Re: Twitter

Here’s an email I received from a friend who works in Web promotion, in response to the sentiments expressed in my last post about finally succumbing to Twitter. He’s on point, and I’m just glad I’m not the dude he describes in the first graf (right? fellas?):

“All this social networking is annoying because most people don’t have shit to say.  They have no draw, no product, no expertise in anything, they aren’t funny, they offer no insight and no one cares about their stupid lives.  They’re yelling into the void and hoping that if they yell loud enough and often enough someone will pay attention.  People try to offer themselves as the draw but if their personality were that magnetic they probably wouldn’t be spending so much time on the Internet in the first place. Continue reading

Announcing my full participation in Twitter

So apparently Twitter is the next big thing, blah blah blah yakkity smakkity.

I must admit that I still don’t REALLY get the effin point. Seems like the ultimate in sound bytes, and unless you’re in a plane crash or being held hostage by terrorists, who the hell really cares what you have to say in 140 characters? And why can’t you say it via email, regular blogging or a text message to your brohamskis?

But I don’t want to be left out of the loop. So I’ve started using Twitter. I’m using it mostly for little haiku-ish revelations that I’m having during the day–the kind of things we all have, every day–and feeding it to the right-hand side of this blog. Here’s the pure RSS feed.

I’m actually finding it a pleasurable way to keep a little journal. Any medium that has clear boundaries is fun to be creative with–funny in that way that rules and structure can be a good basis for freedom. I guess that’s the philosophy behind the haiku and any other fixed-form poem.

Anyway, I hope this provides you a modicum of extra Net enjoyment.

Taking the Darfur discussion to the next level

If you want deeper discussions on all Darfur-related matters (especially the ICC indictment of Omar al-Bashir) you have to add this baby to your RSS feeds: Making Sense of Darfur, started by Darfur expert Alex de Waal. If you’re a Save Darfur member and you’re not engaged in these discussions, well, you should be ashamed of yourself! The thoughtfulness of some of the posts on this blog puts some of my more energetic rants to shame. (Not that I ever get my facts wrong. Ever.)

Also, if you’ve got suggestions for other thoughtful or definitive blogs on Darfur or Sudan that you think are worth following, I’d love to hear them. I’m trying to make Sudan part of my daily readings.

The anti-ethicist: Drive Noah Drive

You know Randy Cohen’s column “The Ethicist” in The New York Times? The one where people write in with mundane but ethically puzzling problems, to find out the right thing to do?

The column gives you that comforting, whole feeling when you’re done reading, a feeling where you go, Oh, good, with the necessary tools you can figure out what’s right and wrong in just about any situation.

Trouble is, try to apply that kind of rubric to real life, and letting “ethics” rule your existence turns out to be cumbersome, confusing, miserable, exhausting and — when it comes down to it — damn near impossible.

That’s where DriveNoahDrive comes in. Continue reading

How badly has U.S. policy failed Somalia?

“The only people who care at all about Somalis are the people who are working out of mosques. But I’m told that if they’re working out of mosques, they’re bad guys.”

That’s the conundrum that Columbia Professor Richard Bulliet says a CIA desk officer related to him at a conference in Washington a decade ago. Despite that clear revelation in the rank and file of the intelligence community, the United States has spent the 2000s doing everything possible to disable the Islamists in Somalia–even if it meant propping up brutal warlords with no real vision for a Somali state.

Bulliet recalled the incident last night during the event “The Obama Administration and the Middle East”, co-sponsored by the Arab Student Association, Columbia University Amnesty International and several other groups. Panelists–even as they expressed their happiness at Obama’s election–gave a sobering analysis of the limited prospects for fast, fundamental change in American policies in the Middle East. (Other panelists included Columbia profs Gil Anidjar and Peter Awn, CUNY professor Amir al-Islam and ACLU attorney Hina Shamsi.) Continue reading

Sometimes Afghanistan is just like Gaza

‘In a statement, Colonel O’Hara said, “[F]orces exercised great restraint and prevented any civilian casualties at the same time the enemy placed the whole village in harm’s way by operating the way they do.”’

Besides the fact that O’Hara is an unlikely last name for an Israeli colonel, it’s hard to tell whether this statement applies to Gaza, Iraq or Afghanistan. In fact, it’s part of an American response to accusations that U.S. Special Ops killed 13 civilians in a raid on an Afghan village this month.

As the world (rightly) remains outraged at the destruction in Gaza, it’s good to remember that the U.S.A. continues a similar campaign in Afghanistan. The parallels should not be overstated–after all, Afghanistan is not our neighbor as Gaza is Israel’s. But these Afghan civilian deaths seem to take place further from the world’s attention than those in Gaza.

Let’s keep our eye on them, and keep pressuring Obama to make changes to his policy in addition to his rhetoric.

A president who’s not an idiot

So this is what it feels like. It’s so beautiful that Obama has chosen Al-Arabiya as the venue for the first interview of his presidency (though it is sort of the Fox News of Arab media, in terms of its orientation). And it’s beautiful that he has chosen to use words and language to redefine the way America will deal with terrorism. This is important.

Now, we’ll all be waiting for some changes in policy. Because of course, the way Bush described things was the smallest problem of his “leadership”.

Muammar Qaddafi on “Isratine”

Travel the Arab world a bit, and you’ll find it’s hard for people to agree on much from one country to another. But whether it’s Palestinians in Dubai, Syrians, Lebanese or Chadians, there’s one point on which everyone seems to find common ground: Muammar Qaddafi, the de facto leader of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, is a freakin’ crackpot.

Crackpot, despot and buffoon he may be. But I have to say, his op-ed in The New York Times yesterday arguing for a one-state solution in Israel and Palestine was well put. With his track record, Qaddafi’s claim of interest in peace is preposterous, and it will be easy for detractors to void his argument based on the colonel’s utter lack of credibility. (In that sense, I think it’s interesting that the Times chose to print the one-state argument under Qaddafi’s byline. There are far more credible and respectable people saying the exact same thing. Makes it look like it’s only the opinion of a maniac.) Continue reading