The Laughing Wolf: A Few Interesting Tidbits I've Run Across

February 24, 2006

A Few Interesting Tidbits I've Run Across

by the English Werewolf:

I've been doing my usual semi-random following of links these past few days, and have found a few interesting little items that might also interest one or two of you.

The first is a story published by the Scotsman, newspaper of Edinburgh, UK. Francis Fukuyama, writer of the book "The End Of History," and one of the founding fathers of the neocon movement, has publically stated that the whole neocon thing has "evolved into something I can no longer support", and that it's now time to tear the whole thing down. According to the article, Fukuyama believes this failure has demonstrated "the danger of good intentions carried to extremes" -- and in regards to the Iraq war, "Although the new and ominous possibility of undeterrable terrorists armed with weapons of mass destruction did indeed present itself, advocates of the war wrongly conflated this with the threat presented by Iraq and with the rogue state/proliferation problem more generally."

He says that the radicalized elements of Islam are a byproduct of the modernisation of Islamic societies. Not to put myself on the same intellectual level as Mr. Fukuyama, but I'd long been thinking that Islam seems to be entering their own version of the "crusade" period that Christianity went through starting in 1096. Just as with the Christian fanatics, only a small percentage of those claiming the faith are involved in the atrocities, yet it poorly reflects on all members of the faith. Let's just hope Islam doesn't take 250 years to work through this phase!

The story's here.

The other two links I've been holding on to for the past couple of days are actually related. Ever since the State Of The Union, I've been waiting for Big Oil to "disappear" the President, who has publically uttered the "E" word.

Ethanol.

Of course, they probably aren't too concerned, because W seems to believe that this is a future technology, inevitably approaching, but somewhere just in front of the Hydrogen world he's previously promoted. While there are aspects of the ethanol-fueled society that are indeed "yet to come" -- the production capacity to actually replace a large percentage of today's gasoline consumption, for example -- we're much closer than W thinks. This article published on the LiveScience.com site updates the work to find efficient methods to produce "cellulosic ethanol." In other words, ethanol from non-seed sources such as corn stalks, wood waste, even the switchgrass W mentioned in the SOTU. Essentially, the new technologies will probably rely on microbial assistance to break the cellulose plant material down into basic sugars, which then can be fermented into 199 proof ethanol. Termites (hosts to the microbes being studied) to the rescue of human civilization -- talk about irony!

(An aside; the switchgrass reference was planted in the SOTU due to the efforts of Sen. Sessions of Alabama, who got the info from an Auburn U. agronomist working with ethanol production from switchgrass and other fast-growing plants.)

Here's that article.

The Prez has been using the "E" word a lot in public since the SOTU; however, he will never master the art of oratory (sadly...). The White House recently released a transcript of one of W's appearances; this one in Golden, CO at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (which, oddly enough, had recently had its budget CUT by Congress; Congress did see fit to add back some of what they had cut so that some researchers and staff could be rehired). Several bigwigs of industry were also on the panel; unfortunately the WH skipped their segments in the transcript.

(Maybe because the other panel members were able to maintain trains of thought long enough to complete a sentence?)

I'm pretty sure W is moderately intelligent; I wish he could sound it. Transcripts only emphasis his shortcomings in public speaking.

The transcript is at www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060221.html . (For some reason, MT is cutting off the entry at this point when I set it up as a link.)

There are several million cars on the road NOW that can run on E85 fuel -- 85% ethanol, 15% gasoline -- or any blend of ethanol and gasoline from 0/100 to 85/15. The problem is that there are practically NO E85 PUMPS in this country! Unfortunately, the oil barons control most of the pumps -- another reason they're not terribly concerned by W's current fascination.

Even if you can't use E-85 (and most cars can run perfectly well on a blend of 20% ethanol; I run mine, both non-flex fuel cars, on 20-30% ethanol as often as possible -- but then, I'm one of the lucky few living within a few miles of an E85 pump...), you can help push this fuel forward. Just ask, when you fill up, where the E85 pump IS -- and, when the station owner looks at you with a clueless expression, you can say that the President says we should be using E85 instead of gasoline, and that it's the owner's PATRIOTIC DUTY to offer an American-produced fuel to his customers.

And it really is....

(we now return you to your regular ranter....)

Posted by English Werewolf at February 24, 2006 05:27 PM | TrackBack

Comments

Laughing Wolf,

In what sense do you think the crusades are parallel to events
in the moslem world today?

You said,

"I'd long been thinking that Islam seems to be entering their
own version of the "crusade" period that Christianity went
through starting in 1096."

I'm uncertain what you mean. By the eleventh century the
Catholic Church had split in two with one being based in the west
and the other in Anatolia, which today we call Turkey.
The Anatolian church or Greek Orthodox Church had once
dominated a good part of the middle east although there
was also the Assyrian Christian Church, centered in Iraq
which may possibly have been even larger.

In any case by the eleventh century most of this land had
been conquored by muslim forces and most christians
lived under muslim rule. In the late eleventh century
the heart of the Orthodox power, Anatolia, was invaded by
muslims and not surprisingly the Greek Orthodox Church --
and note at the time the people of Anatolia spoke greek and
arguably were greek -- appealed to the western christians
for help.

This was the rallying cry of the first crusade, and to a lessor
degree all the other crusades -- it was all about repelling
muslim invaders and freeing christians from muslim rule.

Now it escapes me why this is such an ignoble thing. True
many atrocities were committed in the course of it, but then
the same can be said of for all other combatents in that timeframe,
including most especially the muslims.

So what's the deal?

And what is it that makes today's circumstances like the crusades?

Posted by: Mark Amerman at February 25, 2006 11:07 AM

Mark:

The commentary was by the English Werewolf, not by the Laughing One.

My use of the Crusade example is a (very) imperfect analogy, not meant to illustrate any precise parallels in the paths of the two faiths.

Islam has also essentially split into (at least) two major "denominations" -- Shi'a and Sunni. Again, quite a bit different from the Roman/Greek Orthodox split of the Catholic church, but vaguely similar in some respects. Unlike the Catholic split, however, these two sects still occupy the same general territory, with concentrations here and there of one or the other.

If you review the past few decades, from the Muslim perspective -- they certainly feel they HAVE been invaded and conquered; but by Western culture/entertainment/enterprise, what have you -- and this is basically TRUE. It's not been a deliberate, "let's overrun the Muslims with naked babes" kinda thing, but many of that faith feels that has been the end result. So, the backlash takes a violent turn, since it's so easy to acquire weapons with the untold billions of dollars washing around with nowhere to go in the middle east. It's too bad that this money hasn't been devoted to the study of, recording, preservation, and dissemination of Islamic history and culture; keeping the conflict on an intellectual basis would have sharpened and improved all of us.

I suppose a middling analogy could involve the easily aroused emotionalism that can be generated amongst the poorly-educated of the Muslim masses; similar to the emotional response that could be aroused in the uneducated masses of Europe in the medieval age.

The roots of the Crusades were both in true spiritual ground, in that the West was riding in to "rescue" brother Christians from "heathen" domination, but also in the soil of earthly riches. Too many leaders in the Crusades were diverted by the promise of immense riches to be had from plundering along the way (from WHOEVER was in their path, Muslim or whatever), and the rallying cry soon devolved into "free Jerusalem from the infidels," and, by the way, bring home all the gold and gems you can find along the way.

It's my impression, from too little current research and maybe a hazy memory from history courses taken long ago, that Muslim rule in the eleventh and twelfth centuries was actually pretty enlightened, even when compared to how we (supposedly) coexist in the US today. If it were not for Muslim scholars, much knowledge would have been lost during the Dark Ages (darkest, that is, in Europe), and the quest for new knowledge was an honored occupation among the followers of Islam.

It's not that the impulse behind the first Crusades was ignoble. It became that when individual greed overwhelmed that initial motive. And certainly the definition of "atrocity" has changed in the intervening thousand years.

One item is unchanged from that time to this -- for some people, on both sides (ALL sides, as there's at least three (including the Jewish angle) and probably several more...), it's still about who controls Jerusalem.

English Werewolf.

Posted by: English Werewolf at February 25, 2006 11:17 PM