Israel's Aggression

The violent attacks being perpetrated by Israel towards its Arab citizens these past few days have been disturbing, to say the least. The last time I checked, the death toll for Israelis was less than 5 while the death toll for Arabs was hovering around 300. It does not take a genius to see the discord there. It reminds me of the war between Israel and Lebanon back in 2006 where the death tolls were equally disparate. The fact of the matter is that Israel's army, military technology, and weapons sophistication dwarfed those of their adversaries in both cases. And they are not afraid nor do they feel guilty about displaying this.



I am not saying that the border countries surrounding Israel (most notably Syria, Lebanon, and Iran) do not represent serious threats to Israel's security. But I am saying that the devastating attacks being perpetrated by Israel right now against Hamas (its own citizens) will slow progress, rather than hasten, towards a long lasting peace process between the parties, and therefore seriously compromise any chance of stability in the region for the foreseeable future.

And possibly the most disheartening aspect is the lack of an outcry from any countries. These attacks are acts of terror and need to be condemned. My guess would be that as the attacks get more intense, more countries may start to question some of Israel's actions, leaving their unquestioned support for the Jewish state up in the air. This is by far the most important area in the world in terms of its effect on global security. The major reason for 9/11 and for the continued battles between the Taliban and the US in Afghanistan is the unquestioned support for Israel by the United States. This represents one of Obama's most complicated, important, and consequential foreign policy files. All eyes will be on the new president (whose election for many Arabs around the world, represented hope for the future) to see exactly how he reacts publicly once he takes office to this ongoing seemingly never-ending conflict.

Taking Stock of Raptors Predictions

In my post, “Three Reasons for Raptors Optimism”, I laid out a few good (or so I thought at the time) signs at the start of the season that seemingly indicated a high playoff seeding and possibly a trip to the second round of the post-season or farther. I don't especially like to admit when I'm wrong but, in this case, my predictions have not quite panned out as I thought they would.

(Quick note that I am not suggesting that they blow this team up (figuratively, of course). The season is only a quarter of the way done, they are still getting used to playing for a new coach, and they have shown enough flashes of good play to not yet let our panic get out of hand. It is easier said than done to play like they have shown all the time, but it should be possible.)

Let's review my old list:

The swagger of Jermaine O'Neal

In the post, I argued that arguably the first “enforcer” in a Raptors uniform since Charles Oakley would bring some much needed grit, toughness, and aggressiveness to a team often labeled as “soft”. O'Neal's numbers have been admirable and he did string together five straight double doubles. He has been a presence in the paint, both altering and blocking shots.

But he has had injury issues, starting with him banging up his surgically repaired knee and ending with a sprained shoulder. He has missed a significant number of games because of this. Moreover, his toughness is not really rubbing off on his teammates. Aside from Bargnani throwing Vince to the floor like he was a candy wrapper, the Raps defence has been laughable at times.

I am a proponent of the fact that this game is predominantly about talent, but passion, hard work, and intensity can be almost as important to winning games. Players have made themselves careers in the NBA based mostly on hard work and intensity. On the flip side, no player has ever had an elite NBA career without talent. The Raps need to play with passion on both ends of the floor. We have seen that when they do this, they are successful. However, so far, neither J.O or Triano have managed to make that happen on a consistent basis.

Chris Bosh

I wrote that Chris Bosh entered the season with a new sense of purpose and intensity on both ends of the floor. If the first week of the season was a microcosm of an NBA season, he likely would have won MVP. But after that first week in which he was named NBA Eastern Conference Player of the Week, he tailed off. His 30 point games were turning into 12 pointers. His 14 rebounds were turning into single digit totals. And he was becoming less willing to drive it to the hole. All in all, this team rises and falls with Chris Bosh and if he is not going at full speed, the team suffers. And that's what we have seen.

Calderon

Calderon has been going well actually. Last I checked, he was top 3 in the league in assists, with a stellar as usual assist to turnover ratio. He has a very reliable jump shot and for the most part, does not take unwarranted shots. He is a calming steadying force for this team and one need only watch Roko or Will run the offence to see the difference.

He has missed some games which has been disappointing. One silver lining in those dark days was the realization (if it wasn't already obvious) that the backup point guard situation is next to nothing and that more PG insurance may be needed.

All in all, the Raps have played far below their expectations. That was the danger when Colangelo boasted that this was the best Raptors team “on paper”. That likely created a wave of high expectations for this group and the fact is, they have not delivered. It is still early and they have showed signs. They just need to bring it for 48 minutes and the Ws will start coming. Or maybe my optimism (as well as others) was unwarranted, in which case, I'll stop making predictions. Nah, I'll never do that.

"The War Within" Part 1

So I am about halfway through the book "The War Within" written by Bob Woodward.

He is the author of many political readings, including "Bush at War" and "All the President's Men", as well as the associate editor at The Washington Post. He is probably best known for his critical role in uncovering the Watergate Scandal as well as his detailed and personal accounts of the Bush administration. People often say that he is the journalist who knows Bush the best, having conducted almost 11 hours of interviews with the man himself.

I aim to give you some feedback on the book as I progress my way through it. It is a highly detailed (and highly critical) account of the Bush administration vis-a-vis the war in Iraq between 2006 and 2008. It provides the reader with a behind the scenes look into the different misunderstandings, disagreements, tensions, and conflicts between all those involved. This includes the usual suspects, aka Bush, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, etc. But it gives equal weight to the huge and integral role played by all the military leaders. The hierarchy is sometimes hard to fully grasp and the list of actors involved sometimes seems convoluted and confusing, but this is more than made with the highly intimate feeling that one gets from reading it.

It is predominantly made up of scenes between important actors from the government and the military on their goals and strategies for success in Iraq. Reading these tetes à tetes brought two things to mind:

A) How does Mr. Woodward manage to be a witness to these high profile meetings?
B) The odd sensation that I was eavesdropping on the President and that I should have a red dot on my forehead.

It paints a grim picture of a group of politicians and generals trying to put together a plan that will topple a government, bring security and democracy to a country, whilst at the same time winning hearts and minds. This picture portrays these decision makers as disjointed, cobbled together, uninspiring, and clearly lacking the ability to come to a clear consensus.

Here is an example of the intense intimacy that is felt when reading this book. It starts with a private conversation between the President and Army General George W. Casey Jr. which happens on quiet veranda with a couple of cigars in the warm Baghdad dusk. Here's an excerpt:

Casey studied Bush's face, now wrinkled and showing its 59 years, the right eye slightly more closed than the left under graying, full eyebrows. The general had pushed for a drawdown for two years...
"I know I've got some work to do to convince you of that," the general said, "but I firmly believe that".
Bush looked skeptical.
"I need to do a better job explaining to you" why winning means getting out, Casey said.
"You do," Bush replied.

So I am almost completely certain that Woodward was not on that veranda that evening. So how does he know what was said between these two men? Honestly, it doesn't really matter to me. But the fact that you can read conversations of such a high importance between highly important people really gives the reader a rare treat into the insight, discussion, and procedures that go into decision making on the highest level.

Jon Stewart pulls no punches!

So I am a huge fan of Stewart and Colbert. And so should all of you. I remember a recent Rolling Stone cover with the two of them on the cover displaying "The two most trusted names in news". While they are, for the most part, comedians, there is no doubt that the two possess keen political intellects and have a powerful influence on the political views of America's youth. Stewart always ends his shows with a guest, who is oftentimes on the other side of the political spectrum. He is always respectful and polite in these "debates", and also always seems to wipe the floor with his opponent. And with Colbert, you can just tell that he understands right-wingers because if not, he wouldn't be able to impersonate one so convincingly.

Anyway, perhaps more on them later but I wanted to post Jon Stewart's take on the Canadian crisis. Pure gold!

If you have not yet seen it, please click here!

Wow. Good for this guy!

So I'm sure that this has already traveled substantially across cyberspace but I wanted to post it anyway. The reason for this is because it's awesome!



A man responsible for the death of so many innocent Iraqis as well as US soldiers finally gets a taste (albeit not even close to proportional) of his own medicine. I wouldn't imagine this happening if the president was not so close to his exit day (and will therefore start to minimize his official state visits), but it just shows the intense ire that is felt towards Bush, who has turned Iraq upside down and has spiraled it into a seemingly never-ending civil war.

Seriously, how many of you would love to do this? I bet if they held a worldwide contest with ten open spots to launch a couple shoes at the outgoing president, more than half the world would enter! By the way, apparently throwing shoes at someone is a long held Iraqi custom that is used to display disdain and rage. It is interesting to note that many anti-Saddam Iraqis flung their shoes at the Saddam statue once it came down back in 2003. Apparently, they don't much like the new guy either.

Wikipedia says:

The shoe represents the lowest part of the body (the foot) and displaying or throwing a shoe at someone or something in Arab cultures denotes that the person or thing is "beneath them." Showing the bottom of one's feet or shoes (for example, putting one's feet up on a table or desk) in Arab cultures is considered an extreme insult. Examples include Iraqi citizens smacking torn-down posters of Saddam Hussein with their shoes, and the depiction of President of the United States George H. W. Bush on a tile mosaic of the floor of the Al-Rashid Hotel's lobby, forcing all visitors entering the hotel to walk on Bush's face to enter the hotel.

Call me cold. Call me out for wanting to kick somebody when he is as down as down can get but the last thing I felt while watching this was sympathy. It was more like "OK, that makes sense."

Question for all you faithful readers (i.e. me and who knows who else): If you could throw anything at Bush, what would it be and why?

The Official "Videos That Travel Around the World Post"

I know how long you guys have been waiting for this official "Videos That Travel Around the World Post", henceforth known as the OVTTATWP. Well, the time has come.

Warning: you will see other posts that claim OVTTATWP status but be weary. These are all fakes. You've arrived at the realness.

Today, I have two. The first is of a guy named Matt who dances his way around the world. And the second is a version of the classic "Stand by Me" played by street musicians from around the world. If you're ever in low spirits, these videos are guaranteed to tug at your little heartstrings and cheer you right back up.

If anyone knows of others (and I'm sure they exist), feel free to post links.

So without further ado:

Note: a far better version of this video can be found here.

An "Old" Man Among Boys.

You know when you see a headline that is so unfathomable that you can't really decide whether it is fact or just taken from "The Onion" website? Well, today I saw this headline:

73 Year-Old Gives Basketball Another Shot.

Now, upon reading this, you might think that its just some geezer who started shooting some hoops down at the local YMCA because some extra free time had befallen him. But no. This 73 year-old senior citizen, Ken Mink, is a member of the Roane State Community College Basketball team. 52 years back, he attended the school as a freshman and played for the basketball team. The reasons are hazy, but he was forced to leave after one year. So now, Ken Mink is finally making his comeback and is expected to go # 1 in next year's NBA draft. That last part isn't true but I assure you that the rest is.

Check out this interview.

Highlights include:

• Ken admitting that he doesn't have an iPod after receiving the requisite question, "What is on your iPod?"
  
• Commenting on todays fashion trends as compared to his freshman days more than half a century ago
  
• Nicknames bestowed on him by his teammates (who, by the way, have an average age of 19)
• His coach talking about how Ken brings "experience" to the team

Anyway, this is obviously strange, surreal, and even possibly an underhanded attempt to get the media's attention. I can't imagine him getting any significant playing time down the stretch. When you watch the video, check out Ken participating in the running drills with his young, virile teammates. I think he has man boobs! I mean, I could even score on this guy!

Anyway, a fun and interesting story. And if his and his team's goal was media attention, well, they got it alright. How about top story on the New York Times website. Here's the link.

Bill Ayers speaks!

I found this op-ed piece written by none other than Bill Ayers. Name ring a bell? He's the "terrorist" who Obama "palled around with".

This is for sure one of the most interesting pieces I have read in a long time. The most interesting topic that he addresses comes near the end of the article, where he articulately describes the "guilt by association" culture in the United States. Apparently, having a relationship of any kind with somebody equals shared values. Rather than paranoia setting in, relationships with different types of people should be seen as leading to a more varied, cosmopolitan, and understanding view of our world. He writes:

The dishonesty of the narrative about Mr. Obama during the campaign went a step further with its assumption that if you can place two people in the same room at the same time, or if you can show that they held a conversation, shared a cup of coffee, took the bus downtown together or had any of a thousand other associations, then you have demonstrated that they share ideas, policies, outlook, influences and, especially, responsibility for each other’s behavior. There is a long and sad history of guilt by association in our political culture, and at crucial times we’ve been unable to rise above it.

And then a bit later:

Demonization, guilt by association, and the politics of fear did not triumph, not this time. Let’s hope they never will again. And let’s hope we might now assert that in our wildly diverse society, talking and listening to the widest range of people is not a sin, but a virtue.

More from Mr. Ayers himself:

Speaking of Steve Nash...

I love this video.

A little bit of Canadian content for Canada's only NBA team.

Nash and Triano

Sam Mitchell, now the ex-head coach of the Toronto Raptors, was swiftly replaced last week by the then assistant coach Jay Triano. Apparently, winning "coach of the year" does not give one much job security these days. All in all, the decision was not a surprise, given Colangelo's obvious and understandable desire to install someone of his own choosing as well as the pitiful week the Raptors had just prior to the falling axe. In this climate of constant coaching changes, Mitchell should not have been that surprised either. Coaching is equally about keeping your players motivated as it is about Xs and Os. And the recent trouncing by the Denver nuggets demonstrated a huge lack of both, with the former being the higher cause for concern.

Here's a clip: (highlights include a refreshing JO speaking about personal responsibility as well as Triano trying to turn Hassan Adams into an all-star!)



Triano, the first Canadian born coach to ever coach in the NBA, will inherit a no doubt talented team with an equally no doubt roster with many holes. The most glaring of these is the backup point guard situation with two unproven, often confused looking, frustratingly inconsistent PGs in Will Solomon and Roko Ukic backing up the solid Jose Calderon. They are weak on the wings, with Anthony Parker possibly the worst starting 2 in the league. They have an aging ex-all star in Jermaine O'Neal with a scary history of serious injuries.

But given all that, Calderon and Bosh are all-star calibre. Bargnani is showing some serious signs that he's here to play this season. Joey Graham has been perhaps more good than bad. And O'Neal (if he stays healthy) can be a tenacious rebounder and intimidating presence in the post. I heard the other day that altered shots are better for the defensive team than blocked shots because they result more often in defensive rebounds while blocks often give the ball back to the team on offense. And JO has the ability to consistently alter shots.

So it is up in the air as to how this team will perform under the tutelage of a "new" face. My prediction is a playoff berth without home-court advantage and perhaps another first round exit. But it is early and there is a game today. And we all know how one game can change peoples minds. Especially the acute minds over at realgm.

Enjoy the game.

Obama and Clinton: The odd couple?

It's evolution, baby!

It's like calling up your ex to be friends after a messy breakup. Or contacting an old enemy when you're in a bind. Or burying the hatchet with an old rival.

Whatever the metaphor, the ex-rivals of one of the most fiercely contested primary battles are now teammates. Today, Obama nominated Hillary Clinton to the post of Secretary of State, basically meaning that she will be the face and voice of US foreign policy. In one of the most heavily scrutinized posts not named President, Clinton may now see Obama's vice-presidential snubbing as a blessing in disguise. I mean, noone can argue that Clinton will now have more influence and sway than Biden, who is essentially there to break ties in the Senate. Obviously, Biden will continue to have the President's ear, but Clinton will be the spokesperson for US international activity. Think of how much media coverage Ms. Rice got in her time as Secretary of State. Possibly as much as Mr. Bush himself.

Obviously, this is a very shrewd political move for Obama. It shows his willingness to leave the past the past and move on. Clinton is one of the most recognizable and trusted characters in US politics, and her nomination gives the Obama team instant “starpower”. I can't wait to see all the editorial cartoons about this partnership.

In addition to this, for those who strongly supported Clinton during the primaries, it will serve to take some of the sting out of Obama's victory over Americas favourite first lady. Clinton was especially popular amongst women, and many saw the primaries as an extremely rare opportunity (and one that will not likely be replicated for some time) for a woman to be a legitimate contender and maybe even the favourite in a US presidential election. But then in came Obama with his charismatic, passionate, and fiery public speaking (not to mention his arugula lettuce and his chai tea lattes). He wooed the crowd into submission and instantly became the “sexy” choice. The Obama train gained steam and eventually left Clinton and her many diehard supporters in the proverbial dust.

This nomination is likely an olive branch to those very Clinton supporters who remain crushed by her defeat and who became even more incensed when she was passed up for the Vice-Presidential nomination. Personally, I think I like the choice. My only concern would be that their political ideologies vis a vis foreign policy are quite different, with Clinton a bit more to the right, highlighted by her support for the Iraq war. But, in the end, its the Presidents' party and he can do what he wants. Advisers are there to do just that, advise, and in the end, the President always has the final word. This provides me with a certain level of comfort, because OBAMA IS INCAPABLE OF MAKING A BAD DECISION. I say this in jest obviously, but also in reference to the wildly high expectations bestowed upon the skinny Chicagoan.