The Virtual Stoa

On 27 November 1978, twenty-three years ago today, San Francisco city supervisor Dan White took his gun to the City Hall (where Jo and I were married earlier this year). There he shot dead both the Mayor, George Moscone, and his fellow supervisor, Harvey Milk, the first openly gay man to be elected to a significant office anywhere in the United States, and whose great political achievement is memorialised on this page (from where I took these fine images) and in the daily political activity of the Harvey Milk Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Democratic Club.Notoriously, in the trial which followed, White was acquitted of first-degree murder after inaugurating the “Twinkie Defense”: eating too much sugary junkfood had, he claimed, made him temporarily insane. He served a little less than six years for voluntary manslaughter, and killed himself months after his release in 1985.

Nick wrote [2.12.2001]: A bit more background on the “Twinkie Defense”: not *quite* the spin you (and others) were putting on it, from snopes2.com:

Neither White nor his defense team ever claimed that White’s consumption of junk food had wrought psychological or physiological changes in White that caused him to act in way inconsistent with his “normal” behavior when he shot George Moscone and Harvey Milk. White’s defense was that he had been suffering from a long-standing and untreated depression that diminished his capacity to distinguish right from wrong, and thus he was not capable of the premeditation required to support a charge of first degree murder. Dr. Martin Blinder was called as a witness by the defense to testify that the conversion of the previously health-conscious White to a diet of Twinkies and other junk foods was evidence of his depression. This testimony was similar to offering evidence that the habitual wearing of torn and dirty clothes by someone who had previously always been a snappy dresser was a sign that that person was suffering from depression. Nobody who paid attention would claim that such testimony asserted that bad clothing had caused the defendant’s depression, but that is essentially what happened in White’s case. Junk food was used as evidence that White was depressed; White’s depression was used to establish grounds for a successful diminished capacity plea; and therefore White was judged incapable of the premeditation required for a murder conviction.

When the diminished capacity defense was successful and White was convicted of the lesser charge of voluntary manslaughter, an outraged media and public skipped the middlemen. White’s depression wasn’t mentioned; instead we were told he had claimed that “Twinkies made him do it.” (Dr. Blinder did suggest excessive sugar could have aggravated a chemical imbalance in White’s brain, but that comment was offered only as a parenthetical remark during Blinder’s testimony about White’s depression. It was not in any way a substantive part of White’s defense.)

Jo wrote [2.12.2001]: The crucial part is the bit in parentheses. The reason that we here in San Francisco talk about the Twinkie Defense is that the perception (contemporary and in retrospect) is that this observation was an important factor in the verdict, whether or not it was an official part of the defense case. I agree that the events have become simplified through mass consumption, but I am sure we all agree that factors can influence a trial without being spelt out by the lawyers - witness the differential conviction rates of whites and people of colour. Perhaps it should be referred to as the “Twinkie Argument”, but it was made, and it seemed at least to matter. By the way, this website article has no by-line and only cites (later) newspaper articles as sources. It quotes other (contemporary) newspaper reports in order to dismiss them, presumably in the light of the first set of articles. There is no argument as to why we should believe a Newsweek reporter as opposed to the Chronicle reporters. (I note, by the way, that Randy Shilts did not have access to records of the trial when he wrote The Mayor of Castro Street: presumably these would be the only source which could really trump the newspaper reports dismissed on this website. Maybe the Newsweek reporter had access to these; the article does not make it clear).

By another way, I think that this website plays a rather banal game by describing a ‘myth’ in terms that the writer can then easily disprove, without giving any evidence for that particular formulation of the ‘myth’. So, in this case, I have never actually heard the version of the Twinkie Defense that says that Dan White’s lawyers actually made it part of the official defense, only that it was an influential argument used at the trial. But that version is less easy to disprove, so the website sets up a straw man.

Wilfrid George Kalaugher. Born 26.11.1904, died 12.8.1999. Ninety-seven today - and much missed.

Nick recently sent me this variant on Martin Niemöller’s famous remark, which was, he tells me posted in a Usenet discussion of anti-Muslim sentiment in the USA:

When they come for the Muslims, I will speak up, even though I am not a Muslim.
When they come for the spammers, I will speak up and say: ‘Hey, you missed that one over there!’

On the whole, I’ve been relatively untroubled by electronic spam — though to write these words is to tempt fate. But then four copies of the same message arrived in my inbox earlier this afternoon, from someone who’d clearly been trawling The Voice of the Turtle for email addresses, and found several different ways of contacting me. What did he want to say?

This letter was borne out of my desire to establish a business/mutual relashionship with you.My name is Mr Smith Lunor,the son of chief michael Dada (the former deputy minister of finance under the ousted civilian government) who was killed and mutilated by the military junta led by Major Paul koroma,after overthrowing the elected of President Tijan kabba.Though I do not know to what extent you are familiar with events and disturbances in Sierra Leone,but the pressure of war drove my mother and me out of Sierra Leone into exile in Spain where we have been living under political asylum Sadly,my mother died of cancer three weeks ago and was burried in Spain.Prior to her death,she handed me over a certificate meant for a secret deposit which my father made in a Security Company in Spain,the deposit that worth US$14,500,000 (fourteen million five hundred United States dollars only),was money paid to his corporation by its overseas Company in the heat of the conflict.He made this saving on his name with the hope of converting it for his personal use at the end of the war;but was killed when the conflict intensified as a result of his opposition to the rebel forces. I have contacted the Security Company to confirm and the established ownership.Due to the return of peace in Sierra Leone and the subsequent death of my mother,I have decided to solicit for the participation of a honest and trustworthy person or Company that will assist in the transfer and business re-investment of the fund.I cannot do it alone due to my present social status and total ignorance of the business world.You will be given a nogotiable percentage at the end of the transaction. If you are interested in the above proposal,contact me immediately through this same e-mail address for more details.You must maintain absolute confidentiality to ensure success.Please indicate your personal tel/fax numbers when replying. Best regards, Mr Smith lunor.

A touching story, and one offering the tantalising prospect of personal enrichment (or at least a “nogotiable percentage”). But a moment with google.com confirms the suspicion that this is spam and scam alike, and one with a distinguished history, as a glance at the thirty-three variations on a theme documented at the Sierra Leone Web demonstrates.Peter Andersen of the Sierra Leone Web writes [25.11.2001]: One of these days I will have to add some of that have been circulated in the past few months. For some reason the last week has seen a lot of activity. Even I got one! I’ve also had more than my share of dishonest potential victims writing to me under false pretenses. Apart from the 419 formula which you recognized, this scam artist has managed both to mangle all the facts and to completely misspell the names of everyone he has referred to.

Nick writes [27.11.2001]: This looks like a modern variant on the more famous Nigerian 419 scam. For more info, see this page, where there is also a beautiful “letters gallery” of non-electronic correspondence examples, plus sundry links to related scams and resources. The quatloos site is a perfect place to pass idle afternoons musing on human gullibility… as is vmyths.com (also highly recommended).

Rob writes [6.12.2001]: This is merely a technologically updated version of the Spanish Prisoner scam. Mamet’s version is a bit more exciting, and stars his scrumptious wife, Rebecca Pidgeon.

Nick found this model response [9.1.2002]:

Dear DR. ONORIODE BOBOLO,

It is so good to hear from a fellow-countryman, having been raised and lived for many years in our most beautiful homeland, Nigeria. I want to send you my sincere thanks and gratitude for your kind offer of USD$25,000.000.00
(TWENTY FIVE MILLION UNITED STATE DOLLARS) for taking part in this funds transfer transaction.

However, I am a businessman too, and I make my living transferring large sums of money from and to my friends, relatives, and business associates in Nigeria. Therefore, I know that you would agree, that in order to participate in this wonderful opportunity, I must have an advance monetary commitment from you — a good faith gesture on your part — in order to proceed.

Therefore, I ask that you deposit just 10% ($2,500,000) of the $25M into my PayPal account as an indication that you truly possess the funds and are actually authorized to release them. Using the online PayPal service is a
very convenient and secure way to transfer funds. All you need do is access the PayPal web site, open a PayPal account, deposit the funds into your new account, and then transfer the money into my existing account, which has already been set up to receive the $25M.

You only need my email address, which you already have, to transfer the funds into my account. Therefore, the complete safety of your account, as well as mine, is guaranteed and insured unconditionally. You have asked that
this matter be handled with the strictest confidentiality, and I will agree to that condition, provided that the transfer takes place in a reasonable period of time, say by Friday, 5 October.

If the money has not been received by that time, I must assume that you are not making a legitimate offer, and that you might be someone other than who you say you are — although I can tell by the exceptional language of your
email, that is probably not the case. However, if that is the case, then I will be forced to embark upon a most unpleasant course of action that I would prefer not to undertake.

Because I have so many loyal friends in the Government of Nigeria and the Military, and many close ties within the Security Service where you work, it would be quite easy to locate your office and your home, as well as learn the identities of your friends and relatives.

I truly don’t believe that you would want to jeopardize their health and well-being, and your own future. I will access my PayPal account on next Saturday to verify that your good-faith payment has been made. Once that takes place, we can move forward with the final transfer.

I trust that you will not disappoint me in this matter, since the consequences for non-compliance could be quite severe. I look forward with great anticipation to working with you.

From slashdot.org.

This cartoon and others by Kirk Anderson are available through the ZNet Cartoons Page.

Two good anniversaries to celebrate. Charles Darwin published his Origin of Species on 24 November 1859. And happy birthday, Baruch Spinoza (b.1632) — three hundred and sixty nine today!

From the BBC:

Pope John Paul II has sent an apology by e-mail for a string of injustices, including sexual abuse, committed by Roman Catholic clergy in the Pacific nations. The 81-year-old pontiff transmitted the message, his first virtual apology, in a recent string of statements of contrition, from a laptop in the Vatican’s frescoed Clementine Hall on Wednesday.

Pope John Paul II Reporting on a Synod meeting held in 1998, the Pope wrote that bishops from the region “apologised unreservedly” for the “shameful injustices done to indigenous peoples” in Australia, New Zealand and the islands of the South Pacific.

The Vatican website is still highly recommended.Nick writes [23.11.2001]: “My favourite detail was in the last paragraph of the Grauniad account:

“The Pope pressed the send button which emailed the document, by tradition a publication he would deliver by hand. Aides said it was intended to spare him a lengthy journey.”

A perfect example IMO of your old friend, “traditional values in a modern setting.”

The Fabian Society writes [19.11.2001]:

The Fabian Society AGM has voted to amend the Society’s statement of socialist aims and valuesAt the Fabian Society’s AGM on Saturday 17 November, members voted to adopt a new statement of aims and values. The Society’s proposed new Rule 2 updates the Society’s commitment to a classless society and to a just distribution of wealth and power. Unlike Labour’s new clause 4, it also expresses belief in the democratic direction of the economy and to common and social ownership. It commits the Society to strong and accountable public institutions and to sustainable development.

The proposed new Rule will now be put to a ballot of the full membership of the Society.

The proposed new Rule 2 reads:

‘The Fabian Society consists of socialists. It therefore aims at a classless society, where a just distribution of wealth and power assures true equality of opportunity. It holds that society, throught its democratic institutions, should determine the overall direction and distribution of economic activity, and seeks to promote where appropriate the social and co-operative ownership of economic resources. It argues for strong and accountable public institutions reflecting the values of public service to meet need. It believes in an active democracy, characterised by liberty, tolerance and repect for diversity. It aims at the implementation of the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and seeks the creation of effective international institutions to uphold and promote world peace and sustainable development. It seeks to secure these ends by the methods of poliical democracy.’

The existing Rule 2, which would be replaced, was drafted after the second world war. It reads:

‘The Society consists of socialists. It therefore aims at a society in which equality of opportunity will be assured and the economic power and privileges of individuals and classes abolished through the collective ownership and democratic control of the economic resources of the community. It seeks to secure these ends by the methods of poliical democracy. It also aims at the implementation of the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It seeks the creation of effective international institutions to uphold and enforce world peace.’

The Labour Party’s Clause 4 reads:

‘The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect.’

All we’re missing here is the text of the old Clause Four of the Labour Party, drafted by Sidney Webb, so I’ll include that here for the sake of completeness:

“To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service.”

So, should the Fabians vote for the new Rule Two?

Nick writes to recommend theyesmen.org.

Check out the Professors of Tampere speech — it’s a very odd thing indeed.

Brief background — a group of surrealist parodists who run a WTO parody website are inadvertently invited to give a presentation explaining the WTO’s outlook to Finnish textile manufacturers. Now read on…

There’s a Finnish press article summarising events here.

The US broadsheets are coming out strongly against W’s new thinking. Good for them. From the editorial columns of 16 November:

The Washington Post: “End-Running the Bill of Rights”

“Any non-citizen whom the president deems to be a member of al Qaeda, or to be engaged in international terrorism of virtually any kind, or even to be harboring such people, can be detained indefinitely under his order and tried. The trials could take place using largely secret evidence…

“Such a process is only a hair’s breadth from a policy of summary justice. The potential to imprison or execute many innocent people is large, the chances that such mistakes would become known much smaller…

“When Americans accused of terrorism are tried in secret courts by hooded judges in Peru or other nations, the U.S. government rightly objects. To authorize comparable trials in this country will erase any legitimacy of such objections…. And worse in turn than the blow to the U.S. image abroad will be the potentially irreversible injury at home if Mr. Bush proceeds, as his order would allow, to undermine the rule of law.”

The New York Times: “A Travesty of Justice”

“President Bush’s plan to use secret military tribunals to try terrorists is a dangerous idea, made even worse by the fact that it is so superficially attractive…

The administration’s action is the latest in a troubling series of attempts since Sept. 11 to do an end run around the Constitution. It comes on the heels of an announcement that the Justice Department intends to wiretap conversations between some prisoners and their lawyers. The administration also continues to hold hundreds of detainees without revealing their identities, the charges being brought against them or even the reasons for such secrecy…

“With the flick of a pen, in this case, Mr. Bush has essentially discarded the rulebook of American justice painstakingly assembled over the course of more than two centuries. In the place of fair trials and due process he has substituted a crude and unaccountable system that any dictator would admire…”

Thanks to Naunihal for sending these my way. He comments: “Note that the rights afforded to a prisoner of war will also be violated. This is a more damning indictment in my eyes since they get neither the protections usually given to residents, nor those given to an enemy, even though the pretext for the trial is that they are enemy agents in a war that we have not yet properly declared. Then again, the other European countries have passed restrictions far more draconian than this already.”

ATTAC — the Association for the Taxation of financial Transactions for the Aid of Citizens — has set itself up in the UK. Here’s its press release:

British ATTAC Will Seek to Disarm the Markets

The worldwide popularity of ATTAC, an association that promotes controls on the financial markets, has inspired an attempt to set up an ATTAC group in Britain.

At a public meeting at London’s Conway Hall on the 17th of November, British campaigners will speak alongside representatives from the French, Irish and Swedish ATTACs, to discuss the question of how a British ATTAC could work. ATTAC, an international network of national and local pressure groups in 26 countries, has raised broad support in Europe for a tax on currency speculation (the Tobin tax), and for reforms of financial institutions, aimed at reducing the human costs of globalisation.

In the three years since it was founded, ATTAC has enjoyed spectacular growth in membership and influence in several countries. Its French chapter now has 30,000 members. Its campaign for the Tobin tax has forced the French and German Prime Ministers to take the proposal seriously, and put the issue on the agenda of the European Council. Although the national ATTAC groups have a common platform, each one has its own structure, and campaigns are closely linked with local issues.

ATTAC’s work combines education with peaceful confrontation, as when hundreds of members of ATTAC France sailed to Jersey this past June, to debate with local authorities about Jersey’s status as a tax haven, and to attend workshops where they learned about proposals for eliminating money laundering. ATTAC also functions as a kind of think tank; its vigorous critique of free-market economic policies comes from an informal network of academics, who also provide a steady stream of alternative proposals for parliaments to consider. This approach appeals to a large number of people who are alarmed by the power of market forces in their lives, and who feel disenfranchised by party politics.

More information on the initiative to launch an ATTAC in Britain can be found at attac.org.uk. The international ATTAC web site is attac.org.

Press contact: Marcus Bischoff (tel: 07855 193 406).

Thanks to Uri for pointing this my way.

From the BBC:

‘Excited’ Simpson regrets Kabul claims

The BBC’s John Simpson said he is “very, very, very embarrassed” after his widely-reported remarks that he liberated Kabul.

As he entered the Afghan capital he told viewers it was “extraordinarily exhilarating to be liberating a city”.

The Taleban had left the city and the veteran correspondent and other BBC staff arrived before the Northern Alliance column.

His remarks were pilloried by some commentators with even Home Secretary David Blunkett adding a note of sarcasm.

It was later emphasised that BBC correspondents Rageh Omar, William Reeve and Kate Clarke were already in Kabul.

Thanks to Jo for sending this to the weblog. She writes: “Not the story itself, you understand, but the fact that it appears in the “Entertainment” section of the BBC news site.”

Once you get into the business of plugging other people’s books, it’s quite hard to know how to stop…

In Beautiful Disguises has now been translated into French, a language very well-suited to its elegantly-crafted prose. Translations into Dutch and Greek (modern, alas) are, I am told, in the pipeline…

Another book to recommend, this time by a former flatmate. (That’s Jennifer, not Alexis).

Alexis de Tocqueville, Writings on Empire and Slavery, edited and translated by Jennifer Pitts, Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001. “In order for us to colonize to any extent, we must necessarily use not only violent measures, but visibly iniquitous ones. The quarrel is no longer between governments, but between races… the day a European plough touches the soil”. Some people are surprised to learn that the celebrated author of Democracy in America was also a strong partisan of the violent French subjugation of Algeria in the 1840s. Jennifer Pitts’ excellent edition translates several of Tocqueville’s influential political essays on Algeria and slavery into English, astonishingly enough for the first time, and provides useful background and commentary in a valuable introduction. Currently only in hardback; let’s hope this one goes into paperback soon.

What’s the point in having a weblog if you don’t get to plug good books by your estimable friends, colleagues and teachers?

Bonnie Honig, Democracy and the Foreigner, Princeton University Press, 2001. Readers in England will be especially interested in Bonnie Honig’s excellent new book, since her account of the ways in which foreign energies simultaneously supplement and subvert the project of democratic citizenship perfectly theorises the role of England football manager Sven-Goran Eriksson in the life of the nation. (Her analysis may even extend to Millennium Dome Supremo Pierre-Yves Gerbeau, too). With illuminating discussions of Machiavelli on founding, Shane, the Book of Ruth, Strictly Ballroom, Rousseau on Poland, the international marriage trade, The Wizard of Oz and Michael Walzer’s What It Means To Be an American, this book presents contemporary academic political theory at its most exciting and least stuffy. A fine, short, and not-too-expensive book. Highly recommended.

Sasha Abramsky, Hard Time Blues: how politics built a prison nation, St Martin’s Press, 2002. New York journalist Sasha Abramsky’s first book - published early next year - won’t be shipped to British bookshops, alas, so you may have to acquire it over the internet, or by getting a friendly US-based colleague to buy a copy over there. But if his writing in The Atlantic Monthly is anything to go by, promises to be a well-researched and exceedingly interesting account of the rise of the mass incarcertation regime in today’s America, where an astonishing two million people are today in the custody of the state and federal authorities’ prison-industrial complex.

David Renton, This Rough Game: Fascism and Anti-Fascism, Sutton Publishing, 2001. The ever-prolific David Renton has yet another book published, hard on the heels of his Fascism: Theory and Practice, Fascism, Anti-Fascism and the State in Britain in the 1940s and Marx on Globalisation. This Rough Game brings together a collection of his recent-ish essays on the subject(s), all of them lively and engaged; and one of them, I am very pleased to say, first published in the pages of The Voice of the Turtle.

Patrick Riley, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Rousseau, Cambridge University Press, 2001. This is where I declare an interest, since my own essay on the Stoic and Augustinian origins of Rousseau’s political thought has been published in these pages. The rest of the volume, however, looks superb, and Patrick Riley has done a fine job of assembling a set of essays which provide a comphrehensive overview of Rousseau’s many-sided achievement without a dull moment in sight. Good stuff. Available in bookshops now in an expensive hardback and cheap paperback edition. Buy the paperback.

It’s over a month now since this picture went into circulation, but it’s still an intriguing image: a 14-year old Osama Bin Laden, on the right, visiting Oxford in 1971 and hanging out with four fashionably-dressed hip young things: two older brothers and a pair of Spanish language-school students. There is also, apparently, a photo of Osama punting, though I sadly never caught up with that one.

Image swiped from the BBC site, and originally published in El Correo.

A lot of the warmongers have been gloating over the last few days, not so much over the fall of Kabul to the Northern Alliance but at the peaceniks who opposed US-UK involvement. Having a good gloat is one of life’s most underrated pleasures, of course. As gloating goes, however, this has been pretty feeble stuff, and it is sad to report that the single most stupid column in this tradition was written by the once-admirable Christopher Hitchens in the Guardian.

It is true that many opposed the war because they feared that millions in Afghanistan would starve during the winter if the supply routes were cut off. If food convoys are able to enter the country safely again - and it is a big if - then this is marvellous news, for which we should be thankful. But the major reasons for opposing the British and the American participation in the war in Afghanistan remain as valid as they ever were, and in the midst of the mindless jubilation of the cheerleaders’ chorus, it is worth reminding ourselves what some of these are.

We oppose the clampdown on civil liberties licensed by Mr Bush’s “war on terror”, which has already led to the absurdities of the Patriot Act and to an executive order permitting extraordinary military tribunals in the US, and to Mr Blunkett’s proposals to allow indefinite detention without trial of terrorist suspects in the UK. We fear the open-ended nature of the Orwellian “War against Terror”, which permits the State Department to open and close hostilities against Iraq, Iran, Syria, Pakistan and various other regimes in the region as the mood takes them. We hate the double standards of US policy in the Middle East (and elsewhere), which underwrites the criminal regime in Saudi Arabia, supports the criminal behaviour of Israel in the Occupied Territories, and sponsors the crime of the UN sanctions regime against the people of Iraq. We have always thought, and continue to think, that the hunt for the perpetrators of the September 11 atrocities should be an international police operation, and that to insist on conceptualising the current crisis in military terms is to hand an important victory to the terrorists themselves. And we have never thought that destroying still more lives from the air - with the detestable use of “cluster bombs” and the inevitable civilian “collateral damage” - is any kind of appropriate response to the abominable destruction of the World Trade Center.

The record of the Northern Alliance in power, of course, is grim. It is not quite as grim as the record of the Taliban in power, but it is close. Since it is possible that the US will find ways to restrain these allies of theirs this time around, there is some reason, though not nearly as much reason as the mainstream press has managed to find, to think that things might have changed for the better in Kabul and Northern Afghanistan. In these times we do well to study the statements put out by Amnesty International or Oxfam, which sound important notes of caution; to continue to read the careful reports from Robert Fisk in the Independent; and to reflect on whether the sudden “collapse” of the Taliban may be no more than a prudent decision to fight from Afghanistan’s hills rather than attempt to defend fixed positions against relentless US bombardment.

When the military campaign brings peace and self-determination to the peoples of the Middle East, then the gloating at people like me can begin in earnest. But, please, not till then.

News from the Conservative Party!

Conservative Islamic Committee formed

Iain Duncan Smith, the Leader of the Opposition, today announced the formation of a Conservative Islamic Committee.

After chairing a meeting with Islamic leaders at Conservative Central Office, Mr Duncan Smith said the committee would meet on a regularly to discuss the issues affecting British Muslims.

He said that Monday’s meeting, which was called to discuss the current international situation, the new anti-terrorist legislation and the issue of religious discrimination, had been very productive.

“We agreed mechanisms to exchange views when the legislation is published,” Mr Duncan Smith said.

“There are so many areas where Conservative and Muslim values coincide. This committee has been designed to work closely with the Islamic community to promote these issues.”

It’s easy to see why the Tories might want to work with British Muslims. But why do any British Muslims want to waste their time talking to the Conservative Party?