From Reuters, a quote from the Chechen terrorists in Moscow: “We seek death more than you seek life.” They seek death…well, OK, then!
[Update: Looks like the Russians took the offer…]

Check out The Smoking Gun.

Beltway Sniper suspect John Allen Muhammad served in the U.S. Army for 15 years as a “demolitions/weapons expert” and could “make a weapon out of anything,” his former wife once reported. According to Mildred Muhammad, she was hospitalized in May 2000 when she received a phone call from John Muhammad, who threatened to kill her. According to this report prepared by a Tacoma, Washington hospital security officer (which you’ll find below this text), Mildred Muhammad claimed that her husband–whom she described as “very charming”–had abducted the couple’s three children as part of a custody dispute. She added that Muhammad was skilled in hand-to-hand fighting and that while he “owned no weapons,” he did have “access to them.”

As everyone in the world probably already knows, it looks like they may have caught the Beltway shooter – I also don’t like to honor him with the title ‘sniper.’

He appears to be an alienated African-American man, ex-military (although not Special Ops or a trained sniper) and his Jamaican stepson. He apparently has sympathies to the Islamist cause, and wanted to strike his own blow against the Great Satan (and if he could get $10 million into an offshore bank account while doing it, so much the better).

From my point of view, this is the worst possible result.

First, because I think he’s shown a number of other disaffected people how easy it is to leverage small actions into a huge amount of attention.

Second, because I think there are a lot of disaffected people out there.

I’ve talked about ‘muckers’ in the past, looking online for a definition, I found this, by Santa Fe complexity researcher Cosma Shalizi; it’s perfect, and I couldn’t add anything at all:

“Mucker” is a word coined by the science fiction writer John Brunner in his great novel Stand on Zanzibar. The word derives from “amok,” which will require a bit of history.

It is a Malay word, and a person who goes violently insane, rushing through the village and murderously attacking everyone in his path, is said to have “run amok.” In what was an egregiously idiotic statement, even for him, the eminent French critic Georges Bataille called running amok the purest manifestation of revolt, “the movement by which man rises up against his own condition and the whole of creation.”

(Bataille never ran through the streets of Montparnasse madly slashing with a kris, so he either lacked the courage of his convicions or was a hypocrite with a small – a very small – modicum of brains.) The Malays, inevitably, were and are more sensible: they kill those who run amok.

A “mucker,” then, is someone who runs amok; the times havin’ a-changed, now they use guns. As always, they are people driven to murderous madness by intolerable frustration, repression and conformity, whether in an isolated kampong or the Postal Service. So far muckers seem to have been mostly Americans, but just the other day the radio carried news of one in Germany.

It does Mr. Brunner’s prescience great credit to have foreseen the need for this word, back in 1964; and it does the rest of us no credit at all, for letting such a word be needed.

Shalizi even makes the neat connection to Romantic philosophy that I keep harping on.
What has happened is that the inchoate rage and disassociation that is felt by too many people in this society (and by waaay more people in places like the West Bank and Saudi) now is legitimized. It’s legitimized philosophically by the Bad Philosophers, it’s legitimized politically by ‘liberation’ ideology (and here I don’t mean politically grounded efforts at national liberation, like Vietnam’s, but the more generic ‘liberation’ ideology of the Frankfurt School), it’s legitimized in the media by our obsession with the pornography of violence (a subject for a later post), and finally, it’s legitimized as it becomes part of a ‘tradition’ where the Khobar Towers leads to the USS Cole which leads to the WTC, which leads to the July 4 El Al shooter, which leads to this nutjob.

Terror is going wide, and we are about to look at a world in which tens or even hundreds of Beltway shooters become a possibility.

What’s the answer??

Well, first of all, a top-down Orwellian security state isn’t. It sure looks like this was broken by good old-fashioned police work (a tip of the hat to Chief Moose and his team) and by an alert guy at a rest stop with a cell phone.

We need to learn the lessons of an alert and empowered citizenry, because if there were ten of these guys running around at once, the criminal investigation infrastructure of the country would just melt down.
And most importantly of all, we need to find a way to stop growing these guys. We need to cut off the cultural roots that promote this kind of behavior. We need to de-legitimize Bad Philosophy, and send it back to the academy, where it belongs. We need to de-legitimize terrorism in all its forms, and we need to figure out how we can begin to stop growing enraged disassociated people who drift across the line into evil.

I regularly read Meryl’s blog, and a few days ago noted the LGF/MSNBC hoohah, and meant to follow up (but had no time).
Tonight, I was browsing, and followed her links to this great – essay – (post seems dismissive) by Anil Dash, who apparently stepped into a fight on this issue by criticising what he saw as racism on LGF.
Following Matt Yglesias’ lead, I haven’t yet read my way through the MSNBC issue; I do have some opinions on the LGF issue, as I’ll note below, but I wanted to compliment Anil for his self-reflective essay; he manages to stand his ground and take responsibility at the same time, and that’s not something many writers are necessarily very good at (including me). So I’ll read the threads out as I have time, and draw my own conclusions. But this is a good piece, and well worth reading.
Re LGF: I think Charles Johnson has done an incredible service by opening a portal into the media and news ofthe Arab Middle East – lots of what we see is stuff we wish weren’t there, but it’s better to see and hope than to hope blindly. We have to deal with reality, first.
Having said that, I’m still not on board on the Clash of the Civilizations model. I am sure there is more here than a few loose psychopaths; but I’m not yet ready to lay it at the feet of the entire culture. I will suggest (remember the ‘armed’ in the blog title) that being well-prepared for war is often a good way not to have to, and any Administration would be remiss not be staging, planning, and otherwise preparing for the worst case, while negotiating like mad to get us to a better one.
I’m not sure if Charles is either; I know he’s signed on to the Clash model, but I’m not seeing what I would perceive as ‘kill them all’ in his writing.
He has however become the center of a community that includes people whose dream is a Middle East made of slag and glass, and who aren’t shy about saying so. If it were my blog, I’m not sure what I would do – in his case, the volume of content he creates, traffic, and so posts by readers is so great, I wonder if one person could police it if they chose to. I know this is an issue I would somehow address if I were him. I’m not.
And finally, I do think that for MSNBC to characterize it as a ‘hate site’; hang on, let me get the exact words from Meryl – ‘A popular but controversial Warblog focusing on militant Islam and terrorism. Is this news or hate?’ – was waaay out of line, and Charles and the blog community that supported him were not wrong for taking a stand on that.
But read Anil’s post; I’m certainly going to be thinking about it.
[Update: I just went over to LGF and there’re a few things you should read before forming a complete opinion. (my penalty for not reading the while damn set of threads first) It may put Anil in a slightly different light…it does for me…but I think Charles is a little too dismissive of the issue of the ‘glass and slag’ folks. They aren’t even a substantial minority of his posters, but they set a tone that makes it easier to dismiss the serious stuff in his posts. But as I’ve said, that’s his thing. ]

Brad DeLong (who I religiously read, even though he has deleted me from his blogroll…I’m not hurt *sob*…really…) proposed a damn good Blogger’s Motto:
But to that I reply: “We’re the good guys. We benefit in the long run from elevating the level of the debate at every opportunity.
I think I’ll put that on the masthead…

Riffing on Teresa Neilsen Hayden’s great comment, I want to try and explain (again) why I keep harping on this issue (she defined it incisively:I believe there’s a largely unacknowledged divide between politicians who still believe we’re all members of the same polity, all citizens together; and those for whom I’m just a member of the voting audience, watching but not otherwise a participant in our regularly scheduled pantomime of democracy.).
It relates closely to why I refuse to support Gray Davis, and why I harsh writers like Hesiod and Tom.
Let me make a metaphor first.
I’ve done a fair amount of first-aid training; I’ve participated in risky sports – climbing, sailing, racing cars, bicycles, and motorcycles – most of my life, and a long time ago, someone died as a part of one of my sports activities when I was a freshman in college, driving home the point of risk and of shared responsibility.
Part of the responsibility is taking proper precautions (why I’m sometimes called ‘the Safety Nazi’), and part of it is taking responsibility for consequences – hence the first aid.
One of the things they train you to do (and here the more advanced medical bloggers are free to comment and clarify) is to evaluate someone’s condition, and deal with the most critical issues first.
A compound fracture is and looks bad, but a blocked airway is worse.
You have to look beyond the superficial symptoms and try and determine what underlying conditions are serious and how best to deal with them.
This was brought home to me last week when someone I know on an internet list died. He was in what appeared to be a relatively minor accident, received superficial care from the attending EMT’s, who transported him to the hospital, where it was discovered that he had severe bleeding in a lung, which couldn’t be controlled, and he bled out and died. I don’t know all the facts, and certainly don’t know from my limited information if better diagnosis would have made a difference to him (and his grieving family). But I do know that that is the practitioner’s nightmare…to fix the scraped knee and miss the bubbling lung.
Our country – our world – is definitely not short of scraped knees, and people with band-aids ready to fix them, if only we’ll vote for them.
But some of us…including me…hear a frightening bubbling coming from the lungs.
We face huge systemic challenges, coming from rising population, misallocation and shortages of key resources, a huge gap between the First and Third World, compounded by closer economic, informational, and transportation ties that will make these challenges abroad into ours.
We have challenges at home, in poverty and alienation, as well as education, health care, and the environment.
To deal with these wisely will require that we restate our commitment to some common goals, and to some processes – some governmental, some political, some private – that will tie us to these common goals. And we must do it while maintaining and improving both freedoms – the freedom to, and the freedom from. And it is exactly that shared commitment to some set of goals, and that shared sense of common citizenship that is eroded by the kind of politics and kind of commentary that I criticize.
If we don’t deal with these, our country and our world will look far different and far worse than if we do. The worlds of Blade Runner and Snow Crash aren’t impossible dystopias. They are very possible dystopias, and I don’t want my children to live in them.
I’ve talked about this a lot. Here’s one quote:

We’re at a point in our history when we need to find the threads that bind us into a nation and a polity. Sadly, ‘win at any cost’ politicians (c.f. Gray ‘SkyBox’ Davis), and culture warriors of one stripe or another are happy to drive wedges, if they believe the fractures serve their short-term political interests.
And we’re at a point in our political history that’s been made by single-issue warriors…for and against development, for and against abortion, for and against parks for dogs…and damn those on the other side of the issue.
I had the unique opportunity to have dinner once with then-State Senator John Schmitz. He was a genuine John Birch society member, elected from Orange County, who lost his office when it was discovered that his mistress had sexually abused their sons. (His daughter is also Mary Kay Le Tourneau, so I’ll take as a given that the family had…issues…). He was still in the Senate, and made a comment that I’ve always remembered:

When Moscone ran the Senate, he and I used to fight hammer and tongs all day, then go out and have drinks over dinner and laugh about it. We differed on where we wanted the boat to go, but we recognized that we were in the same boat. These new guys would gladly sink the boat rather then compromise.

And that’s why I think the [pledge]decision was stupid, and why the forces behind it…the Church of My Wounded Feelings…and their soldiers, the Warrior Cult of the Single Issue…are incredibly destructive. And right now, we don’t have the time for it.

Yes, Gray Davis has put some good band-aids on the scabs I think are important. Yes, a Republican Congress would probably put band-aids on scabs I think are totally unimportant, and worse, damaging. I’ll clearly continue to argue for the things that matter to me, no matter how small.
But I’m just done participating in a game of ‘kiss the boo-boo’ and believing that I’m really doing anything to help the patient. I want to get the heart and lungs examined, and I want to find and support people who support making sure the patient doesn’t die before they worry about the cuts and bruises.

Via Electrolite:
Teresa Nielsen Hayden commenting on modern politics (go to her comment on this post):

I find I care less than I used to about the hairsplitting fine points of a politician’s positions, and more about hearing his or her disintermediated voice. It isn’t just a matter of aesthetics. I believe there’s a largely unacknowledged divide between politicians who still believe we’re all members of the same polity, all citizens together; and those for whom I’m just a member of the voting audience, watching but not otherwise a participant in our regularly scheduled pantomime of democracy.

What she said!!
[It’s ironic that I’d misquote a book when talking about an editor, isn’t it?]

May just be the bravest, most honest man I know. Read this, and do it somewhere quiet, where you can read and think and cry all at once.

I’m having a horrible time accessing any blogs hosted on Blogspot today. Is anyone else seeing this??

From Rough & Tumble:
A Robert Novak piece suggesting that the race is a dead heat:

The nightly tracking poll taken for the California Teachers Association, made available to Republicans last Friday morning, was startling. Thursday night’s telephone interviews about the race for governor showed beleaguered Republican candidate Bill Simon leading Democratic Gov. Gray Davis 34.2 percent to 33.7 percent. The three-day tracking roll gave Davis a mere 2.7 percentage point lead.
Those numbers collide with Democratic surveys that show a double-digit lead for Davis.

He goes on to outline the tactical issues this presents for Bush … to come out and campaign, and maybe pull off an immense upset, or stay out rather than risk tarring his reputation with a Democratic blowout.
The losers are, as usual, those of us who live in California. His comments about Davis couldn’t ring more true:

Diluting these immense advantages, Davis is undoubtedly the most unpopular governor of California that anybody can remember. Prominent Democrats privately express contempt for him as a relentless fund-raiser without principles. One well-known elected government official told me he had endorsed Davis as far back as the 1998 Democratic primary but now considers him ”another Nixon.” He rages that Simon is about to be wiped out, propelling Davis into the White House. He plans to vote for Green Party candidate Peter Miguel Camejo.

As do I.
And while I await my critical missive from Ann, fighting the good fight for the local Dems, the rubbernecker in me hopes for a dramatic Election Day.
The Times this weekend buried a potential bombshell in the race, as convicted influence-peddler-to-the-stars Mark Nathanson’s 1993 statements are due to be released.

In a ruling that could embarrass Gov. Gray Davis in the final days of his re-election campaign, the U.S. Supreme Court has cleared the way for the release of a corrupt state official’s secret assertions about a decade-old bribery scandal at the California Coastal Commission.
En route to federal prison in 1993, Mark Nathanson, a Beverly Hills business executive who had confessed to orchestrating a $734,000 bribes-for- permits scheme while serving as a coastal commissioner, offered information about a state official with whom he said he worked to get campaign contributions from commission applicants, court records show.
Prosecutors dismissed Nathanson as a liar and refused to cut a deal, and he wound up serving three years in prison. Two letters detailing his allegations were sealed for years by a federal judge, then made public only in heavily censored form.
But on Oct. 7, the Supreme Court refused to hear a last-ditch plea to keep the documents secret and their release is believed imminent.
The timing is terrible for the official whom sources familiar with the case say Nathanson accused — Davis, then the state controller, and now a governor running for re-election.

Stay tuned, folks, it may turn out to be a ballgame.
I just wish I could care more about the outcome.