Les Jones

Google switches Gmail to https by default

Saturday, February 13th, 2010 | Middle East, Tech | Permalink | No Comments |

Information Week - Google: We’re Encrypting Everyone’s Gmail Automatically:

Whether or not the timing of this announcement has anything to do with Google’s recent actions in the Chinese market is unknown. The company today said that it is switching Gmail access to https for all users by default.

The company wrote in a blog post, “Using https helps protect data from being snooped by third parties, such as in public wifi hotspots. We initially left the choice of using it up to you because there’s a downside: https can make your mail slower since encrypted data doesn’t travel across the web as quickly as unencrypted data. Over the last few months, we’ve been researching the security/latency tradeoff and decided that turning https on for everyone was the right thing to do.”

In related news, Iran’s government has banned Gmail:

As the Iranian authorities attempt to stifle tomorrow’s protests surrounding the anniversary of the Iranian revolution, they are going one step further: Iran is permanently suspending access to Google’s Gmail. Earlier this week, we wrote about failing Internet connections in Iran.

The timing of these problems has been met with suspicion: February 11 (tomorrow) marks the anniversary of the Iranian revolution and gatherings are already being planned to protest against June’s alleged election fraud.

Tags: china, gmail, google, iran

Iran seizes Nobel Peace Prize winner’s medal

Thursday, November 26th, 2009 | Middle East | Permalink | No Comments |

This is why people say Iran’s government is run by dicks.

Tags: iran

Iranian blogger Hoder has been in solitary confinement for 10 months

Monday, October 26th, 2009 | Blogging, Middle East | Permalink | No Comments |

BoingBoing - Iran: blogger Hossein “Hoder” Derakshan said to have been jailed in solitary for 10 months:

Fershteh Ghazi (@iranbaan) tweets that Hamed Derakhshan, brother of jailed Iranian blogger Hossein “Hoder” Derakshan, just said on @bbcpersian his brother has been held in solitary confinement for 10 months. Hoder was first arrested on November 1, 2008.

Previously:

• Iranian blogger dies in prison
• Hoder on a Nuclear Iran
• News from Iran
• Live-blogging Hossein Derakshan’s BlogNashville Talk

Tags: hoder

Fight Club

Sunday, July 19th, 2009 | A&E, Middle East | Permalink | 2 Comments |

Watched Fight Club again last night. The basic story is that a generation of young men are living empty lives, “working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don’t need.” Fight Club gives them a purpose and makes them feel like men.

Scary thought: think of the aimless young men in Fight Club. Now imagine they’re young Muslim men joining a terrorist organization, which is what Fight Club became when it turned into Project Mayhem.

Fight Club was released in 1999. Post-9/11 they would have never used an ending that involved blowing up skyscrapers. The parallels would have been too obvious and unnerving.

I’m glad they were able to use that ending because the parallels are instructive. I like Fight Club, but what I’ve always disliked about it is the juvenile endorsement of violence as a means to manhood and the embrace of destruction as entertainment and self-realization. Connecting the dots with groups like Al Qaeda shows where that mindset leads.

Rich Lowry on the illegitimaticy of the Iranian elections

Wednesday, June 24th, 2009 | Middle East | Permalink | No Comments |

Rich Lowry: “A reminder: There is not a question about the legitimacy of the Iranian election. It was illegitimate from the beginning; the regime hand-picked the candidates.”

Absolutely correct. Even if the vote counting had been 100% legitimate (which it wasn’t) the election was illegitimate because the existing regime simply disqualified candidates it didn’t want on the ballot in the first place.

Disqualifying political challengers is a long-standing practice of Iran’s current regime. Follow that link to The Washington Post’s account of the 2005 elections. While you’re there contrast Obama’s timid response to the Iranian mullahs this past week with Bush’s forceful denunciation in 2005:

“Today, Iran is ruled by men who suppress liberty at home and spread terror across the world,” Bush said. “Power is in the hands of an unelected few who have retained power through an electoral process that ignores the basic requirements of democracy. The June 17th presidential elections are sadly consistent with this oppressive record.”

Addressing the Iranian people, Bush added: “As you stand for your own liberty, the people of America stand with you.”

Robert Kagan recently noted the contrasting approaches of Bush and Obama towards Iran:

One of the great innovations in the Obama administration’s approach to Iran, after all, was supposed to be its deliberate embrace of the Tehran rulers’ legitimacy. In his opening diplomatic gambit, his statement to Iran on the Persian new year in March, Obama went out of his way to speak directly to Iran’s rulers, a notable departure from George W. Bush’s habit of speaking to the Iranian people over their leaders’ heads. As former Clinton official Martin Indyk put it at the time, the wording was carefully designed “to demonstrate acceptance of the government of Iran.”

Iranian election fraud

Monday, June 22nd, 2009 | Middle East | Permalink | No Comments |

In many Iranian cities the number of people who voted exceeded the number of eligible voters. Is miracle!

This is in addition to the suspiciously-fast vote count. “How do you count almost 40 million handwritten paper ballots in a matter of hours and declare a winner? That’s a key question in Iran’s disputed presidential election. International polling experts and Iran analysts said the speed of the vote count, coupled with a lack of detailed election data normally released by officials, was fueling suspicion around President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s landslide victory.”

The bad news is that the Iranian government ran a rigged election. The good news such as it is is that their  incompetent made it obvious that they rigged the election.

Tags: iran

Daoud Kuttab’s crazy bias against Israel

Tuesday, December 30th, 2008 | Media Behaving Badly, Middle East | Permalink | 4 Comments |

Little Green Footballs - Washington Post: ‘Amateur’ Rockets ‘Nagging’ Israel:

The Washington Post gives column space today to Palestinian shill Daoud Kuttab, who turns in one of those very predictable whiny pieces claiming that fighting against terrorists “only makes them stronger:” Daoud Kuttab - Has Israel’s Gaza Attack Revived Hamas?

Includes this absolute howler of an opening sentence:

JERUSALEM — In its efforts to stop amateur rockets from nagging the residents of some of its southern cities, Israel appears to have given new life to the fledging Islamic movement in Palestine.

Other great Washington Post headlines from history:

• DALLAS - Amateur assassin nags JFK’s head with old milsurp bullets
• NEW YORK - Amateur pilots nag Twin Towers, much like Maverick playfully buzzed the control tower in “Top Gun”

I’ll have to check my copy of the AP Style Book, but I don’t think nag is an acceptable synonym for “murder.” This year Hamas rocket attacks on Israel killed a number of Israeli civilians, wounded others, and kept the population in terror.

Also, I don’t think Iran would appreciate the WaPo describing their Qassam and Katyusha rockets as “amateur.” Many of the press reports describe them as “Hamas rockets,” but Hamas couldn’t make a light bulb, much less a rocket. The rockets are provided by outside countries like Iran and Syria who are using Hamas in a proxy war with Israel.

Roundup of missed predictions on the surge…

Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008 | Middle East | Permalink | No Comments |

at Volokh.com.

The only real question about the planned “surge” in Iraq — which is better described as a Vietnam-style escalation — is whether its proponents are cynical or delusional. — Paul Krugman, NYT, 1/8/07

There is nothing ahead but even greater disaster in Iraq. — NYT Editorial, 1/11/07

What anyone in Congress with half a brain knows is that the surge was sabotaged before it began. — Frank Rich, NYT, 2/11/07

Keeping troops in Iraq has steadily increased the risk of a bloodbath. The best way to reduce that risk is, I think, to announce a timetable for withdrawal and to begin a different kind of surge: of diplomacy. — Nicholas Kristof, NYT, 2/13/07

W. could have applied that to Iraq, where he has always done only enough to fail, including with the Surge — Maureen Dowd, NYT, 2/17/07

Team Finds Little Evidence of Archaeological Looting in Iraq

Monday, July 7th, 2008 | Middle East | Permalink | 1 Comment |

Archaeologists debunk claim of looting in S. Iraq war zone:

Curtis admitted he had been “very surprised” by the team’s findings and cautioned that, while the survey covered the most important sites in an area equal to one-fifth of the country, it might not be representative.

“It may not be typical of the country as a whole, and the situation could well be worse further north,” he warned. Curtis credited efforts by coalition forces and local authorities, as well as the drying up of the international market for Iraqi antiquities, with keeping looters away.

The team did identify damage to sites caused by the Iraqi military and coalition military forces. At Ubaid, trenchworks to protect Saddam’s tanks had been built in archaeologically significant deposits. Similar damage was found at Tell el-Lahm. Paper food wrappers provided evidence of the U.S. military at the latter site.

At Abraham’s Ur, significant damage was identified caused by large numbers of troops walking over the site in desert boots. And ancient buildings, reconstructed in the 1960s and 70s, were in danger of collapse from weathering. The team did not confirm Farchakh’s report that military vehicles from the U.S. base were causing the walls of the buildings to crack.

In 2003, WND reported in the aftermath of reports of looting at the National Museum in Baghdad, nearly all of the Iraqi antiquities feared stolen or broken by looters have been found inside following an inventory.

Does the New Iran NIE Change Anything?

Thursday, December 6th, 2007 | Middle East | Permalink | No Comments |

From The Corner:

I worked as a manager for 30 years in the US nuclear weapons program and have been a consultant to places like Los Alamos for the past six years.

The NIE, if correct, still is of concern. Making nuclear weapons involves two major initiatives: designing/building the weapon and getting the nuclear material for the weapon. The NIE appears to say that the former has been (temporarily?) suspended, while the latter is proceeding. Getting the nuclear material for a uranium bomb is by far the most difficult and time consuming part of the problem. The US pursued parallel programs (uranium and plutonium) in the Manhattan Project. US physicists were so sure that the uranium bomb would work that they did not even test it before using the uranium bomb on Japan (the one we tested in southern New Mexico was the plutonium bomb). It is likely that the physics and manufacturing challenges for the Iranians are modest at best. (Many of the physics students in my grad school 40 years ago were Iranians that planned to return home.) Again, the difficult job is getting sufficient enriched uranium, and that program continues to be accelerated.

So… the NIE says that the Iranians have suspended their weaponization efforts, but in the total critical path to getting a bomb, I am not sure that it matters.

And we have reason to believe that Iran is still refining uranium based on an intelligence report not from the Bush administration but from the IAEA:

A new report from the International Atomic Energy Agency on Iran’s nuclear program highlights Tehran’s cooperation with the agency. But the report makes clear that Iran continues to defy international demands for a halt to its uranium enrichment program.

So the news that Iran isn’t developing its weapon program - assuming it’s even true - doesn’t seem like that big of a deal if it’s still refining uranium.

CNN’s Six “Undecided Voters” Were Ringers

Monday, November 19th, 2007 | Middle East | Permalink | 2 Comments |

Doug Ross:

CNN hits bottom and digs: All six debate questioners appear to be Democratic Party operatives. So much for “ordinary people, undecided voters”. To paraphrase Junior Soprano, CNN is so far up the DNC’s hind end, Howard Dean can taste hair gel.

In a nutshell, CNN’s six “undecided voters” were:

A Democratic Party bigwig
An antiwar activist
A Union official
An Islamic leader
A Harry Reid staffer
A radical Chicano separatist

This is why some people’s ears perk up when they see or hear the phrase “undecided voter.”

See also:
- John Ridley - NPR’s “Undecided Voter”

89,000 Afghanistan Kids Saved This Year

Thursday, November 8th, 2007 | Middle East | Permalink | 3 Comments |

USA Today - Afghan officials: Better care saves 89,000 kids this year:

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — Close to 90,000 children who would have died before age 5 in Afghanistan during Taliban rule will stay alive this year because of advances in medical care in the country, Afghan President Hamid Karzai said Sunday.

The under-5 child mortality rate in Afghanistan has declined from an estimated 257 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2001 to about 191 per 1,000 in 2006, the Ministry of Public Health said, relying on a new study by Johns Hopkins University.

The U.N. and aid agency Save the Children both hailed the advances in health care in Afghanistan.

“This is certainly very positive news,” said the U.N. spokesman in Afghanistan, Adrian Edwards. “To come from such low life expectancy to see this improvement does appear to be an indication that the work on the health sector here is beginning to pay off.”

The article goes out of its way to give any credit to the U.S., devoting just one sentence (the last sentence) to the American role: “A U.S.-led invasion in 2001 toppled the Taliban militant movement from power.”

Iraq Civil War Averted, Iranian Influence Checked

Wednesday, September 26th, 2007 | Middle East | Permalink | No Comments |

Washington Post via Confederate Yankee:

Civil war has been averted in Iraq and Iranian intervention there has “ceased to exist,” Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said yesterday.

“I can’t say there is a picture of roses and flowers in Iraq,” Maliki told the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. “However, I can say that the greatest victory, of which I am proud . . . is stopping the explosion of a sectarian war.” That possibility, he said, “is now far away.”

While political reconciliation is not yet complete, he said, progress is being made. “Reconciliation is not a decision that can be made, but a process that takes continuous efforts and also needs strategic patience,” Maliki said.

Muqtada Al-Sadr Calls Off Violence in Iraq

Wednesday, September 5th, 2007 | Middle East | Permalink | No Comments |

I’m late in linking to this:

BAGHDAD - The powerful Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr publicly ordered his huge militia Wednesday to “freeze” operations for up to six months.

But U.S. and Iraqi officials expressed skepticism of the fiery, anti-American cleric’s intentions and his ability to control the fractured network of fighters who kill in his name.

Al-Sadr issued his order following a day of Shiite-against-Shiite gunfire that killed 49 people during a religious ceremony in the holy city of Karbala. In a statement, he said the freeze would apply to his Mahdi Army militia “without exception in order to have it restructured in a way that would retain for this ideological body its prestige.”

It’s hard not to see this as a turning point and evidence of the success of General Patreus’s surge.

Positive NY Times Op-Ed on the Surge

Tuesday, July 31st, 2007 | Middle East | Permalink | 4 Comments |

NY Times Op-ed by Michael E. O’Hanlon of the Brookings Institution and Kenneth M. Pollack of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at Brookings:

In the past, few Iraqi units could do more than provide a few “jundis” (soldiers) to put a thin Iraqi face on largely American operations. Today, in only a few sectors did we find American commanders complaining that their Iraqi formations were useless — something that was the rule, not the exception, on a previous trip to Iraq in late 2005.

The additional American military formations brought in as part of the surge, General Petraeus’s determination to hold areas until they are truly secure before redeploying units, and the increasing competence of the Iraqis has had another critical effect: no more whack-a-mole, with insurgents popping back up after the Americans leave.

In war, sometimes it’s important to pick the right adversary, and in Iraq we seem to have done so. A major factor in the sudden change in American fortunes has been the outpouring of popular animus against Al Qaeda and other Salafist groups, as well as (to a lesser extent) against Moktada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army.

These groups have tried to impose Shariah law, brutalized average Iraqis to keep them in line, killed important local leaders and seized young women to marry off to their loyalists. The result has been that in the last six months Iraqis have begun to turn on the extremists and turn to the Americans for security and help. The most important and best-known example of this is in Anbar Province, which in less than six months has gone from the worst part of Iraq to the best (outside the Kurdish areas). Today the Sunni sheiks there are close to crippling Al Qaeda and its Salafist allies. Just a few months ago, American marines were fighting for every yard of Ramadi; last week we strolled down its streets without body armor.

ABC: “Document: Iran Caught Red-Handed Shipping Arms to Taliban”

Thursday, June 7th, 2007 | Middle East | Permalink | No Comments |

From ABC’s newsblog:

NATO officials say they have caught Iran red-handed, shipping heavy arms, C4 explosives and advanced roadside bombs to the Taliban for use against NATO forces, in what the officials say is a dramatic escalation of Iran’s proxy war against the United States and Great Britain.

“It is inconceivable that it is anyone other than the Iranian government that’s doing it,” said former White House counterterrorism official Richard Clarke, an ABC News consultant.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stopped short earlier this week of blaming Iran, saying the U.S. did not have evidence “of the involvement of the Iranian government in support of the Taliban.”

But an analysis by a senior coalition official, obtained by the Blotter on ABCNews.com, concludes there is clear evidence of Iran’s involvement.

Iran gave arms to Hezbollah during last year’s proxy war with Isreal. Now it’s been caught giving arms to the Taliban. If Iran gets nuclear weapons there’s no reason to believe they won’t give them to terrorists.

Scott Adams Re-thinks the War on Terror/Al Qaeda

Tuesday, June 5th, 2007 | Middle East | Permalink | 1 Comment |

He’s now in favor of it:

One of the problems is that there is a complete disconnect between reality and what terrorists believe. They think God gave them specific real estate, that a horse can fly, there are virgins waiting for them in heaven, and Jews orchestrated the 9-11 attacks. There’s no reason to believe that reality intrudes on their decisions. Tweaking reality would be a waste of time.

This leads me to Israel. I used to think Israel was making a mistake to occupy disputed land and give their enemies more reasons to attack and fewer reasons to make peace. Again, perhaps if we had a time machine there was a period in history where that was true. But we’re long past that. Now I believe there is sufficient perpetual hatred against Israel that it would be irrational for them to offer any concessions. It makes more sense to grab as much land and water as they can get their hands on. And it makes sense to keep the Palestinians in a permanent state of wretchedness and powerlessness as Israel consolidates its hold on those resources. In five hundred years, they’ll be glad they have more land and water.

While I think Israel’s policies are a dark grey form of evil, I support them because at this point they are being entirely rational. It would be hypocritical to deny any other nation the right to pursue their self-interest.

Is the Troop Surge for Iraq, or Iran?

Friday, January 26th, 2007 | Middle East | Permalink | 6 Comments |

I’m starting to wonder if everything is as it appears with the calls for increased troops in Iraq. Ahmadinejad keeps making fierce noises about Iran’s nuclear program. It’s possible the extra troops are a chess move to intimidate him into concessions on Iran’s nuclear program, or at least to be less of a loudmouth. It’s easy to know what’s said at press conferences and in press releases. It’s harder to know what’s happening behind the scenes.

Hoder on a Nuclear Iran

Friday, September 22nd, 2006 | Middle East | Permalink | 1 Comment |

I met Hossein Derakshan (”Hoder”) last year at BlogNashville and covered his talk there. Hoder is an Iranian expat and critic of the current Iranian regime. He currently lives in Canada.

This week he wrote a Washington Post op-ed titled “Iran Needs Nuclear Weapons.”

Hoder fled his native country because of the abuse of power there. He’s spoken out against the Iranian mullah’s manipulation of elections (such as wiping dozens of opposition party candidates off the ballot). He’s fearful of going back because the government may arrest him for his criticism.

Yet he wants that same government to have nuclear weapons. What’s wrong with this picture?

This is the same Iranian government that openly gave conventional arms to Hezbollah a few months ago to wage a proxy war with Israel. Why should we believe they wouldn’t do the same with nuclear weapons?

Conversation in a Food City Checkout Line

Saturday, September 9th, 2006 | Middle East | Permalink | No Comments |

JAY: Do you have your Food City card?
ME: I think. Maybe on my keychain.
JAY: Here. You can use mine.
ME: I’m using your Food City card? Cool. In that case I want five enema bottles, a gross of Kotex, and a dozen Trojans size extra-small.
JAY: Why don’t you go ahead and get some of that cold medicine they keep behind the counter?
ME: (to the cashier) I’ll take a hundred dollars worth of whatever I need to make crystal meth. Put it on his card.

See also:
- Buying Condoms
- Conversation in the Living Room
- Conversation in a Kroger’s Checkout Line
- Conversation at a Urinal (Rated R)

Tags: conversations

How War, Guerilla Warfare, and Terrorism Work

Wednesday, August 30th, 2006 | Middle East | Permalink | No Comments |

Steven den Beste explains all.

Industrial war can be summed up this way: God fights on the side which has the biggest pile of ammunition and the fastest rate of replacement of expended ammunition. Like any general principle it’s not absolutely unconditionally true, but that’s the norm.

In response, two new strategic doctrines of war were developed to make it possible for small logistically-poor forces to contend against large logistically-rich forces without getting instantly crushed: guerrilla warfare and terrorist warfare. Both of them seek to nullify the logistical advantage of their richer opponents by maintaining initiative, so as to control the tempo of the war at a level low enough to not exhaust the logistics of the poorer side. For the rest of this discussion I’ll be concentrating on guerrillas.

Guerrillas hide among civilians, and only come out and form up when they choose to fight. The rest of the time they’re invisible, which makes it impossible for their rich opponent to find them.

It’s possible for guerrillas to win directly, but the doctrine doesn’t assume that to be the only way victory can be achieved. The idea is to try to fight a long slow war and to build strength. Guerrillas try to maintain a force-in-being, and concentrate heavily on propaganda. By so doing they try to wear out their opponent, try to rally supporters, and try to find patrons elsewhere to support the fight. When handled ideally all these begin slow but increase in effectiveness as time goes on. As their strength builds, they can make more attacks, and get more headlines. The other side’s war weariness grows. Patrons see the guerrillas winning and are more enthusiastic about providing more and better weapons and supplies to help them. Locals see them winning and are more likely to join or otherwise support them.

Anyone recognize Hezbollah in what I just wrote? That’s what they’ve been trying to do in Lebanon.

Syrian Missiles Being Fired at Israel

Tuesday, August 15th, 2006 | Middle East | Permalink | No Comments |

From the UK Telegraph:

Abandoned Hizbollah positions in Lebanon yesterday revealed conclusive evidence that Syria - and almost certainly Iran - provided the anti-tank missiles that have blunted the power of Israel’s once invincible armour.

Israel TV Station: Iranian Soldiers Found Among Hizbollah

Friday, August 11th, 2006 | Middle East | Permalink | No Comments |

Reuters:

Members of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard have been found among Hizbollah guerrillas slain by Israeli forces in southern Lebanon, Israel’s Channel 10 television reported on Wednesday citing diplomatic sources.

It said the Iranians were identified by documents found on their bodies, but gave no further details on how many were discovered or when. Neither the Israeli military nor Hizbollah representatives in Beirut had immediate comment on the report.

I’d like to see confirmation from a non-Israeli source. (Israel is engaged to some degree in a progaganda war, even if it is somewhat less cynical and shameless than Hezbollah’s propaganda war.) If it is true the story doesn’t surprise me.

See also:
- I Just Realized We’re in a Proxy War with Iran and Syria

I Just Realized We’re in a Proxy War with Iran and Syria

Tuesday, August 8th, 2006 | Middle East | Permalink | 1 Comment |

So this war in Iraq. This confrontation between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. I just realized we’re in a proxy war with Iran. And Syria, to a lesser degree.

Iran and Syria have armed Hezbollah with some 14,000 rockets. A Hezbollah soldier tells Reuters he trained in Iran and arrived there on a flight from Syria. It’s long been said that Iran was supplying and manning the Iraq resistance.

So we’re in a proxy war with Iran and probably Syria. It’s worth remembering that as news comes out of the Middle East.

Iraq Oil Production Highest Since War Began

Friday, June 30th, 2006 | Middle East | Permalink | No Comments |

Production now at 2.5 million barrels per day.