For a nation with incredible diversity of domestic opinion, the monolithic quality of French foreign policy never fails to astound. It's as if democracy ends at that country's borders, especially if it involves confronting America. America bad. Syria, for example, good. It's loony and almost buffoon-like.
Now, of course, this country has played plenty of footsie with despots like, most recently, the Saudis, but there is also plenty of domestic criticism of those same activities (and not just on this blog). But in France you hear nary a peep about the liaison with Assad. And now we learn, just as the whole world is trying to pull together to help Iraq's move to democracy Chirac snubs Bush's Nato request. How deeply pathetic. What extraordinary lack of self-knowledge from the country that gave us that other Jacques... Lacan.
.. as important as he is in the evolution of blogging... has received a compliment as great as the one received by Omar of Iraq the Model today in being the lead to Paul Wolfowitz's article in this morning's Wall Street Journal. Why is this such a big deal? Because Wolfowitz is the man believed to be the major theorist of the Iraq War here laying out, for the first time in detail, the Administration's plan for post-June 30 Iraq. He begins:
After a suicide car bombing killed Iraqi Interim Governing Council President Izzedine Salim and eight others on May 17, one Iraqi put that act of terror into a larger perspective for those who wonder if democracy can work in Iraq. His name is Omar, one of the new Iraqi "bloggers," and he wrote on his Web log: "We cannot . . . protect every single person, including our leaders and the higher officials who make favorite targets for the terrorists--but we can make their attempts go in vain by making our leadership 'replaceable.' "
Exercising his newfound freedom of speech via the Internet, Omar addressed what he sees as the terrorists' fundamental misunderstanding about where Iraq is going. Terrorists--whether Saddamists or foreigners--"think in the same way their dictator-masters do," failing to grasp that the idea of leadership by an indispensable strongman applies to totalitarian regimes--not democracies.
Many will (and should) analyze Wolfowitz's piece today for the particulars of the plan, but I would like to register my lack of amazement that he has chosen an Iraqi blog to begin his discussion. It is an illustration not only of the equality of blogs vis-a-vis the major media when it comes to opinion, but their primacy in a situation like the Iraq War where intelligent locals of integrity like Omar frequently offer more to the public than media from abroad with all their satellite dishes and Internet phones. I have written before that I have learned more about the aftermath of the war from Iraq the Model than I have from The New York Times. Perhaps Wolfowitz agrees.
UPDATE: Apropos d'Irak... Normblog has an excerpt from an Amir Taheri article for the (London) Sunday Times that is more than worth reading.
MORE: An interesting discussion in Reason re: the situation in Iraq. (hat tip: Catherine Johnson)
Is he guilty of sexual assault? Who knows (though it doesn't seem very likely at this point)? But what anyone watching the game tonight does know is Kobe Bryant is clearly one of the greatest basketball players who ever put on sneakers. With the Lakers' season hanging over a precipice, he drained a three with 2.1 seconds to go, then took over the game in overtime. Amazing! On to Detroit... (I actually felt sorry for Larry Brown.)
UPDATE: My take on the Kobe Case so far: Of course it is impossible to know the truth definitively when there are only two people in the room, but it is becoming increasingly clear that the one obvious villain in the case is Eagle, Colorado DA Mark Hurlbert. Whatever else happens, this peculiar individual has set back the cause of legitimate rape prosecutions more than anyone on the planet.
The most recent information alone, that he has resisted for the better part of a year subpoenaing the cellphone text messages sent by the accuser immediately after the alleged assault, should be cause to have this guy impeached. It amounts to suppression of evidence, no matter what the contents of those messages. And that’s after his bizarre delay of the DNA testing for fear it might exonerate the defendant, which apparently it has (now he wants a retest). I don’t know whether it was zeal to prosecute a celebrity, unconscious racism or what this District Attorney’s motivation was, but if I were a victim’s rights advocate or an opponent of violence against women (both of which I am), I’d want to put Hurlbert in jail.
I don't know about the late (or not) Osama bin Laden, but if we are to believe his famous letter his acolyte Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi is not a happy camper today. The UN passed the Iraq resolution unanimously , further legitimatizing the new democratic government so anathema to Al Qaeda and its operatives, not to mention a host of thugs across the Middle East and their accomplices in all the ships at sea. And speaking of operatives, the "politics of the last five minutes" is indeed also operative because only a week or two ago George W. Bush and his supporters seemed to be on the ropes in Iraq, the forces of "progress" calling for his head. Now with Iraq, unlike, say, France or Germany, installing a Prime Minister with a science PhD who seems to be acting -- again unlike, say, France or Germany -- like a true statesman and with the economics indicators soaring, the President seems to be sitting pretty... and not just because of the resurrection of King Ronald.
Who knows what the next five minutes will bring? But if a tipping point has been reached in Iraq and the American economy continues on its present path, this is not going to be as good a year for the Democrats as it will be for democracy in the Middle East. At this precise moment, I hope they get shellacked (the Dems, that is), because only an extreme hiding will wake them up. The Democratic Party could have a lot to offer it wasn't highjacked by anti-idealistic stasists, in Virginia Postrel's lexicon. The Dems need to get their future (dynamist) orientation back. JFK, the original one, was definitely one of Virginia's dynamists. JFK, the present one, is not -- to say the least. He's dull. Stasists are dull.
This article in The American Thinker on the French relationship to Syria underscores the differing approaches to the world between the US (at least for the moment) and France. It's hard to square this cozying up to the Baathists by so many strata of the French government with pronouncements about "égalité" and "fraternité," but perhaps I am not sufficiently "sophisticated". (hat tip: Clarice Feldman)
... at least the Wall Street Journal would have us believe it --and they have a point, highlighting the under-reporting of the following:
First in Arabic and then in English, Prime Minister Iyad Allawi said in his inaugural address to the Iraqi people last Tuesday that "I would like to record our profound gratitude and appreciation to the U.S.-led international coalition, which has made great sacrifices for the liberation of Iraq." In his own remarks, President Ghazi al-Yawer said: "Before I end my speech, I would like us to remember our martyrs who fell in defense of freedom and honor, as well as our friends who fell in the battle for the liberation of Iraq." Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari told the U.N. Security Council much the same thing....
Of course we all have narratives and the narrative of much of our media is that the intervention in Iraq was a mistake fomented by over-zealous neocons and augmented by bad or misinterpreted intelligence from the CIA and others. But it's been less than a year and a half and a semi-democratic government is already in place in Iraq with reasonable-seeming leaders. What if this trend continues and in three years, say, Iraq is actually something of a functioning democracy and others in the Middle East are beginning to follow suit? Will the media eat crow? I wonder. But I can promise you one thing -- I and others like me will be trying to feed it to them... and we will make sure that plenty of people are watching.
All praise is due to the Washington Post for their editorial today 300,000 Deaths Foretold about the drastic situation in the Darfur region of the Sudan. (Darfur is as large as France.) As many as a million people are in danger. The Post urges us to act:
The tragedy is that aggressive diplomatic pressure would have a good chance of working. In the past, Sudan's government has been pushed into expelling Osama bin Laden, negotiating with the southern rebels and signing a paper cease-fire in Darfur. The United States and its allies should press for a U.N. Security Council resolution demanding full and immediate humanitarian access. They should encourage Kofi Annan, the U.N. secretary general, to force the world's attention onto the crisis; a letter by Rep. Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.) calling upon Mr. Annan to visit Darfur has attracted 45 signatures in Congress. And they should authorize the use of military escorts for emergency aid. The United States is overcommitted militarily in Iraq and elsewhere. But this is a mission for which European countries ought to make troops available.
Holocaust Memorial Museum's Committee on Conscience has also gotten involved, sending Jerry Fowler to the refugee camps in Eastern Chad. His report is here. Maybe this is a time for Kofi Annan to redeem himself a little bit. It's also important for all of us to pay attention to this. The least we can do is send our support to Rep. Wolf. The numbers are staggering. I tip my hat to the anonymous emailer who alerted me to this story. You more than deserve credit.
I know every organization has to have a conference... (UPDATED TWICE)
... and the elevators in Vegas are aleady filled to overflowing with boozy clowns with noisemakers... but THIS? And guess what, there's an application form at the end. Can't wait to sign up (and give up my life and a few other people's at the same time)!
Meanwhile, the good folks at BLOG IRAN are understandably (considering the above homicidal insanity) trying to get a "FREEDOM CHALLENGE" contest going among blogs backing the isolation and overthrow of the Mullahs. I'm not the contest type, but I certainly support what they're trying to do. Blog on!
UPDATE: Dept. of He's Bad and He's Back!... actually he's not bad, they're bad... the same (or related) crew behind the suicide bomber application form linked above is now once again targeting Salman Rushdie. I wish I could say "Good for Salman's book sales!" but these religious psychotics are obviously more serious than that.
"The report called on the European Union to increase pressure on Iran to take strong steps to end torture and ill-treatment in detention and restore freedom of expression. The ongoing EU-Iran human rights dialogue will have its next meeting in Tehran on June 14 and 15. The dialogue, entering its third year, has failed to achieve any tangible results. In fact, the human rights situation in Iran has markedly deteriorated since the inception of the dialogue."
Deteriorated since the dialogue began? Why is that? Some of the possible explanations are not entirely complimentary to the Europeans.
Oh, and there's this quote from which they derive their title "Like the Dead in Their Coffins" -- a description of solitary confinement in the notorious Evin Prison in Tehran:
"And you feel like they are holding you, like they are physically holding on to you. Your hair and nails grow faster. A lot of prisoners say that solitary is like being like "the dead in their coffins" because we had heard that the dead's nails grow in their coffins. Even if they had given me something to read, they had taken my glasses. Even if I had had my glasses, there wasn't enough light."
If you're interested in what's going on inside a country, start with native speakers. It's like CSPAN, go to the source without filters. Omar at IRAQ THE MODEL seems to know this because he has decided to start a weekly column translating the comments on the BBC Arabic Service. Of course, the people posting on there are a subset of the population of some kind (don't know what exactly), but their comments are at least uninterpreted. Omar has a bias like the rest of us (strongly pro-democracy in his case), but unlike most in the media he doesn't pretend he doesn't. So we can factor that in.
Here's his overview of the last week. I find it quite interesting and heartening:
I noticed that there were more positive comments from Arabs this time than in the past weeks but I also noticed that most of the negative ones came from Syria (largest share) while there's a remarkable change in attitude in the comments coming from KSA, Egypt or Jordan. Another observation was that negative comments from Iraqis decreased significantly also and actually I could find only one comment of those.
One negative comment from Iraq... amazing. I could do a lot better than that in Studio City.
After Dog Blogging and Booze Blogging, this blog is going upscale with Art Blogging in honor of my son Jesse Simon whose work is now appearing in a group show (that's him at the opening Friday night) at the Cartelle Gallery in Venice, along with such older fixtures of the California Art Scene as Billy Al Bengston.
This an example of Jesse's work from the show. A dedicated surfer he uses the sport and his love of the ocean in his art, deconstructing old surf boards, refining them in a complex manner and turning them into wall sculptures. Some, like this one, reflect his roots in graffiti art.
Jesse's work has appeared before at a show at the San Jose Museum of Art: "Surf Culture: The Art of Surfing". His first one-man show will be in San Francisco later this year (details to come) and, in part, I would imagine, because both his works on display at Cartelle sold within minutes of the show's opening, that gallery is also giving him a two-man show this year as well. What can I say but... Go Jesse!
I never voted for him for Governor or President but...
... he undoubtedly had more positive effect on history than all those for whom I did. "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" he said -- and it happened. What more need be said? RIP, The Gipper!
... but it is interesting. Someone just emailed me anonymously an article from the Jerusalem Post from March 3, 2004. As most will recall, the nefarious Ahmad Chalabi stands accused of having "leaked" the information to the Iranians that their code had been broken by US intelligence. Now read this from early last March (I quote in entirety since the link to the JP archive is pay only at this point):
BYLINE: Yaakov Katz
A secret intelligence unit, known as Unit 8200, broke a sophisticated Iranian code enabling Israel to monitor communications, including contacts with Pakistan regarding the development of Iranian nuclear weapons, The New Yorker reported on Tuesday.
"On a trip to the Middle East last month, I was told that a number of years ago the Israeli signals-intelligence agency, known as Unit 8200, broke a sophisticated Iranian code and began monitoring communications that included talk between Iran and Pakistan about Iran's burgeoning nuclear weapons program," investigative reporter Seymour M. Hersh wrote.
According to the report, Israeli intelligence has created strong ties in Iran over the year, some of which still exist. Hersh writes that the investigation by the International Atomic Energy Agency into Iranian nuclear capability was spurred by Israeli intelligence findings which were relayed to the agency via the National Council of Resistance of Iran.
According to the report, the findings, which showed that senior officials in Teheran and Islamabad had frequent conversations regarding the IAEA investigations, were also shared with US intelligence services. [bolds mine]
Well, fancy that... Seymour Hersh of all people. Could this be true? So I Googled it and there it was. Obviously, it wouldn't have taken Chalabi to tell the Iranians their codes were endangered. They could have read about in The New Yorker. Maybe they dropped their subscription. Well, it did get a tad duller under David Remnick and, yes, maybe it was a different code, but still... 'curiouser' and 'curiouser'.
As one who respects CSPAN over all news outlets, finds CCN particularly reprehensible after the revelations they played footsie with Saddam to gain access, it should be no surprise that I consider Al-Jazeera an "obectively pro-fascist" (in Orwell's term) disinformation service. To have this on television is especially dangerous in societies where the illiteracy rate is frighteningly high. By playing to the shame and rage of its constituency, Al-Jazeera enhances the oppression of its audience, allowing them to continue to project the failures of their lives on others, rather than correct them. Talk about reactionaries!
In conjunction with the forthcoming release of a documentary on Al-Jazeera called "Control Room," (I haven't seen it) LAWeekly has a cover story on the network this week by Brendan Bernhard. The most interesting part of this article is at the end, a dialogue between Mr. Bernhard and Samir Khader, a senior producer for Al-Jazeera who was in the US to help promote the film. This exchange is worth reading as a revelation of the level of cognitive dissonance necessary to broadcast at a network like that, possibly at CNN as well.
This morning's column by David Brooks in the NYT might lead us to that conclusion:
Party affiliation even shapes people's perceptions of reality. In 1960, Angus Campbell and others published a classic text, "The American Voter," in which they argued that partisanship serves as a filter. A partisan filters out facts that are inconsistent with the party's approved worldview and exaggerates facts that confirm it.
That observation has been criticized by some political scientists, who see voters as reasonably rational. But many political scientists are coming back to Campbell's conclusion: people's perceptions are blatantly biased by partisanship.
For example, the Princeton political scientist Larry Bartels has pointed to survey data collected after the Reagan and Clinton presidencies. In 1988, voters were asked if they thought the nation's inflation rate had fallen during the Reagan presidency.
In fact, it did. The inflation rate fell from 13.5 percent to 4.1 percent. But only 8 percent of strong Democrats said the rate had fallen. Fifty percent of partisan Democrats believed that inflation had risen under Reagan. Strong Republicans had a much sunnier and more accurate impression of economic trends. Forty-seven percent said inflation had declined.
Then, at the end of the Clinton presidency, voters were asked similar questions about how the country had fared in the previous eight years. This time, it was Republicans who were inaccurate and negative. Democrats were much more positive. Bartels concludes that partisan loyalties have a pervasive influence on how people see the world. They reinforce and exaggerate differences of opinion between Republicans and Democrats.
It also might lead us to the conclusion that that party affiliation is anti-(small d)democratic. Brooks also points out, citing a book by political scientists called "Partisan Hearts and Minds," that:
Drawing on a vast range of data, these political scientists argue that party attachment is more like attachment to a religious denomination or a social club. People have stereotypes in their heads about what Democrats are like and what Republicans are like, and they gravitate toward the party made up of people like themselves.
Once they have formed an affiliation, people bend their philosophies and their perceptions of reality so they become more and more aligned with members of their political tribe.
Anti-democratic indeed... a kind of combination of willed blindness and sheep behavior. I think this column of Brooks' (hat tip: Catherine Johnson) is extraordinarily important and will be much talked about -- particularly since it appears on the oped page of the NYT. It is about time we started asking serious questions about our political system, which may have become outmoded without our realizing it. I know that although the two parties are supposedly BIG TENTS, I don't feel comfortable in either one -- and not just because I can't stand Tom DeLay and Nancy Pelosi. The nature of these parties disrespects critical thought.
Now, I know some of this evolved of necessity and that our two party system has achieved many pragmatic successes, but that view has become such a universal assumption, that for that reason alone we ought to examine it. Brooks promises future columns on the nature partisanship. I'll be watching and reading. (And no doubt commenting here.)
UPDATE: I knew I was stepping into a hornet's nest on this one (hey, what's a blog for, but a little disagreement among friends), but already one of the blogosphere's (not to mention radio's) heavy-hitters is taking me to task -- Hugh Hewitt. Hugh's points are well made, naturally, and I don't think this is a simple issue by any means. The major parties have made governing in America remarkably successful over generations. And yet I think Brooks is correct in raising the issue of partisanship. A lot of people, some of whom comment on here, are feeling disenfranchised by the major parties. The big tents aren't holding as well as they should--or did. Examination isn't going to hurt. We're at war and likely to be in it for some time. Finding common ground wouldn't be a bad idea... although I have to admit, when I read some of the ungracious reactions on the "leftist" websites to the death of Reagan, I wonder if there's hope.
Apropos of the "left is no longer the left," I was reminded today in a post by the definitely-not-left-Hugh Hewitt of the great mystery of the "disappeared" in modern history. To me that used to mean the "Desaparecido" or "Disappeared" of Argentina during the 1970s when fascists ruled that country (to be overthrown, at least fitfully, in 1983). This was the subject of the fine 1985 film The Official Story written by Luis Puenzo and my friend Aida Bortnik.
Of course in those days, we (I) on the left were very concerned about those Argentinian "disappeared," and justifiably so. But it seems the left has lost its interest in disppearance. It was only today that I learned via rightwing Hugh Hewitt that "five to seven million" had disappeared over two decades from Saddam's Iraq. (Of course I had known of the mass graves, but not this.) I'm not sure anymore of the statistics from Argentina, but bad as they were, they are no doubt dwarfed by these numbers from Iraq. These are Holocaust-sized numbers. If they are remotely accurate, they should about close the case for American intervention in Iraq. Not to have done it would have been immoral. Nunca mas, as they say in Argentina.
UPDATE: Thanks to commenter Bran who found this link to the World Socialist Web Site, estimating the number of Argentine "disappeared" at 30,000, the size of a small town. Saddam seems to have "disappeared" the equivalent of Chicago or Los Angeles.
I had barely finished reading Nick Cohen's article in the New Statesman this morning (via Instapundit.com and Harry's Place) when it went subscription only. The piece is about how the BBC spiked stories that put the antiwar movement in a bad light by revealing the movement's leadership as fascist neo-Stalinists and fundamentalist Islamic misogynists and homophobes:
Radio silence was imposed on the sinister and in many ways right-wing behaviour of the far left and has continued into the campaign for this month's elections.
That the BBC quashed this is, alas, not surprising; you can find lengthy quotes at the above links, if you haven't seen them already.
What interested me though was Cohen (a man of the left) accusing the far left-wing of being right-wing. I had been thinking about that a lot lately, because I keep asking myself whether I left the left or the left left me? (How's that for a Peter Piper sentence?) After all, I'm not young anymore (except in my own mind) and traditionally people move right as they grow older. ("Traded their used MG/For a new XKE/Switched to the GOP/That's the way things go," as Allan Sherman used to sing in his "Hava Nagila" knockoff "Harvey and Sheila").
But these days I gotta wonder. Who really is "progressive" anyway, those who have been backing democracy in Iraq or those opposing 'unilateral' intervention in totalitarian states? Even though the disasters are many (I wouldn't be surprised if there were more as you read this), we interventionists are looking better and better, more "progressive," if that word still means anything outside the sphere of DVD players (as in "progressive scan"). So maybe I do think that the left left me.
For my old leftist pals interested, I would recommend a reading or rereading of Mao's essay "On Contradiction." Unfortunately, it's rather heavy going (I would suspect Mao, like most politicians, had a ghost writer), but it does contain that interesting phrase "left in form but right in essence." Worth pondering. Also, I would recommend, if I haven't before, the following quotation from William Morris (not the agent, the Victorian socialist):
"Men fight and lose the battle and the thing they fought for comes about in spite of their defeat, and when it comes out not to be what they meant, other men have to fight for what they meant under another name."
Could it be you are on the wrong side this time?
UPDATE: If you're looking for an example of "left in form but right in essence," go no further than this article in Salon, linked by Andrew Sullivan.
Yesterday was dog blogging, but it's getting to the weekend and, hey, summer's coming, so as a public service following in the footsteps of a certain humorist and a man who brought cocktails to blogging, or was it the other way around, I thought I'd do a little booze blogging and introduce you to the wonders of Daiquiris a la mode de Simon -- a particularly potent blend useful if you're planning open heart surgery in the near future. And before I go any further, I have in the past entertained variousbloggers, journalists and other drunks with my potions (this man abstained, his loss) and I am sure they will attest to my skill, assuming they remember. [Or they won't get one again.--ed. Right!]
Okay, so first to the ingredients. This is the important part because how you mix them doesn't really matter, as long as you don't forget the rum (a lot). Speaking of rum, many are great, obviously, but for this recipe I choose Bacardi Coco, which has a certain tropical je ne sais quoi. I also use Monin's vanilla syrup (yes, it's French--get over it), frozen mixed berries (blackberries, strawberries, raspberries, etc....or, if you're feeling feisty, pineapple) and Nellie & Joe's Famous Key West Lime Juice. This latter stuff is great and worth looking for if it's not in your local store. It's almost a "secret ingredient." (Okay, rum is the real "secret ingredient"). Oh, and you'll need ice and a blender.
To start I make sure my glasses are cold (martinis are best) and if they're not, I swizzle some ice cubes in them, discarding the ice. Then I pour the rum in the blender (you guessed it--liberally--about five or six ounces), then add about six smallish ice cubes, a cup of the frozen berries, a dash or two of vanilla syrup and lime juice (depending on if it looks like a sweet or sour crowd). Then let it rip with the blender until smooth, pour and... Death to Your Enemies!
Don't forget to read Zeyad (Healing Iraq) and Omar (Iraq the Model) today for information on the situation over there not appearing in the mainstream media. Zeyad has the clearest analysis I have read of the new government. He understands the role of the tribes in a way no Western reporter could (or any that I know of), so his views on the Iraqi President are more interesting and probably more valid than what you will read here. Omar has an interesting link to more info on the oil situation and possible positive benefits. I know I'm a Dr. Pangloss, but these guys hearten me. They don't seem to have an ax to grind other than positive hopes for the future of their country. Maybe this intervention wasn't such a bad idea after all. Fortune, they say, favors the daring.
The first American writer... to his knowledge... to be profiled favorably by both the National Review andMother Jones in his lifetime. Is this the auto-da-fe of a screenwriter?
CIA Director George Tenet has resigned for 'personal reasons.' (Well, they always are in one way or another.) This is something that many people thought (myself included, though I could be persuaded otherwise with sufficient inside information) should have happened on September 12, 2001.
Even though, in this case, it is about as relevant as nominations for President of Alpha Centauri, the suggestion box is open.
UPDATE: And of course this was inevitable: Iraqi politician Ahmad Chalabi accused CIA director George Tenet on Thursday of being responsible for allegations that the former exile leader passed intelligence information to Iran.
"Roger L. Simon is a
gifted writer. I think the most brilliant new writer of private
detective fiction who has emerged in some years. His vision of
Los Angeles--fresh, new, kaleidoscopic--gives up perhaps the best
recent portrait we have had of the great multi-cultured city where
the future is continually being born--halfway between a love-lyric
and an earthquake. The Big Fix, like The Big Sleep, should become
something of a landmark in its field." --Ross Macdonald
"Moses Wine is back with all his wit and
wisdom exposing crime and
the movie industry to the respect it deserves and proving that Roger
Simon is better than ever.”
-- Tony Hillerman
"A terrific read! What a pleasure
to have Moses Wine walking
down these
mean streets again."
-- Sue Grafton, author of Q is for Quarry
"As irresistible as movie popcorn. Moses Wine is the slyest, most entertaining
gumshoe anywhere."
-- Martin Cruz Smith
"Where was Moses when the lights went
out? Up to his schnoz in an anthrax bath--but as might be expected from
Roger Simon, the tawdry Tinseltown toxins
pour like
vintage Wine."
-- Tom Robbins
"Mordantly funny... Simon's satiric humor thrives on absurdity; and once Moses is
in the director's chair, trying to salvage a project that will eventually (by hook and by crook) make it to Sundance,
this sendup of Hollywood greed and bad taste wins the jury prize."
-- Marilyn Stasio, NEW YORK TIMES BOOK REVIEW
"…realistic and amusing. I read the whole thing in two sittings and enjoyed it very much. He
offers insight into the world of filmmaking that readers will find hilarious."
-- Glenn Reynolds, MSNBC.com
"The initial boos from the left—for whom Wine has been a hero since his first appearance
as the one radical detective in the 1973 The Big Fix—and tentative cheers from the right will have faded by the end of the
book, when both are laughing too hard to care. Moses hasn't changed his political stripes all that much, and the main target
of his creator's satire is one everybody enjoys ridiculing: the motion picture industry."
-- Jon L. Breen, THE WEEKLY STANDARD
"On his first day as head of security for a movie being shot in Prague, Moses
Wine (making believe he's a Variety reporter for reasons too complicated to summarize here) meets the city's Grand Rabbi, who
asks him, 'Perhaps you would like an exclusive interview with the only screenwriter in Eastern Europe who gives kabala
classes to foreigners on a riverboat cruise ship with catered kosher dinners in the style of the Vilna ghetto?' That lovely
snatch of tossed cultural salad sums up the wacky pleasures of Roger L. Simon's eighth book about Wine -- the Berkeley
radical who literally changed the face of mystery fiction in 1978's 'The Big Fix.'"
--Dick Adler, CHICAGO TRIBUNE
"'Director's Cut,' with its footloose plot and its wisecracking lead, is about
as serious as a Marx Brothers movie--which means that Moses Wine gets to do his patriotic bit after all. In the darkest
days, they also serve who make us laugh."
-- Tom Nolan, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
"A particularly relevant plot, then, filled with action and suspense and
set against arresting Czech backgrounds. Recommended."
-- Library Journal
"Simon's savvy Hollywood satire raises troubling questions about our B-grade
domestic preparedness efforts."
-- Booklist
"Director's Cut is a timely thriller, loaded with absorbing insider snippets about
the film industry, humorous jabs at governmental bureaucracy and a general disregard for icons of any sort."
-- Bruce Tierney, BookPage
"Roger L. Simon is a talented writer who can always be counted on to deliver
a chilling thriller."
-- Harriet Klausner, Allreaders.com
"Like a fine wine, Moses just keeps getting better and better. It's one heck of a surreal roller coaster
ride full of the sophisticated satire and wry wit Roger L. Simon is famous for."
-- Anne Barringer, Old Book Barn Gazette
"A quarter of a century after he first appeared in the
now-classic The Big Fix, Moses Wine remains a private investigator par excellence."
-- In Other Words, Mystery
Wednesday, June 9, 2004
After Dog Blogging and Booze Blogging, this blog is going upscale with Art Blogging in honor of my son Jesse Simon whose work is now appearing in a group show (that's him at the opening Friday night) at the 
This an example of Jesse's work from the show. A dedicated surfer he uses the sport and his love of the ocean in his art, deconstructing old surf boards, refining them in a complex manner and turning them into wall sculptures. Some, like this one, reflect his roots in graffiti art.
Okay, so first to the ingredients. This is the important part because how you mix them doesn't really matter, as long as you don't forget the rum (a lot). Speaking of rum, many are great, obviously, but for this recipe I choose Bacardi Coco, which has a certain tropical je ne sais quoi. I also use Monin's vanilla syrup (yes, it's French--get over it), frozen mixed berries (blackberries, strawberries, raspberries, etc....or, if you're feeling feisty, pineapple) and Nellie & Joe's Famous Key West Lime Juice. This latter stuff is great and worth looking for if it's not in your local store. It's almost a "secret ingredient." (Okay, rum is the real "secret ingredient"). Oh, and you'll need ice and a blender.
