man and his background. Indeed, how did a slightly above average Genovese sailor gain access to the Spanish court?

People have contended that he was really a Portuguese spy, a former Catalan rebel, even a Marrano Jew. All of these theories are very interesting, if not all HIGHLY circumstantial. Here’s an article from today’s New York Times about attempts to trace his DNA.

Francis Ford Coppola Robbed in Buenos Aires

Francis Ford Coppola (the director of the Godfather) has been working on a new movie, entitled Tetro. The film is set in Buenos Aires and is about the rivalries in an Italian immigrant family of artists. He and his production company have been in Argentina for the past six months preparing to begin filming in February, 2008; But that date might now have to be postponed.

Two weeks ago a band of thieves broke into his Buenos Aires apartment, which doubled as his work station. They made off with a number of valuables, one of which was his personal computer, containing Tetro’s screenplay. The famous director is now offering a reward to get his material back.

This is terrible news for any movie buff or fan of Argentina (I consider myself a member of both categories), and I’m sure Coppola is distraught over all this as well.

If by any chance one of you thieves is reading this: Que le devuelvan sus cosas! Pelotudos!!

BRAZIL 3 - ARGENTINA 0

Today Brazil won the Copa America final 3-0 against Argentina; Brazil won and the sport of soccer lost. No, that’s not an outlandish statement. Brazil is known the world over not just for winning, but winning in unmistakable style. However, today they tossed their “beautiful game” aside for the “efficient game.” They did what they had to do to win- nothing more, nothing less.

The Argentines came out soft and let up an early goal to Brazil’s Julio Baptista. They then just couldn’t get going. Riquelme and Verón were unable to distribute effectively, so Argentina failed to adequately use the wings.

Brazil then nailed Argentina into the coffin with two more goals, both coming form counterattacks. Brazil were deserving winners of the game, but not the tournament.

To be sure, the way the Brazilians came together to battle adversity throughout the tournament was impressive. But they didn’t deserve to win the cup. Overall the Brazilians played very lackluster. Argentina played a bad match today but should be considered moral winners of this addition’s Copa América. Furthermore, Argentine coach Basile has found a good base of players to build upon for the 2010 World Cup, while Brazilian coach Dunga has made little long-term headway.

Copa America Update

The group stage and quarterfinals are over and only four teams remain in the Copa America: Argentina, Mexico, Brazil, and Uruguay.

Brazil should win handily against the Uruguayans tomorrow night, but the Wednesday night match up between Argentina and Mexico should be a memorable encounter. Argentina has steamrolled all oponents in their path, scoring a remarkable 13 goals in just four games. However, Mexico, under the tutelage of Hugo Sanchez, has made magnificent strides this month. Mexico (with the exception of Brazil) appears to be the only team capable of taking on the Argentines. Mexico's fate rests on the shoulders of Nery Castillo, Mexico's new young talent (the man is one hell of a dribbler).

I think Argentina will win the encounter. There's just so much to be said about the Argentine team. Alfio 'the Coconut' Basile has assembled a breathtaking, attacking lineup; man for man they are undoubtedly the best team in the world. They don't just win and score goals, they do so with a style that makes even Brazilians salivate. The past four games they have consistently strung upwards of 15 passes together. The game is played on the field, one only needs to look at the 2002 World Cup to recognize that, so I'm certainly not attempting to predict anything definitively, but I hope Argentina wins, they deserve it.

Copa America 2007 Preview

Ever since I can remember I’ve been infatuated with soccer. I still recall the summer the United States hosted the World Cup. It was 1994 and I was eleven years old. Every morning I woke up early to dig through the newspaper to find the Sports Section. Soccer in the US was even less popular than it is today, but the World Cup coverage in New Jersey was intense. I read every article at least twice, trying to absorb every bit of information I could. I still remember being heart broken when Maradona was found to be taking performance enhancers, the antics of Mexican goalie Jorge Campos, and all of Roberto Baggio’s clutch goals for Italy.

Most people abroad don’t believe an American could ever truly follow the sport. Yet it’s true, I did and I still do (I will post my thoughts on the USA-Mexico Gold Cup final in a few days). This summer my love affair with the beautiful game continues with the Copa América, kicking off tonight. The Copa América is the South American nations’ soccer championship- think of it as a regional World Cup- and Venezuela is hosting the three week tournament for the first time. Brazil and Argentina- the two countries to historically dominate South American soccer- are this year’s favorites. Argentina probably has a slight advantage.

Currently Argentina has, in my estimation, the best side in the world. For the first time since my unforgettable summer as an eleven year old, Alfio ‘el Coco’ Basile is back coaching the national side, known as the albicelestes,. The Argentine senior side hasn’t won a competition in fourteen years (the 1993 Copa América during el Coco’s first stint in charge), and will be out for blood. The albicelestes have brought in a full strength side featuring a good mix of veterans and youth. Look for them to play attractive attacking soccer. Success will hinge on how well playmakers Juan Roman Riquelme and Sebastián Verón combine in the middle of the park. Also, Lionel Messi is ready to lead; he’s 20 and is the newest ‘new Maradona.’ If the team clicks they could steam roll the opposition.

Probable Lineup: (4-4-2)

- Abbondanzieri -

- Zanetti --- Ayala --- G Milito --- Heinze -

- Mascherano -

- Cambiasso ------------------ Verón -

- Riquelme -

-Messi - - Crespo -

Juan Pablo Aimar and Carlitos Tevez will make key contributions off the bench.

Brazil, while still a favorite, is not coming with its full strength squad. No Ronaldinho, no Kaká, no Ronaldo, no Adriano. All the same, Brazil is Brazil. The seleção has heaps of talent and will rely on young players eager to make an impression on new coach Dunga (Brazil’s number five from the 1994 World Cup winning team).

The two standout players of the group, Robinho and Diego, know each other well from their years together in the youth ranks and senior side of Santos (Pelé’s former club). Their success will depend on how quickly they come together as a team and the productivity of Robinho, who’s coming off a mediocre season with Real Madrid. Striker Vagner Love could be the tournament’s break out star.

Probable Lineup: (4-4-2)

Hélton

-Maicon --- Alex --- Juan --- Gilberto

- Mineiro --- G. Silva -

- Elano -------------- Diego -

- Vagner Love - -- Robinho -