Islamists in our midst

By far the sanest commentary on the whole Lou Dobbs/”Islamist” business is this bit from Demosthenes over at one of my recent blog discoveries, Shadow of the Hegemon:

The sad (and funny) thing is that the distinction Dobbs tried to make and failed is one that he never can, because it would beg questions of its own. What Dobbs was trying to say and would have said if he only could was that the war was against religious fundamentalism; that this was actually a conflict between secular tolerance and religious ignorance and intolerance. The problem, of course, is that we have religous extremists of our own, mouth breathing fundamentalists of our own; foul libellers of our own. They have power in our society, power that can’t be dismissed or ignored. How can Lou Dobbs say that the war is against fundamentalism when religious fundamentalists occupy places in the administration, seats in Congress, and many of the seats of power that can’t be ignored in Washington? He can’t, of course, so he can only try to split hairs and hope that nobody realizes that “they” aren’t so different from rather a lot of “us”; that the desire to “invade them, kill their leaders, and convert them all by the sword” is a more universal one than anybody wishes to admit. Lou Dobbs can never admit on television that the war is really against fundamentalism, full stop. This is far too fundamentalist a country to ever say that.

Yahoo redesign

I see that Yahoo! is contemplating a new design. The most striking thing to me about the new design is the realization that I never look at Yahoo’s front door anymore. I still do use Yahoo, all my email is read via Yahoo Mail, I belong to some groups over at Yahoo Groups, and I do check out their news page as well as their MLB baseball news page. But all these I get to from bookmarks. What I used to use Yahoo for was browsing or searching among its directory. Now I notice with the redesign that Yahoo’s once-vaunted directory is barely “above the fold”, that is to say viewable on normal monitors/resolutions without needing to scroll. They’ve also made the type size of the directory smaller. One of these days I predict it’ll be nowhere to be found on Yahoo’s front page. Meanwhile their Shopping box gets larger and larger.

The FBI’s past precursor to future?

Via Cursor, a fascinating “Special Report” called The Campus Files at the San Francisco Chronicle’s online site SF Gate. The series revolves around various FBI memos from the 1960’s that reveal the coordinated efforts of the FBI, CIA, and then-California governor Ronald Reagan to undermine those Hoover and his cronies deemed subversive. Especially disturbing is being able to compare the FBI memos with most of their contents censored for what the FBI claimed were reasons of protecting information about law enforcement operations, and the same memos un-censored (obtained after a 17-year long and eventually successful Freedom of Information Act suit). Needless to say the previously censored information didn’t contain anything sensitive about law enforcement, but a lot of information about the illegal surveillance of various people connected with the University of California at Berkeley.

To quote from a 1969 memo from J. Edgar Hoover’s third in command to his second in command:

[Governor Ronald Reagan’s Legal Affairs Secretary] Mr. [Herbert] Ellingwood stated that Governor Reagan is dedicated to the destruction of disruptive elements on California college campuses. The state government will attack these groups through several methods. (1) By hounding the groups as much as possible by bringing any form of violation available against them. He cited as an example that if any of these groups has a bookstore on campus they will bring building code violations against them.[…] (3) A psychological warfare campaign. In this connection Mr. Ellingwood indicated that he plans to confer with Department of Defense officials today to get ideas from those individuals as to how to conduct campaigns of this nature.[…]

The lessons for today’s era of “homeland security” are painfully obvious. Look no further than Ashcroft’s recent lifting of restrictions on the FBI to monitor religoius meetings and Internet traffic.

Update: Found this over at the Nando Times:

Most Americans would concede freedoms for security, poll says

Four in five Americans would give up some freedoms to gain security […] a new Gallup poll found.

About one-third of those polled favor making it easier for authorities to access private e-mail and telephone conversations.