November 7, 2005

Welcome to the Schmuck

Brendan Miniter, Wall Street Journal op-edster denounces the new movie "Jarhead" in a piece entitled:

"Disillusioned warriors bomb at the box office.

Great headline, except that, according to BoxOfficeMojo.com:

"Jarhead" enlisted $27.7 million at 2,411 locations, storming past industry expectations. Universal Pictures' $72 million military drama was in a similar range as "Black Hawk Down's" $28.6 million nationwide berth and was considerably stronger than "Three Kings" and "Courage Under Fire," two pictures that also dealt with Operation Desert Storm. "Yippee!," said Universal's head of distribution, Nikki Rocco. "That's my word. I think the entire industry had [the movie] in the high teens."

That's a solid $11,500 per-theatre opening weekend gross for a movie aimed at a literate audience. I guess, when you are a WSJ op-edster, you don't have to know anything about the business aspects of what you're opining about.

An excerpt from my upcoming American Conservative (subscribe here) review of "Jarhead:"

War movies have been getting more stomach-churning over the decades, but that hasn't hurt recruiting. The more gore on the screen, the more boys want to prove they're man enough to take it. Although Marines have been dying in Iraq at a disproportionate rate, the manliest of all the services still hit its enlistment quota for fiscal year 2005, while the more feminized Army has struggled.

Former Marine lance corporal Anthony Swofford writes in "Jarhead," his somewhat embroidered Desert Storm memoir about his love-hate relationships with war and his fellow warriors, "Vietnam war films are all pro-war, not matter what the supposed message, what Kubrick or Coppola or Stone intended."

Indeed, when "Apocalypse Now" was finally released in 1979 after years of hype about how it would be the ultimate antiwar movie, I noticed that all the most macho ROTC guys at my college were humming Wagner's Ride of the Valkyries. Likewise, in this slow but often hilarious adaptation of Swofford's book, a theatre full of Marines lustily sings along as Francis Ford Coppola's helicopters rain down death from above. Young soldiers, Swofford notes, are excited by war movies "because the magic brutality of the films celebrates the terrible and despicable beauty of their fighting skills."


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Adoption: New study, old results

From the Sunday Times of London:

Good genes beat good homes as guide to pupils’ school success
by David Smith and Abul Taher

NATURE not nurture is the main determinant of how well children perform at school and university, according to a study to be published this week. The researchers came to their conclusion by comparing how well adopted children did at school when they were brought up alongside parents’ biological children. The relative effects of genes and the home environment were then separated out.

Previous studies have suggested that the home environment, and in particular the level of family income, is the most important determinant of educational attainment.

But the new study, to be published in the Royal Economic Society’s Economic Journal, will argue that while income and home environment account for about 25% of educational attainment, inherited intelligence is responsible for the rest.

Doubling a family’s income would have only a small effect on educational performance, say the researchers, who examined more than 15,000 children, 574 of them adopted...

The study, Does Family Income Matter for Schooling Outcomes? by Wim Vijverberg, professor of economics at Texas University, and Erik Plug, an economics researcher at Amsterdam University, concludes that previous studies suggesting a strong link between family income and educational performance were flawed.

“Children of higher income parents probably do well in school because they inherit superior genes, not because they can afford to buy their children a better education,” said Vijverberg.

Adoption experts said the research failed to take into consideration other factors. Jonathan Pearce, director of Adoption UK, said: “A lot of adopted children have faced previous trauma or abuse.”

The quality, as well as quantity, of children available for adoption has fallen since the legalization of abortion.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Help me out here

I think understand American and British riots fairly well, but I'm not sure I know what's going on in France. Essentially, what happens here is that people notice that the cops have lost control of an area, so they can get free stuff (or as Robin Williams derisively called it during the LA riots in 1992, "political shopping.") For example, when my wife was a little girl, on the day after Martin Luther King was assassinated, she looked out of her house window on the West Side of Chicago and noticed that neighbors were walking down the street holding new televisions. "Look, mom, free TVs! Let's get some!" Her mom locked her in her room.

Similarly, during the 1992 Michael Jordan victory riots in Chicago following the Bulls' NBA championship, a mob of white yuppies looted the best book store in Chicago, Stuart Brent's on Michigan Ave. (where I used to see Saul Bellow browsing), of coffee table art books.

The gigantic Rodney King riots earlier that year in LA got started when thugs broke into liquor stores at Florence and Normandie. The LAPD, having been dragged across the coals for a year over excessive use of force in subduing that philosopher, said, in effect, "Forget it, we're not going to bother, let the public see who the real bad guys are," and let the drink-soaked mob run amok.

So, are the riots in France primarily driven by looting? Or are they more of an intifada intended to intimidate the government into handing out expensive concessions? Or just tough guys showing off? Or what?


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Did you know that the U.S. Constitution authorizes privateering?

Across Difficult Country suggests that Congress respond to the Somali pirate attack on a cruise ship by utilizing its Constitutionally-assigned power to "grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water" to authorize private ships to hunt down the pirates:

" Not only would this be an efficient solution to the piracy problem, it would also be all kinds of fun."

UPDATES: A reader responds:

I am not an expert on international law, but I think privateering was outlawed by an international treaty in the 1850s. I think a privateer now has the legal status of a pirate.

Those international busybodies, taking away all our innocent pleasures...

Mr. Across Difficult Country replies:

According to Wikipedia though European countries outlawed letters of marque via the 1865 Treaty of Paris, the US never signed the treaty.

We have been adhering to that treaty, even though we didn't sign it. But, hey, we've recently tossed out international law technicalities like not invading sovereign countries, so why not privateering?

Some senator should ask Judge Alito during his hearings about Letters of Marqe. It's definitely part of the Original Intent of the Constitution. And it would be more fun than dancing around Roe v. Wade for days.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

November 6, 2005

Chirac playing his Stay-Out-of-Jail card

The ideological aspect of the war within the French government over dealing with the Muslim riots is interesting: Sarkozy has a dual right-left strategy, involving both a police crackdown and instituting affirmative action for Muslims. Villepin (and Chirac behind him) wants to stay with the neoconnish traditional approach where ethnicity isn't supposed to matter, but is talking up "compassion."

But, as is common in these post-Cold War days, ideology is mostly a facade. A French friend, whose English is less than perfect (but infinitely better than my French) writes:

The situation in French political circles is quite peculiar: the favorite for next presidential elections, Sarkozy, is an enemy of the current President Chirac, who fears that when in power Sarkozy will send him to jail. So Chirac is trying to "kill" him (that's the term used by politicians, they consider themselves as "killers"), and for this is launching Dominique de Villepin in the media. Villepin has made his political career under Chirac, and so is probably implicated in all scandals that could affect Chirac (ex: Oil For Terror): he is a secure ally.

The opposition between both is exaggerated by media on any affair, and for these riots, they are positioning themselves on opposite points. While Sarkozy uses strong words and speak about Republican Law, Villepin is trying to give an image of himself as compassionate, and is willing to give advantages to Muslims.

But actually, these are no more than words.

This seems to be a growing trend of national leaders needing to manipulate their succession to keep from going to jail themselves. This has been standard practice in Mexico for decades, and it's how Putin ended up running Russia. Perhaps it's a good sign that politicians are at least more worried about going to jail these days. But it doesn't feel like a good sign.

A reader writes:

Anyway, a new intellectual consensus will likely emerge on both sides of Atlantic which will recommend the following:

1) Obviously there hasn't been enough multi-culturalism. To increase understanding of Muslims, France needs to import even more of them!

2) There needs to be more welfare, more equality, because that's what rioting youths are angry about!

3) The rioting youths weren't Muslims. Don't you know Islam is a religion of peace?

The Wall Street Journal editorializes that the solution, surprisingly enough, is to cut wages. And the WSJ editors conclude:

"The U.S. experience shows that all immigrants, regardless of race or creed, ultimately respond to the same incentives to embrace their new home. The Muslims of Europe are unlikely to be different."

You see, if the Muslim of Europe were different, that would be a bad thing, and only bad people think bad things might be true.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

November 3, 2005

More thoughts on the five-year silence on Scooter Libby's long connection to Marc Rich

In response to my posts on why Scooter Libby avoided criticism for being Marc Rich's mob lawyer, a Jewish reader writes:

I'm especially saddened and angered that perfectly legitimate Jewish charities and purportedly pious Orthodox rabbis are so willing to take dirty money. Corruption is a serious problem in the Jewish community, and one the community is very reluctant to face - even when the cameras are not rolling.

On Gideon's Blog, Noah Millman wrote awhile ago:

I am particularly ashamed of the whole business because [Republican lobbyist Jack] Abramoff appears to have been involved with (a) legitimate Jewish charities; (b) a number of Orthodox rabbis; (c) the Israeli settlers' movement.

Abramoff not only fleeced his clients and corrupted his government, but he seems to have thought this was OK in part because he was stealing money (partly) to finance Jewish charitable and political/religious/nationalist activities.

This is deeply wrong on a variety of levels. Not only because violating the law of the land is, where that law itself is not unjust, a religious transgression (the rabbinic dictum is: dina di malkhuta dina - the law of the land is law). Not only because these kinds of games are "bad for the Jews" in that they may lead people to think that all Jews are similarly corrupt, or that Jewish involvement in politics is potentially corrupting. But because it is categorically wrong to fulfill a mitzvah - a commandment - by means of an avera - a transgression. You get no points in heaven for behaving like the Bad Baronet of Ruddygore.

It is one thing to say, such-and-such law is unjust, so breaking it to do good is not a transgression. But theft is wrong, corruption is wrong - the laws against such behavior are not unjust, and breaking them in order to do "good" - leaving aside whether the particular activities he supported were indeed good - is sinful on a number of levels.

And yet, for some reason, over and over again I read about rabbinic authorities who have failed to comprehend this basic principle, and accept dirty money and corrupt relationships for their charities or other activities.

This kind of behavior has got to be anathematized in the Jewish community, and especially in the more insular parts of the Orthodox world - not for my sake, but for theirs, and for the sake of Heaven.

Being allowed to destroy outside critics' careers by calling them "anti-Semites" is not good for the soul.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Update on Scooter trial

timeline and jury demographics: A reader writes:

Jeff Toobin just said on CNN that due to lawyers needing security clearances, Scooter’s trial may not start until 2007. With pre-trial motions, continuances, and possible appeals, that could stretch easily past Pardon Day 2008 (12/24/08). BTW, are you surprised that he hired a distinguished senior black attorney Ted Wells who had previously represented Clinton Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy? Espy admitted upfront that he had accepted the gifts of Super Bowl tickets and a Jeep from agri-business executives, but was still acquitted of all felony charges by a mostly black DC jury.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Blond sumo wrestlers

Back in 1999, I wrote a spec screenplay for the HBO comedy Arliss: The Art of the Sports Superagent.

Arliss
was perhaps the least popular sit-com ever to survive a half dozen years. The lead actor, Robert Wuhl, mugged too much and the pro athletes who did cameos were almost all wooden. But it had a small but intense fan base among prominent men because it was the most politically incorrect comedy ever and the intelligence level of the writing was about two standard deviations above that of the much more popular Sex in the City. Each time HBO was about to cancel it (which was just about after every season), guys like Tom Brokaw would complain and the producers would get another order for 13 shows.

The main plot of my spec script was about a black quarterback who plans to start a black-only country club. But the subplot was about an aging client, a white basketball center from Tulane named Devereaux Blanc, who is such a gourmet that he has eaten his way out of the NBA and has now lost his job playing for Milan. To find him another Italian league team, Arliss had handed him off to his sharp secretary Rita (played by Sandra Oh of "Sideways) and his concussion-addled assistant Kirby, a washed-up NFL quarterback:

KIRBY

(trying to imitate Arliss)

Dev, the Ragin' Cajun, the Man Who Took Tu-lane to the Final Four-Lane.

Dev stares at him blankly.

KIRBY (CONT'D.)

Bad news, big guy. Every Italian team told us that during your year in Milan you put on thirty-five kilograms.

(accusingly)

Do you know how much that is?

(pause)

Well, neither do I, but apparently it's too goddam much.

DEV

So, I'll play in Greece. … If only goat cheese had a subtler flavor …

RITA [Sandra Oh]

(ruefully)

We called the Greek teams, too.

DEV

Spain? … Turkey???

KIRBY

Luckily, there is an expansion team that's not worried about you putting on pounds: the Glasgow Neap-Eaters. … What are neaps?

DEV

Mashed turnips.

KIRBY

Well, there you go: the Scotch like food, too.

Arliss then thinks of peddling Dev to the WWF as the Gargantuan Gourmet, but Rita won't make the call because pro wrestling is too chicken-fried steakish for a man of Dev's exquisite taste. Fortunately, there's a happy ending:

Rita and Dev burst in, smiling.

RITA

Knock knock! Dev has a contract!

Kirby struggles in man-handling a huge stand-up cardboard cut-out, of which we can only see its blank backside.

DEV

Rita found me a wrestling job with a fascinating cuisine to explore.


KIRBY

Here's what Dev'll look like once he gets in shape.


While Rita speaks, Kirby turns the stand-up cut-out around. It's a LIFE-SIZED, but headless, 2-d version of 600 POUND Samoan sumo wrestler Konishiki in traditional garb.
Kirby places the cut-out in front of Dev, so Dev's head appears to be attached to Konishiki's BLOATED BODY.


RITA

Mr. Saito, Dev's new stable manager, says he'd assumed Japanese fans wouldn't support sumo wrestlers from, uh …


KIRBY

Bigger races. But the fans love Konishiki, who's a 600 pound Samoan.


RITA

So, Dev will be the first white.


KIRBY

The Ragin' Caucasian.


RITA

A pioneer of diversity.


KIRBY

Jackie Robinson in a g-string.

Well, the Arliss producers hated my spec script, but another show's producers liked it enough to have me pitch them ideas and paid (nicely) for a script. (It's a rule of thumb that the show you write your spec script for will hate it, but you can still use it to get work on other shows.)

I was reminded of all this ancient history by this new Washington Post story:


Blonds Enter the Sumo Ring: Fleshy Foreigners Crack Japan's Sacred Sport
By Anthony Faiola Washington Post Foreign Service


TOKYO -- Flesh struck flesh with a thunderous smack, and rolls of fat and muscle rippled down the alabaster-skinned frame of the blond sumo Baruto [see picture], a rising star in Japan's national sport. Clad only in a traditional loincloth, the sweaty Estonian towered over his stouter Japanese opponents during a morning practice, knocking them to the dirt floor one after the other, like so many oversized bowling pins.

"I came to Japan to be a sumo champion," said Baruto, 20, the professional name of Kaido Hoovelson. After only 19 months in Japan, the 6-foot-6, 360-pound Baruto -- which means Baltic in Japanese -- is soaring in the rankings. "I still feel like a foreigner, and I don't understand many of the customs of sumo. But I don't care. I plan on making it to the top anyway."

Baruto's ruddy complexion and hungry, outsider's spirit make up the new face of sumo wrestling in Japan, where foreigners are now dominating what once was among the purest and most sacred cultural bastions. The change has become a metaphor, many here say, for a reluctantly globalizing Japan. Foreigners are making unprecedented inroads in this nation long considered to be highly xenophobic, breaking into the top levels of fields as diverse as sports, finance and the arts.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Who Could Have Imagined? (Part 538)

The NYT reports:

Malfeasance Might Have Hurt Levees, Engineers Say
By JOHN SCHWARTZ

WASHINGTON, Nov. 2 - The head of a team of engineering experts told a Senate committee on Wednesday that malfeasance during construction might have been one reason for the catastrophic failure of the levees that were supposed to protect New Orleans from hurricanes.

"These levees should have been expected to perform adequately at these levels if they had been designed and constructed properly," said the expert, Raymond Seed, a professor of civil engineering at the University of California, Berkeley.

"Not just human error was involved," Professor Seed said. "There may have been malfeasance."

Professor Seed, whose team was financed by the National Science Foundation, did not offer hard evidence to back up his accusation. But he said after the hearing that the team had been contacted by levee workers, contractors and, in some cases, widows of contractors who told stories of protective sheet pile being driven less deeply than plans called for and corners cut in choosing soils for construction, among other problems.

His group is trying to confirm the accounts, he said, and he cautioned that even if proved, they might not be a major contributing factor in the disaster, which killed 1,000 people and left 100,000 without homes.

Corruption and feckless negligence in New Orleans? I'm sh-- ... ehhhh, forget it ...


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

November 2, 2005

The Brief Rise and Sudden Fall of the Italian-American Civil Rights League

The Brief Rise and Sudden Fall of the Italian-American Civil Rights League: From Wikipedia:

The Italian-American Civil Rights League was a short-lived grass-roots political organization which existed in and around New York City in the early 1970s. Its stated goal was to combat pejorative stereotypes about Italian-Americans, specifically their association with the Mafia.

A precise, fixed date can be assigned to denote the group's founding: April 30, 1970, when approximately 30 Italian-Americans, led by reputed mobster Joseph Colombo, picketed the Manhattan headquarters of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. They were there to protest the recent arrest of Colombo's son... Prior to this, the senior Colombo had complained of unfair harassment of him and his family by various federal law-enforcement authorities, who alleged that Colombo was the boss of one of New York City's five Mafia families — a charge he repeatedly denied.

The 30 demonstrators who appeared at the FBI building were joined by others in successive days, and ultimately their number grew to more than 5,000. The group then adopted the name "Italian-American Civil Rights League" after Colombo's attorney, Barry Slotnick, had suggested it...

Within two months, the organization claimed 45,000 dues-paying members, and held a large rally in Columbus Circle on June 28, 1970. The league gained further momentum when Frank Sinatra held a benefit concert in its honor at Madison Square Garden in November of that year.

The group then turned its attention to what it perceived as cultural slights against Italian-Americans, using boycott threats to force Alka-Seltzer and General Motors to withdraw television commercials the league objected to, and also got United States Attorney General John Mitchell to order the United States Justice Department to stop using the word "Mafia" in official documents and press releases. The league also secured an agreement from Al Ruddy, the producer of The Godfather, to omit the terms "Mafia" and "Cosa Nostra" from the film's dialogue, and succeeded in having Macy's stop selling a board game called The Godfather Game....

On June 28, 1971, the league held another rally in Columbus Circle — but this time tragedy would result, as Colombo was shot three times in the head by an African-American named Jerome Johnson (who was then immediately shot and killed himself); the blast left Colombo in a coma from which he would never recover (he died on May 22, 1978). Theories abounded as to the motive for the shooting; the most commonly-held belief was that other Mafia bosses in New York ordered the hit because they did not like the media attention Colombo and the group were receiving. The organization, at that time believed to number more than 100,000, had effectively disappeared within a year after the shooting.

Honest Italian-Americans ended up greatly benefiting from the collapse of the Italian American Civil Rights League. With the danger of being accused of racism removed, the federal government during the Reagan Administration hammered the Mafia and left it a shell of what it once was. Since the Mafia preyed most of all on their co-ethnics, that was a huge win for Italian-Americans.

This issue is not whether or not one group is more prone to organized nefariousness than any other. The issue is that if any group is exempted from criticism, as Mr. Colombo attempted to get Italian-Americans exempted, so that anyone who publicly notes anything bad about its behavior is excoriated as a racist or worse, the temptation for members of the group to do bat things increases. We all have urges that are worthy of criticism, but if we can arrange matters so nobody is allowed to criticize us, then the temptation to give in to those urges can be overpowering.

A reader writes:

It is interesting how crushing the Mafia removed all the hypersensitivity about naming it. Rudolph Giuliani, the Italian son of a father who reportedly had early and minor Mafia ties and the prosecutor who did so much to break the organization's power in the 1980s, now does a very funny Mafia skit as part of his corporate speech act. I saw him at a conference in Atlanta, and Rudy begins by talking about how mind-numbingly boring it was to listen to tapes of idiotic Mafiosi conversations, then launches into imitations of the dialogue, complete with the heavy garlic accents.

In contrast, Mario Cuomo could never joke about the mob.

The collapse of the Italian-American Civil Rights League was a huge boost for the careers of Italian-American actors like De Niro, Pacino, and Gandolfini who were freed to play mafioso. In contrast, although Hollywood has made dozens of movies over the last decade and a half with "Russian mafia" bad guys, they have typically employed Slavic-looking actors rather than the co-ethnics of the actual higher-ups among the most successful organized criminals in Russia.

Yet, Hollywood has been better about bringing us at least a distorted picture of one of the vast stories of the last 15 years, the looting of Russia, than has the "serious media."

By refusing to view Russian politics from a realist (i.e., conspiratorial) perspective during the 1990s, the respectable press largely failed to accurately report what was happening in Russia after the break-up of the Soviet Union. For years, the establishment media insisted on portraying Russian politicians as ideologically motivated public servants clashing over whether to emphasize the free market or the social safety net.

Instead, these idealistic-sounding labels were mostly masks for the conspiracies of various criminal gangs struggling over who got the biggest share of the loot. In contrast to the serious press, Hollywood, which quickly added the Russian Mafia to its inventory of stock bad guys, may well have provided a more realistic sense of what power in Boris Yeltsin's Russia was really all about.

A major reason why the press refused to tell you about what was really happening in Russia was because of the ethnic identity of the initial winners (since Putin's advent, ethnic Russian big shots have been clawing back assets, such as by imprisoning the Yukos Oil company leadership). Yale Law School Professor Amy Chua, author of World on Fire on the rise of "market dominant minorities," explained the sensitivity of the facts to an interviewer:

Q. One case that intrigued me was the case of the oligarchs in post-communist Russia. In that case, six of the seven oligarchs turn out to be Jewish [to be precise, five and a half of seven]. But in a way, it's a product of their having been excluded before, under the communist system.

Chua: Absolutely.

Q. Talk a little about that.

Chua: Well, that's one of the more controversial cases to write about. There are so many invidious ethnic stereotypes, and so much anti-Semitism, so it's a hard topic to discuss. You hear things like "Jews controlling the United States economy." I actually researched that and documented that that's false. The U.S. economy is not controlled by any ethnic minority, whether it's the Koreans or the Jews. It's just not true, if you look at the ten wealthiest Americans. Not so in the former Soviet Union. In the anarchic shift to capitalism in the early nineties, which, by the way, I think was ill-advised -- it was just a fast transition to cowboy capitalism; there were no anti-monopoly laws, no anti-insider trading laws -- but the result of that was that seven men, known as the oligarchs, came to control roughly 60 percent of Russia's incredible natural resource wealth: oil, nickel, the minerals.

I wasn't the first to document this. It came out in The New York Times magazine and a book called Sale of the Century, by Chrystia Freeland. But it was well known in the former Soviet Union. Six out of these seven men were Jewish, or at least of Jewish background. I did have a lot of research assistants who delved into this question of why; they were all students from Russia, many of them Jewish. The explanations are partly a result of exclusion. Many of these men, the oligarchs, wanted to go into the Soviet Academy of Sciences, but were excluded because of anti-Semitic reasons and ended up doing other things. Lots of them ended up being very active in the black markets during the Soviet era. Now, black market sounds negative, but, in fact, everybody loved the black markets during the communist era. It was the only place that officials and others could get shoes and consumer products. There were shortages everywhere. The black market during the Soviet era was essentially the only capitalism there was.

In fact, all of the oligarchs had practice in a private economy, in markets. Many of them translated those skills very successfully when suddenly, with perestroika, there was market liberalization. Before everybody even knew it was going on, they were privatizing, and it was a complicated process. But for whatever reasons, these men came to the fore, bought up a lot of the things that were for sale, got in touch with the foreign investors, and came to control a disproportionate amount of the economy.

That case fits sadly, very neatly into my thesis because you have this enormous transfer to markets -- not the kind of markets I think we should be promoting -- leading to these seven men controlling 60 percent of the natural resources.

But what does democracy do? Sadly, [democracy] and free speech led to the emergence of anti-Semitic political parties, politicians that were openly campaigning on, "Let's expel the Jews. Let's take back their property. The Jews are milking us dry." And that's a pattern that we saw in Indonesia around the same time; it's very interesting. Free market policies in the 1980s and 90s in Indonesia led to a situation where the country's tiny 3 percent Chinese minority controlled an astounding 70 percent of the private economy.

Democratization in 1998 [in Indonesia], which was hailed with euphoria in the United States -- I still remember everybody was so excited about democracy in Indonesia -- well, tragically, democracy produced a violent backlash against both the Chinese and against markets. Politicians in Indonesia fell over themselves campaigning on anti-Chinese platforms. You know, "Let's take back the economy." And right now, the Indonesian government has nationalized about $58 billion worth of ethnic Chinese assets. That's part of the reason that country is in such an economic crises.

Q. Before this democratization occurs in many places, what you get is an alliance between the economically dominant minority and the ruling autocrat. You used the common term "crony capitalism."

Right. It's an interesting challenge: if you think of the worst cases of crony capitalism, you'll be surprised to find that almost every one involved a market-dominant ethnic minority. It's a very typical pattern for an indigenous dictator, say, Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines. Ferdinand and Imelda were Filipinos, they were supposed to represent the majority, but instead, they went into a crony capitalist situation with their country's best entrepreneurs, who are Chinese. It was this little symbiotic relationship. The Marcoses said, "We'll let you make money as long as you kick back bribes and profit to us, and we won't have majority rule." That's what Suharto did in Indonesia. He had a tiny handful of Chinese cronies, who made a huge amount of money, and then kicked it back to him. That's what President Daniel Arap Moi did in Kenya. He had a very authoritarian little regime propped by a very small handful of Lebanese businessmen.

Now, it's crucial to note that there isn't a closely organized Russia-Israel-U.S. Jewish Mafia-with-a-capital-M. There are merely a number of opportunists who tend -- for reasons of family ties, educational connections, personal style, ethnic solidarity (we all hang together or we all hang separately), and personal comfort level -- to do illegal business with each other rather than with people from other ethnic groups.

These crooks have often proved more successful than rival crooks on a per capita basis, for a variety of reasons -- brains, experience, the existence of Israel as a refuge from arrest, and ties to the business, media and think tank worlds in America generating financial and political capital.

But one huge advantage they've enjoyed is that they've possessed what the Italian-American Civil Rights League attempted and failed at: freedom from collective criticism. The mere existence of Jewish crime organizations with operations in Russia, Israel, and the U.S. has been treated by the serious media as one of those taboo topics that you can't talk about. And it's not just a social faux pas, but a taboo enforced by ostracism and career-wrecking.

Thus, we finally arrive at the answer to how Scooter Libby could move from being the mob lawyer for international racketeer Marc Rich to being chief of staff to the Vice President of the United States without raising eyebrows: because the very concept of international Jewish organized crime is off-limits.

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

The demographics of Scooter Libby's upcoming jury in Washington D.C.

The odds are that, like the grand jury that indicted him, it will be dominated by black women. According to the 2004 exit poll, only 5% of black women in DC voted for Bush.

So, since he is highly likely to be convicted, Libby has a choice to make:

- Does he try to run out the clock by going to trial and then appealing his conviction over and over in the hopes that he won't have to serve any prison time before Pardon Day, December 24, 2008, or

- Does he make a deal now and avoid prison by rolling over on a big enchilada like Dick Cheney?


If I were Libby, I would be building a very detailed calendar to estimate just how long it would take Patrick Fitzgerald to put me in prison.

Any readers with knowledge of the courts have any estimates on how likely it would be that Fitzgerald could hustle Libby into prison in less than 37 months?


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Kaus notes a Marc Rich angle in Libby's perjury:

Pardon My Perjury
The secret of Scooter's confidence?
By Mickey Kaus
Updated Wednesday, Nov. 2, 2005, at 2:11 AM ET

Q--If He's So Dumb, Why Isn't He Rich? A--Maybe He Is: A week ago the question of the day, after the NYT reported that Libby's notes show him learning the secret of Mrs. Wilson from Vice-President Cheney, was

Would Libby really have been dumb enough to contradict his own notes (which the prosecutor has had from the start) under oath?

We now think we know the answer to that question, which is that Libby wasn't dumb enough to contradict his own notes. Instead he was dumb enough to avoid contradicting his notes by concocting a wildly implausible story about how he forgot what was in his notes! The story is non-believable on its face, whether Tim Russert testifies or not. ... Who would take such an idiotic risk before a much-feared special prosecutor? One answer: Someone who knows he'll be protected in the end. Someone who knows, for example, that he'll be pardoned. Maybe even someone who had represented a client who'd been pardoned in similarly controversial circumstances. It's easier to be a highwire daredevil when you know you have a safety net.

There were always been two key dates for I. Lewis Libby as he attempted to run out the clock on Patrick Fitzgerald.

- For the team, don't spill the beans or get indicted until after November 2, 2004 (Election Day)

- For himself, don't go to prison until after December 24, 2008 (Pardon Day)

Christmas Eve 2008 is the best date for Bush to pardon the Iraq Attaq plotters, just as his father pardoned Iran-Contra figures, such as current Deputy National Security Advisor Elliott Abrams, on Christmas Eve 1992. Bill Clinton, in contrast, procrastinated until practically Bush II's inauguration, when the attention of the country was already focused on Washington, and was roasted for it. Christmas Eve is a much better day than Inaugural Day for unpopular pardons, because the populace is bored with politics and is in a benign mood.

Pardon Day is just over three years away, so the clock is ticking on Fitzgerald. In Illinois, he indicted 65 people and convicted 59 before unveiling his final indictment in his bribery probe: former Gov. George Ryan. In this investigation, he's starting much higher up, with the right hand men of both the Veep (Libby) and the President (Rove). But Pardon Day is coming.

Fitzgerald can impose a lot financial hardship on Libby over the next three years and seven weeks until Pardon Day, but Libby no doubt has rich and powerful friends who will surely make it up to him if he protect the rest of the cabal by keeping his mouth shut and simply dragging out the proceedings until then. And the remarkable example of Abrams, John Podhoretz's brother-in-law, shows that a pardoned criminal can still come back to get his dream job.

But, is Libby a Liddy? This amateur novelist doesn't strike me as the G. Gordon Liddy-type who laughs at prison. So, can Fitzgerald speed the wheels of justice enough to put a plausible fear of doing serious prison time before Pardon Day into Libby, and thus get him to squeal?


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

November 1, 2005

The Italian Connection

Nur al-Cubicle has posted quick and dirty translations of two brand new articles by Carlo Bonini and Giuseppi d'Avanzo in La Repubblica on Italy's SISMi's role in the Iraq Attaq.

So, once more we venture into the Funhouse of Italians, Iraqis, Iranians, Michael Ledeen, Larry Franklin, Ahmed Chalabi, and Manucher Ghorbanifar! God alone knows how much of these articles is truthful, but, compared to the average veracity of Ledeen's efforts for National Review Onloan, well, I know who I'd bet on.

The first article revolves around yet another meeting in Rome, this time not long before the invasion. It raises the old question of whether or not the neocons' Iraq Attaq agitation was in part a false-flag operation run by the ayatollahs' spy agency in Tehran (what I call the Manchumpian Candidate scenario):

The story of Italian military intervention in Iraq begins when the resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, Michael Ledeen, sponsored by Defense Minister Antonio Martino, debarks in Rome with Pentagon men in tow to meet a handful of “Iranian exiles.” The meeting is organized by SISMI. In an Agency “safe house” near Piazza di Spagna (however, other sources have told us it was a reserved room in the Parco dei Principi Hotel).

Twenty men are gathered around a large table, covered by maps of Iraq, Iran and Syria. The big cheese are Lawrence Franklin and Harold Rhode of the Office of Special Plans, Michael Ledeen of the AIE, a SISMI chief accompanied by his assistant (the former is a balding man between 46 and 48 years of age; the latter is younger, around 38, with braces on his teeth) and some mysterious Iranians.

Pollari confirms the meeting to La Repubblica: When [Defense Minister Martino] asked me to organize the meeting, I became curious. But it was my job and I wasn’t born yesterday. It’s true—my men were also present at the meeting. I wanted to know what was cooking. It’s also true that there were maps of Iraq and Iran on the table. I can tell you those Iranians were not exactly “exiles”. The came and went from Tehran with their passports with no difficulty whatsoever as if they were transparent to the eyes of the Pasdaran.

So the Iranians were not exiles. They were not opponents of the regime of the ayatollahs. These men are members of the regime, sent by Tehran. If someone in Washington is wondering what the devil they were doing there on the eve of the invasion, in Rome, elbow-to-elbow with people from the Pentagon, we can supply some elucidation. But to make some sense out of the confusion, you have to listen to an American intelligence source, who has requested anonymity. He tells us: You Italians have always underestimated the work of conversion carried out Ahmed Chalabi, the chairman of Iraqi National Congress. You tend to omit this chapter from your side of the story because you think Ahmed concerns only the Americans. But that’s not the way it is: he is also your business, far beyond anything you currently believe or imagine.

So what do we know about Ahmed Chelabi? The darling of the Neocons, Chalabi has been charged by the hawks in the Pentagon to pass intel on WMD proliferation to European intelligence agencies supposedly garnered from presumed scientists, who have defected from Baghdad. The person charged with “intelligence gathering” and story invention is Aras Habib Karim, Chalabi’s personal intelligence man.

Aras is a key player. He coordinates the Intelligence Collection Programme. He supervises and fabricates the “output” of the dissidents. He is a Shi’ite Kurd just under 50, extremely clever, consumately evil and a magician of double-cross and document forgery. But there is something peculiar about him. The CIA has long considered him an “Iranian agent.” A second key player is an American, Francis Brooke.

The bogus Italian dossier on the Niger uranium turns up [at the meeting] also—and we don’t know exactly why--because Chalabi is in possession of it.

The second article concerns SISMI's self-congratulation in helping subvert the Iraqi army before the invasion. The background is that the Italians had lots of links to the Iraqi military going back decades. Back in the old days, Iraqi officers would go to get their advanced military training in ... Italy! (That may explain a lot about the Iraqi army's performance in the wars of 1980-1988, 1991, and 2003). So, SISMI apparently infiltrated 20 men into Iraq a few months before the American invasion to report on the status of the Iraqi war machine and bribe Iraqi officers to surrender in return for money, American residency, and the like.

But, that effort produced an unwelcome side effect that had to be hushed up: it quickly emerged that no invasion was needed. Iraq had not WMDs and was utterly contained as a convention power.

What this [Italian] cabinet official [the reporters' source] does not say—what he cannot say— is that our military intelligence service--and therefore the Italian Government (similar to, Iraqi National Congress—and therefore the Pentagon), knows for certain as early as the month of January 2003 (and probably in December 2002) that there are no WMDs in the arsenals of Saddam Hussein. There is no nuclear weapon. There are no long-range missiles. There is no possibility of arming missile warheads with chemical or biological agents. There is only a military which does not want to engage the enemy and a General Staff waiting to surrender at the highest possible price.

And this is the most valuable information which the SISMI agents, integrated into SCIRI’s Shi’ite underground intelligence network led by Ayatollah Muhammad Baqir al-Akim and Ahmed Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress web of spies given to Coalition Unified Command in Doha. The Iraqi army is made out of paper- mâché and poorly armed—even for a small-scale conventional war, the consequences of the drawn-out war with Iran, the invasion of Kuwait in the 1991 Gulf War, the long-lasting imposed no-fly zones, the embargo and the sanctions. In conversations between Italian agents and the Iraqi officers trained in Italian military academies, at Finmeccanica [Italian defense industry] and at Selenia [a defense communications company] who eventually became generals, demolishes any hypothesis of Saddam’s WMD with a sneer and a dismissive wave of the hand.

The Iraqi officers explain how their tanks and armored carriers are relics of the 1980-88 war with Tehran and lack spare parts. They are basically unusable pieces of junk. They reveal to our agents that Saddam’s Armed Forces, from the lowliest regiment to the General Staff, are completely demoralized, inadequately equipped and shoeless.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

Italy since 1943

With Italy much in the news again (see below) because of its role in Libbygate and the Yellowcake Forgeries, it's worth reviewing in more detail the contemporary history of that country.

In the 20th Century, Italy seemed like a misfit. In an age of mass ideologies and mass armies, the Italian tastes for luxury, family, personal connections, bribery, and stealth (see Shakespeare's many plays set in Italy for the traditional English view of Italy) -- and consequent incompetence at large-scale organization -- made the country seem outmoded. Italy's attempt at mass-scale modernity, Fascism, seemed more like the exception that proved the rule that Italy wasn't cut out for the age of ideology. You'd have to live in a country where the trains didn't run on time to see an obvious popinjay like Mussolini as the wave of the future.

Fortunately, the era of mass ideologies and mass warfare is over (knock on wood), and our political vices are returning to the more human scale that the Italians have always found more congenial.

Most Americans feel a deep aversion toward conspiracy theories. To label something as a "conspiracy theory" is to dismiss it out of hand. Americans believe they believe in high-minded principles and believe their enemies believe in evil ideologies. Thus, when members of our government decided to respond to 9/11 by invading Iraq, lots of educated Americans suddenly decided that Osama and Saddam were united by their ideology of Islamofascism, thus justifying the Iraq Attaq. Nobody, including all the alleged Islamofascists, had ever heard of "Islamfofascism" before, but the term quickly became popular among certain classes of Americans. Suggestions that the various players in the Bush Administration were motivated by less principled reasons were denounced as conspiracy theories.

In Italy, in contrast, conspiracy theories are most people's preferred explanation for how the world works, for the simple reason that, in their part of the world, conspiracies are the main mechanism for actually getting anything done. The notion that political operators would favor something on principle seems laughable. The political is personal, in the sense that if you want to understand historical events, you need to understand the connections among the players.

We often heard before the Iraq Attaq that because the U.S. did such a good job reforming Germany and Japan after WWII, we were bound to do the same for Iraq. Strikingly, though, we never heard much about the long-term impact of the 1943 American invasion of western Sicily, which Patton rolled through so easily while Montgomery's British army struggled up the east coast.

The U.S. government long refused to release documents that could confirm or disprove the story that the military made a deal with the Sicilian-born mobster Lucky Luciano to ease the invasion, but Italian experts on the Sicilian mafia date that organization's comeback to 1943. When the Fascist state evaporated in Sicily, we needed to keep civil order without tying down scores of thousands of our troops. (Sound familiar?) So, we turned local control over to patriarchs of families not contaminated by ties to Fascism, men of respect within their own communities, friends who had friends who could keep things quiet and keep out the Communists: i.e., mafioso who had been lying low during Mussolini's crackdown on the mob. Some of this was naiveté on our part, some of it was rigged by well-connected individuals among the 15% of our invasion force that was of Sicilian descent, and some of it was realpolitik.

It worked, but the blowback lasted for at least 50 years. In recent decades, a few heroic Italian prosecutors and cops have made progress against the Sicilian mafia, but Italy remains a country where nothing is what it seems. It's not hard to get Italians to connive and conspire, but the U.S. also funded a lot of these Italian predilections during the Cold War.

T
he overwhelming importance of defeating our subsequent ideological foe during the Cold War caused the U.S. to tolerate, even subsidize, a lot of conspiratorial criminality in Italy, where the chance of a Communist takeover, by invasion, coup, or election was always fairly high. The Mafia's get-out-the-vote abilities in southern Italy made it a bulwark of the anti-Communist Christian Democrats, which we heavily subsidized. Our main man in Cold War Italy, Giulio Andreotti, seven times Prime Minister of Italy, has spent most of his retirement being tried for connections to the Mafia and murdering a scandal-mongering journalist.

In the north of Italy, NATO established a network of potential sleeper cells of armed, trained "stay-behind" resistance fighters who would sabotage any Soviet takeover (Operation Gladio). Very patriotic, but of course, being Italians, some of the conspirators weren't content to wait around until their country needed them and began to freelance on their own.

The late 1970s and early 1980s were the fever years in Italy, when the chance of a Communist takeover at the ballot box and leftwing kidnappings were at their peak. Bizarre events were common, such as the horrendous bombing of the Genoa train station, apparently by rightwingers, the hanging death of "the Pope's banker" Roberto Calvi, and the discovery, most ridiculous sounding of all, of the secret and sinister P2 Lodge of Free Masons to which much of the right of center Italian establishment apparently belonged.

All this seems very alien to most Americans. Yet a few Americans positively love to conspire, most notoriously Lee Harvey Oswald. Another inveterate plotter is NRO Contributing Editor and International Man of Mystery Michael Ledeen. Separating truth from fiction about Ledeen is hard, but a few things are agreed-upon, such as his role in initiating the Iran-Contra scandal that almost destroyed the Reagan Presidency and his central role in setting up the recent meetings in Europe, including Rome, between the Neocongate suspect Larry Franklin, fellow Feith operative Harold Rhode, Italian Intelligence agents (SISMI), and Ledeen's old collaborator from Iran-Contra, the notoriously unreliable Iranian arms dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar.

Ledeen spent most of his formative years in the late 1970s and very early 1980s in Italy, moving in CIA-related journalistic / intelligence circles. He was apparently a consultant for SISMI, the Italian Intelligence service, during those years. For an anti-Ledeen report on what he was supposedly up to during those years, see this, the accuracy of which I absolutely cannot vouch for.


My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer