What a beautiful crossfit "itty-bitty" Is this her first seminar ?

I myself am nearly finished with a degree in Near Eastern Studies from Wayne State in Detroit. Dr.Lewis is without doubt the Western worlds formost expert on the region, I strongly encourage everyone to take what he says to heart. I would further recomemend reading his work 'What Went Wrong' as well as Edward Said's classic 'Orientalism' for a balanced view.

Awesome! I learned so much about what I'm doing at CF from the cellular to the neurological level. My forever thanks to Coach; with his incredible intellect on, well, everything he speaks on, and to Lauren with her amazing "Oz" wisdom on workouts. To all the trainers who participated critiquing and helping me improve on my every move, thank you all! And to Jim B.,thanks for coaching me through Fran, sorry I spit on you during round 2, you took it well. I can't wait to CF tomorrow!

By the way, nice camo. annie !

dang...looks like my rest day will be prolonged as I'm pretty sick. I over did it a couple days ago, and then right when I started to feel a little better, I pushed myself pretty hard...now I'm out again. I'm taking some time off.

OK, so I'm probably several days/weeks out of the loop, but when did Annie have her baby? Boy? Girl?

Scott
CrossFitter & curious father of three daughters

I second Robin's comments on the content and evaluation of the seminar. Good stuff! I've again spent a week here in Santa Cruz and have been treated like family since I arrived. I drove myself to a punishing end working out with Greg Amundson on Tabata Something Else on Tuesday and continued to punish myself with the constant training here.

I'd like to thank Rob, Hollis, Cill, Brendan, Narine, Eva, Nicole, Tony, Ronnie, Jason, Jim, Kevin, and the rest of the crew here at CF Santa Cruz for putting up with me and letting me annex the gym all week.

Greg Amundson must be thanked for motivating me to a couple of near death experiences, it was great fun!

Maximus, your effort during the seminar workouts were stellar.

Dave Castro, dude you held this place together and did a great job doing it.

Nicole, way to move the Coach along when his tangents went a bit long.

Coach, thanks for the extremely informative and passionate tangents, not to mention the stuff you actually planned on talking about.

Sally for kicking the crap out of fight gone bad and just being cool as hell.

I am always astounded by the quality of Character that I encounter at CrossFit events and gyms. I've probably been to more CrossFit facilities than anyone, and I have to say its all about the people. Thanks again, and I'll be back.

Wow. Great article. I got chills just reading it. Let's continue to stand firm and convinced and resolute!!!!

Nice photo. I can't wait to make it out to a cert with all the shiny happy people. :)

Ted #5, hope you feel better.

9/24/06 8:30 pm

120 pull ups
120 dips

12:35

Thanks for the link to Mr. Lewis's great article. I am serving in Afghanistan right now and this is very a propos.

A note to the Cert:
As things expand well outside the sphere of their influence, the chance- even likelihood- of its dilution is somewhat inevitable. However, spending two entire days immersing ourselves in the very basics- the essence- of human movement spoke highly of the Glassman's commitment to their knowledge that the very best of human performance comes from the ongoing mastery of these basics.... this is the message I hear coming from the heart of this organization, and the message that cannot be diluted if it is to conveyed accurately.
There really is a certain magic happening here. It's exciting and expanding, dynamic and demanding, inclusive and invigorating! And as far as the movements- I've seen it firsthand- there's magic there too and no more so than at its most fundamental.

So looking forward to the next!

"I think that the effort is difficult and the outcome uncertain, but I think the effort must be made. Either we bring them freedom, or they destroy us."

I find it interesting that after an entire dissertation by an obvious expert that he dicided to end with this statement. Over the course of the day I think people will focus in on this statement and say that it is reactionary, over the top, and uncalled for. I believe just the opposite. If someone so well versed as Dr. Lewis says this, I'm far more willing to believe that the jihadists will truely work to this end if we do not stop them. Also, I believe it nessesary to reiterate his point that not all democracies need to look like our democracy.

You can say whatever you want about President Bush, but one thing is for certain - he's stood fast and resolute in the face of terrorism since 9/11. Thank God we didn't have some wishy washy Dem in power when the chips were down. The message I see today is that no appeasement will work. This is a message the Dems need to understand and is the reason that the November elections will not bring them the majority victory they seek.

My feelings haven't changed when it comes to dealing with those Middle Eastern barbarians. We must become more brutal in our tactics and more resolute in our strategic view in order to defeat those who seek to destroy us.

Just wondering if anyone saw bj penn fight this weekend. He was in control of the fight, but ended up getting destroyed in the third round because of lack of conditioning. He lost to Matt Hughes, who uses traditional workouts and cardio training. After the fight Hughes said he was hoping it would have gone the whole five rounds and that it was too bad Bj didn't train harder and come in in better shape.

Great pic! It only makes me miss the HQ that much more. I'm sure this was another great seminar. "World Class Rob's" words are as true as one can get! I look fwd to the next seminar w/the excitment of a kid on Christmas Eve night. Keep it up Coach and others, you are doing what so many others have tried to do and failed. That's make a difference.

Oh, and how RAD is it to see Annie in a seminar pic again! Congrats again sistah!

Get some, Go again!

jk #14,
I read on the message board that BJ popped a rib in the second round and could barely move. May want to check into that more.

Oh yeah that is a great article, very well written.

-Jeremy

Age 29 Bwt 200
Was on an international flight and lost a day so I am posting now. Did yesterday's workout right after I got off the flight and to my hotel. Was so tired that I misread the workout and did 150 dips and 150 pullups. I was wondering why it seemed so hard compared to last time...those last 30 pullups were murder. Anyway: 29+17. I'm going to bed.

After my first, but far from my last, CrossFit Seminar, I could barely sleep (and not for lack of sufficient exhaustion, thanks to the talented and kind trainers who patiently coached my through the intricate and elusive Dead Lift). I was wide awake at midnight, trying to make space in my brain for everything I'd learned, for everything I wanted to offer deeper understanding and dedicated practice. I'm a baby at CrossFit, with nothing but learning ahead. It's refreshing and inspirational to be taught the basics, the very fundementals, and realize that I could spend a lifetime just working there. Thank you to everyone at CrossFit Santa Cruz and beyond. I've taken my first few steps, and I couldn't be more excited to keep going.

After last week off because of a severe allergic reaction and subsequent needed to be on cortisteroids, I will have to take this week at 50%, just to get back into the swing of things. Usually I push to hard to quick, but listened to my body better and am taking more recovery time.

Read the article and it fits so much in line with a discussion that I had with N & L on Friday evening that I will have N read it this afternoon too. It is right in line with what she is learning about in school.

Going on a hike this afternoon with N & L.

Kate

# 14- JK

I posted a comment concerning Penn running out of gas yesterday and I got very few responses. I was disappointed that there was no further thoughts, but it seems that Penn might not be exactly the most avid Crossfitter in the world. Someone posted and said that Penn, in a radio interview, only trains hard when he feels like it. I don't know if this is true, but I do know that Hughes trains harder than anyone in the UFC. It seems like CF is perfectly designed for a UFC fight: 5 short, intense bouts combining the ten areas of fitness. I do see the advantage of long and measured traditional cardio training in a fight, but I still think CF would have the advantage. You should train like you fight, and a WOD like Fight Gone Bad, or one of the more brutal girls mimic closely a match (without getting your head beat in, of course), and if CF is Penn's training program (I've seen the quote on the left hand side of the page a couple of times) I don't see why he gassed.

Does anyone else have any ideas?

If he popped a rib, that makes it very hard and painful to take a deep breath. Shallow breathing=gassing. Didn't watch the fight. Just assembling data points.

That was an excellent article. I'll have more to say later. I made a bunch of notes over the weekend of thoughts on this general topic I had. I'm always taking notes.

The last few paragraphs really made me think about what may be a severe problem that the U.S. has: the support of the House of Saud. It is important to have allies in the region, for the good of the country, but is our 'best Arab ally' in the area really being helpful? How will a strong, democratic republic on their border affect them? Do they really want Iraq to succeed as the democratic nation the U.S. is trying to help it become? We know support for insurgents and sectarian groups is coming from Syria and Iran, but what about Saudi Arabia? It would make sense for all of Iraq's neighbors to want it to be a weak, if not completely unstable.

BJ Penn's site has his post-fight interview. BJ said he felt something in his ribcage separate in the second round, and tried to fight through the pain in the third round. The link to BJ's webpage is on the main crossfit page.

I saw the fight and was very concerned bout Penn's conditioning before the fight.. have read that he was a crossfitter and it always struck me as odd. He did better than I thought he was going to .. lasted a lot longer than I thought he would, but I have to say (as I sit behind my desk at work or sitting behind a table at Hooter's with a beer while watching the fight) if you are going to go up against Matt Hughes HARD CORE training is a must!!! - Not just when you feel like it...

After this post, now I really have to start doing WOD everyday again. Can't say something like that without owning up to how lazy I have been...

I was there...I swear. I guess I shouldn't have dragged butt on the lunch break. How'd I miss the group pic?

Tremendous week. I echo the sentiments of all my brethren attendees above.

Great comment Rob #11.

It's really a cool thing to hang with so many unselfish people that share a common passion.

Thank you Coaches, you put on a great event.

Cheers!

#13 I respectfully disagree re your comments about Bush's "actions" vs Dem's "non actions". Clintons comments on Fox outline it exactly - what really has George Bush done to pursue Bin Laden to the ends of the earth? Or to chase the Saudi based terrorists that made up the majority of the murderers on 9/11? For all those poor souls who lost their lives in 9/11, the brave souls who are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and for all those who support them Bush has to do afr more in Afghanistan than he has done so far.

#20 I hear you. I'm sort of new to CF, and some of the WOD's I can't complete but I put out, and my strength and conditioning are getting better and better. If you halfass the workout you get halfass results. Also, I think the fight was won by Hughes superior mental conditioning. It has to be a blow to the psyche when your opponent takes everything you dish out at him and he comes back harder and more determined everytime.

Wow..who's the Mountie with the Husky? (photos as you log on)

Nice hat, Minium.
You knew that was coming, didn't you?

Regarding the BJ Penn thing:

If all you know about an athlete is that he supports Crossfit or is coached by a trainer who supports Crossfit, you don't know much. You don't know how intensely he works out, or how consistently, or how good his program is, if he has been taught good olympic weightlifting form, whether he does the WOD's or a separate program, if he does ME training, or even if he used to do Crossfit in the past but no longer does so.

It is important to remember that a supposedly "Crossfit" athlete may not be in the best of conditioning given the many above variables, whereas a non-Crossfit athlete may reach a very high level of strength and conditioning by working his ass off grappling, sparring, sprinting, bodyweight exercises, and lifting. It is possible to get extremely fit without doing a single WOD or even a single one of the girl workouts, and Coach has said as much in the past. It is the Crossfit principles of intensity, functionality, and variety that matter, not whatever label we choose to attach to a program.

By the way - to the fellow cert attendies:

Thanks for the motivation. I wish I could remember everyone's names as well as I remember your efforts.

I was going to pass on FGB on Sunday since I was toasted from Saturday and previous day's wods. But when I watched you grind through on the first FGB, I knew I had to go, or I'd let you and myself down! And, you carried me through it - screaming in my ear, not letting me slack, catching my barbells.

Thanks, again.

#26 - Shayne

The Dems don't have any plan of attack. The Reps actions - taking the fight to the enemy - may not have been executed perfectly, but at least there's been action taken. Looking back at the Clinton administration, you don't see any action taken to combat terrorism. Nothing when our Navy diver was shot and thrown out onto the tarmac, nothing after the USS Cole was blown apart and almost sunk in Yemen, nothing after the first attack on the World Trade Center, and they turned tail and ran after the Somalia debacle. Nothing directly tied to combating terrorism. Sent a signal to the terrorists that we were weak.

Unfortunately, the media favors the Dems and hurts our national interests with their appeasement talk and constant Bush-bashing. Pursuing Bin Laden to the ends of the earth is being done, but our efforts are on a much larger scale. Simply killing or capturing one man won't alter our actions in the Middle East and certainly won't bring us peace. Just look at Al Zarqawi in Iraq. Yes, it was nice to finally kill that guy, but it didn't change anything. If you really want to capture Bin Laden, you have to turn the populace against him and, in particular, get the Pakistanis to capture him. Afterall, Bin Laden is most likely in Pakistan!

As bad as things are in Iraq, they'll eventually get better over time so long as we don't cut and run! If we do cut and run this time, then we all better start learning to accept terrorism here at home. Because it would only be a matter of time before we experience daily attacks right here on US soil. I'm just afraid that it's going to take another major attack here before we all wake up and get really tough with the terrorists.

Nelson, I could see that coming from a mile away.

Believe me, I suffered from no shortage of "Gilligan" mentions.

But the alternative was to have a burnt dome (and to expose the rest of the CFers to the beautiful cut I gave myself by head-banging an olympic bar--fun!)...

Good to see you still have the keen eye, though, Nelson.

The cert was great. I was inspired, impressed, enlightened and educated (oh and humbled).

Thank you Coach, what a great and brilliant human being you are, thank you for everything. I'll even overlook some of those questionable articles you post on rest days.

Thank you Mike M. for mentoring me and getting me to where I am. I look forward to working with you and improving together for a long time to come.

Thank you Nicole O. for getting the ball rolling: I would not have been there if it was not for you.

Nicole & Eva, what can I say that has not been said, but whoa! You are animals, monsters! And I mean that in the best possible way. Totally inspiring.

Ben, Holy Mackrel, did you ever work me, amazing coaching! I definitly did not want any more attention from you! Again, I mean that in a good way!

Pierre, thanks for everything even though you called me "Fat and lazy" (just kidding, relax).

Coach: as stated I have added a "Coach Gregg Glassman Quotes" section to the CrossFit Wiki page. I have never heard anyone with such an amazing ability to turn a phrase: after a whole weekend I was still engaged by everything you said, and that is not easy to do. We love your infopoetry!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossfit#Coach_Greg_Glassman_Quotes

I heard he took the fight on short notice. Not that that's any excuse.

Hey!

A few months ago I saw this kick-ass video on here of some intense women doing a bunch of Thrusters and Muscle-ups till they almost dropped. I'm trying to inspire my wife to CrossFit up, and that was one of the most inpirational video I've seen. Anyone remember the one I'm talking about? I've looked through the Archives and can't seem to locate it... HELP.
Thanks!

I really need to get to a cert. Everyone sems to love them. Posts on Mondays after seminars are like the speaches at the Oscars (I'd like to thank the guy that cuts my dog's nails, etc..)

Great sense of community. Sounds like deep bonds are formed that wil never be broken. Great stuff!

Hi,

A few months ago I saw this kick-ass video on here of some intense women doing a bunch of Thrusters and Muscle-ups till they almost dropped. I'm trying to inspire my wife to CrossFit up, and that was one of the most inpirational video I've seen. Anyone remember the one I'm talking about? I've looked through the Archives and can't seem to locate it... HELP.
Thanks!

Coach,

I love the workout and thank you for all you do for us. You have made me stronger faster leaner and smarter about working out. I also wish to send thanks from my wife and boxing team. As for the politics:

I have to say the endless neocon propaganda gets old on the rest days. Unlike crossfit your slant on political subject matter is quite predictable and thus boring. I'll just watch Fox "news" and get the cliff notes version of the party line in the future.

Thanks just the same,
Ricky

I think the rib injury is an excuse. Penn's lack of conditioning is a common problem. The same kind of thing happened against st piere when they fought. I do agree that his conditioning problems do have a lot more to do with his lack of effort in training up to the fight. If you can't get up for a championship fight like that then you have to question if you should even be doing that for a career.
I have been doing the cf for about three weeks now and am coming back from two shoulder surgeries. I do think cf is a great program. I just know that I read how bj penn does it on the website when I first started and wanted to see if anyone else saw the fight and what their opinions were. Seems like every feels about the same as me. Plus Hughes is just a freak of nature. Maybe we could add bailing hay and wrestling bulls to the wod's.

The article certainly brings an interesting historical perspective to the discussion -- I was especially interested in the description of the Islamic world back in the days of French colonialism. The observation that the most dangerous Islamic governments are those we have historically considered our "friends" is also a powerful and important point. I also agree that we should allow democracies in the region to follow their own course, and not attempt to force them into a certain western mold. Think about it -- most of the stable and prosperous "democracies" (I use the term to mean an elected government, with certain liberties guaranteed to the people) in the world became that way through *internal* revolution, not some external nation forcing it on them for their own good. Even if we can replace regimes with elected governments, do we have any reason to believe they will be stable unless the people of the country rise up and take it into their own hands?

However, I have some issues with the article.

First, it seems like his description of the history of the Middle East is pretty deliberately picking and choosing events to paint a certain picture, rather than attempting to serve as a balanced and objective portrayal. For example, the article mentions the Iranian revolution of 1979, but fails to mention the military coup 25 years earlier that was assisted by the USA and Great Britain (see http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27b/067.html ), which arguably set in motion events that led up to the revolution itself. Lewis has no problem describing the influences the Nazis and Communists had on the region, but why does he shy away from describing the historical intereference by the US and its allies?

Second, I began to get worried early on in the article, by the way Lewis frames the debate between the "pro-Arab" and "imperialist" views. Besides the fact that this is a false dichotomy -- there are many valid views on how to handle the middle east between and beyond these two -- notice how he defines each viewpoint in blatantly biased terms. The "pro-Arab" view "shows ignorance of the Arab past, contempt for the Arab present, and unconcern for the Arab future." Well, that's not good! I certainly wouldn't side with anyone who shows ignorance, contempt, and unconcern! However, the "imperialist" view insists that the arabs "must be allowed to develop in accordance with their cultural principles." What a noble notion! How could anyone disagree with that? Of course, what some people would disagree with is whether these descriptions are anywhere near accurate depictions of the sides of the debate. In fact, a common criticism of the "imperialist" view is that it is *not* concerned with allowing the arab world to develop according to its own cultural principles, and that rather it seeks to wipe out any inconvenient culture and impose an artificial westernized government -- perhaps keeping a fingerhold of power within that government in the meantime.

But I digress.

The final issue I have with the article is toward the end -- as he begins to conclude his argument, he slips away from critical historical thinking and starts to recite what seem to me to be -- and forgive me for this -- characteristically republican talking points. For instance:

"they got a vigorous reaction, first in Afghanistan and then in Iraq."

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. And although our administration argues that Iraq is a front on the greater war against terrorism, I really can't see Al Qaeda caring much about what happens to Iraq one way or the other. However, one could argue that the instability and power vacuum of Iraq has created a potent environment to energize and train new terrorist recruits.

"It is no accident, comrades, that there has been no successful attack in the United States since then."

Specious reasoning at best. There wasn't an attack in the United States for a long time before 9/11 either. The fact that there hasn't been one since is probably more due to increased vigilence and patching security holes than simple deterrence. And finally, there *have* been terror attacks in other countries in the meantime, including Great Britain.

"And one of the greatest dangers is that on their side, they are firm and convinced and resolute. Whereas on our side, we are weak and undecided and irresolute."

And here comes the "us-vs-them" reasoning, where we and they become giant generalities. There's a lot of hidden meaning hanging on these words. We are weak and undecided! (so therefore stop criticizing the president and make sure not to elect those flip-flopping democrats!) They are convinced and resolute! (So be afraid! Fear the unknown! And vote republican!) But are they really convinced and resolute? Sure isolated pockets of radical terrorist activity are. And certain heads of states are in their own way. But are we really to forget the entire article and its attempt to portray the Islamic world as a complex environment full of history and internal conflict, and instead see it all as a uniform, scary "THEM"? For shame.

"Either we bring them freedom, or they destroy us."

Really now, nothing in the article supports the contention that they are going to destroy us, or are capable of destroying us. More fear mongering, pure and simple.

Turned yesterday into a gymnastics day, snatched a PR 150 lbs

Today did a little tech work on Snatch and Clean and Jerk (light)

20 yoa
bwt 142

Fran: 7:03 (PR!!!!)
60# thruster
kipping pull-ups

last time i used 55#, and i got 7:54.

then, Tabata rowing, 8 intervals.

To all the Trainers, and Attendees at this weekends certification seminar, Thank you. I feel so lucky to be surrounded by "Fitness Whores", just like me. I feel at home in your midst. Thanks to Coach & Lauren for your continued expertise, and guidance. Thanks to Nichole, Annie, Eva, Brenden, Jim, Kelven.
There is no way to mention all, but I recognize al the trainers and all attendees for thier heart, grit, and efforts. Maybe we can have a workout party in Orange County some day. Please join us! Collectively, you all inspire the masses.

Recovery WODs continue...
Today:
21-15-9
185# deadlift
25# weighted pull-up
TOTAL TIME=16:09 (6:46/5:34/3:49)

jk #40
I agree about Hughes being a freak of nature.
I do add bull-riding (the meachanical kind) to my work out almost weekly... and I am NOT talking bout those stupid girly rides most girls get... that is always so depressing to me to watch - although I know it's fun for you guys to watch
;)_

Quick leg press/squat workout, then ran a mile. Ju-jitsu tonight...can't wait to get nasty sweaty!

Reading Bernard Lewis will unquestionably enable one to parse events in the Middle East with greater intelligence and understanding. He comes down clearly on the side of those who see us in the beginning of a long struggle with an agressive, jihadist Islam. Sadly, one of the unfortunate by-products of our democratic system is that long somewhat indecisive conflicts become political issues. Let's not forget that if it wasn't for Sherman's successes in Georgia, Lincoln may well have lost to McClellan in 1864; General Eisenhower bullyragged the Democrats about Korea in 1952, and Nixon ran on an end the war platform in 1968. Lewis' article reaffirms my stout conviction that we are doing the right thing in Iraq and Afganistan, and I will support those men and women in the government and the military who have the clear vision and backbone to get the job done, no matter what.

Executed yesterday's WoD: 120 dips/120 pull-ups @ ~ 40:00. (many rest intervals required)
-Additional sit-ups and back extensions.

I found this website: http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf

It's interesting to put numbers to these things.

Also, this article is apropo to today's discussion: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/25/world/middleeast/25terror.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

What's interesting to me, though, is the spin. In my considered view, Lewis is right when he says that the radicalized Islamists got knocked back their heels emotionally by our invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, which they didn't think we had the guts for, but are taking renewed comfort from the apparently increasing chorus in American in favor of retreat.

Put yourself in a radicals shoes. How do you get control of Iraq? Under Saddam, you didn't. You did nothing or died. In the first phase of our occupation, you did little, because the resources and organization weren't there. Now, you have structure, and lots and lots of bombs--provided by Iran and Syria, in all likelihood--and all you have to do is create the impression of chaos, and cause as many deaths as possible, so America cuts bait and runs. It may take a year, or 10, but you live there.

Once America scampers away with its' tail between its' legs, you redouble your efforts at destabilizing whatever semblance of government we leave behind. Absent American troops, at some point you're able to marshall regular forces, as trained and supplied by Iranians or Syrian Baathists, and give it a year or two, we have a baby Iran or Saudi Arabia in Iraq. At that point, you take your oil revenues, and restart work on your nuclear program, while protesting to the contrary. We start seeing pictures in Time or Newsweek of some new bearded dude who claims he wants peace.

That's Future One. Future Two is us showing the same intestinal fortitude we've shown in most of our other wars. We lost 250,000 people in WW2. We haven't even lost 3,000 yet in Iraq, and I see people like Brotherwitharms comparing our situation to the stock market. You know what happens when everyone dumps a stock? It plummets. In that sense, the comparison is valid. What it ignores is the quality of belief in our cause, and the capability of our nation and armed forces to learn, and adapt.

We're in Round 2-3 of a 15 round match. The longer we hold out, the stronger--not weaker--we get. The Islamists think we are weak. That is why they attacked us in the first place. That is why the war on Iraq, in addition to deposing a Stalinist monster bent on building nukes, was a step in the right direction in the War on Terror. It showed teeth we hadn't shown in probably 30-40 years.

Along the lines of thought above, then, it is very plausible that if--as of this moment--our war in Iraq has strengthened terrorist recruiting efforts, it is precisely because they are understanding--or at least believing--that Bin Laden is right, that we are soft, decadent, cowards who run at the sight of the slightest difficulty.

I've said this before, and will say it again: the principle argument I see leftists using against this war is that it is difficult. Absent the need for extended, difficult effort, who wouldn't favor the creation of a Free Iraq, which governed in a manner befitting their culture, but not autocratically?

I have another rant in me about leftism generally, but will leave that for another day.

Ken,

There WERE attacks prior to 9/11. Quite a few of them. Did you not know that, or is that just a rhetorical posture?

As you should know, the effort of Al Queda members to gain access to WMD's is well documented. It is possible to discuss the best response to this, but I dont' think the reality of the problem is a figment of anyone's imagination.

Given that there is a group of people out there dedicated, in effect, to destroying or radically altering our way of life, there is in fact an objective referent to "them". That should not be conflated with Muslims generally, but we have an enemy, and he is real. "We" are the free nations of the West, who may differ in many ways, but who have a common enemy.

I wonder sometimes if Post-structuralism/deconstructionism don't refer to the capacity for rational thought whatsoever. That latter is addressed to my leftist audience. Those words have no signification or relevance for others.

Kate- wondered about you, glad to see you back, and hope you are well.
Turtle

#32 Steve
Please get your facts straight before you accuse an administration of not doing enought to combat terrorism. Bad things happen during all administrations and politicians of both parties prevent things from being done in retaliation.

The Navy Diver you refer to was killed in 1985. As I recall that was during the Regan/Bush Sr. Administration. The man that was convicted of killing him was Mohammed Ali Hamadi has since been released from prison and rejoined the terrorist group Hezbollah.

The Achille Laurel hijacking in 1985 (Fawaz Yunis). Once again during the Reagan/Bush Sr administration. The bombing of the Marine barracks in Beriut Ditto(Iran).

The Cole was attacked on OCT 12, 2000, this was just prior to the Presidential election. George W. could have done something about this easier than Bill Clinton since Clinton only had 3 months left in office.

All of these were actions which have led Terrorist groups to believe we are soft.

Jim,

You're right, of course. Bush, Sr. put us in Somalia, although it was Clinton who pulled us out. Ronald Reagan gave the Iranians weapons, if my hazy memory serves, and certainly did little to defang Hezbollah after they attacked us. Democrats got us into Korea and Vietnam, and Republicans pulled us out.

However, you have to place these things in the context of political realism. Whether a President is a Democrat or Republican, they have to live with the politics of their office. GW is in his last term, but he has to help protect his fellow Republicans from Democratic advances. Their message is that we have failed. That message gets a sympathetic hearing from a lot of people weaned on the rhetorics of failure and dependence.

By dependence, I mean to point to a realization I just had that leftists very sincerly apply their own thinking to themselves. If poor people are poor, someone else is to blame. If someone else is to blame, they are excused their faults. If their faults are not their fault, then, effectively, they have no control. If they have no control, they are victims. If they are victims, their only recourse is anger. If they are angry, then they have been denied justice (emotions are generally rationalized ex post facto). If they have been denied justice, then the existing order is corrupt. If the existing order is corrupt, then only an overthrow of the existing order can create justice.

And what, after all this, was justice, again? Why, it was a condition where they weren't angry. Nobody knows exactly what it looks like, or how to get there, but they'll feel it when it comes along.

Let's apply this basic framework to international relations. Some Arabs are angry at us. Well, obviously, they must have been denied justice. What does justice look like? Why, the condition where they aren't angry. Let's just ask them what they want. We'll be angry together. That would be good fun. Maybe we can learn some fun Arab dances, and cook marshmallows by the fire. Wait, the existing order is corrupt, so they can't find justice. Damn, DAMN that George Bush, with all his malapropisms. We better get him out of office, so we can make friends with our poor, misunderstood Muslim friends.

And that is about the extent of policy recommendations I see on this site, and elsewhere. It's said that there are two sides to every issue. This is no doubt true, but sometimes, one of them is right, and one of them is wrong. There doesn't have to be a balance, although sensitive minds will look anyway, to see to what extent there may be.

In the case of these policy debates, I only see new ideas on the part of conservatives. I scanned a book Saturday titled "The New American Militarism". I think that was the title. Camo'ed up dude on the cover. The author was a West Point graduate, they said, and a Vietnam veteran. Well, in reading it, one could easily be forgiven for forgetting that a recognizable group of Arab and Pan-Islamic men had declared war on us. The whole focus was on psychology and describing our mistakes. Nothing generative or creative. Nothing new, that I saw, in the 50 or so pages I scanned.

The way I look at it, you make a plan, and stick to it. If it isn't working, change it, keep tweaking it, but above all soldier on if your cause is important. This cause is not small, and not worthy of the derisive irony I so often see heaped on Bush and Republicans generally.

I'm training for a hike in the desert with a pack, and was right at the end of an 8.6 mile hike with 45 lb. yesterday when some little kid--I'd guesstimate 17-20--pulled up next to me, and asked if my [contraction of Richard] was missing. Now, I was tired, and I've never concerned myself with other people's opinions overly much anyway, but I got to thinking about it.

There is this sense, on the part of some people who are smart enough to create trouble, but not to solve it, that the military can best be understood in effect as a psychological malady. This view is ahistorical, and frankly stupid. But someone taught this view to this kid, either his parents or his teachers, and it is not uncommon. That, not what he said, pissed me off.

In the same way that I am arguing that we need to stay in Iraq until we are done, we also need to persist in trying to clarify thinking, and kick people in the asses until they start waking up from the (in many cases literally) drug-induced intellectual comas they have fallen in to. I say that, because it is tempting at times to despair about the future of a nation with significant numbers of such morons. However, whereever we are now, is not where we need stay. All of us can make a difference, in large ways and small, in working towards a nation where we are defined by shared beliefs, and not by a sense of shared irony, and disenfranchisement.

Now let us pray.

#38 Patrick,

Re: "kick-ass video on here of some intense women doing a bunch of Thrusters and Muscle-ups till they almost dropped." You probably want the "Nasty Girls" link on http://www.crossfit.com/cf-info/excercise.html. That is, http://media.crossfit.com/cf-video/051204.wmv

Before I forget, I had another idea that I haven't seen before, that I can recall.

It seems to me that the Soviets didnt' distinguish between regular and ideological warfare. They did an excellent job of winning minds to their cause by, among other things, COMMITTING themselves to it. They understood the process by which minds are won. In the Arab world, they positioned themselves in part by building things, and giving things away. We could do a lot more of that.

In particular, it occurred to me it would be an interesting idea to have a sort of "armored peace corps". The Peace Corps, in my view, is a great idea. However, in many places, there will be some small segment of the population who will oppose American help. Therefore, you train them to defend themselves. Maybe this is a really stupid idea. Not sure. Conceptually, though, we need to be selling America everywhere, high and low.

JIm D - #53
I stand corrected on the timing of the murder of our diver.
Bottom line is that, in my opinion, the Dems via Clinton set the stage for where we are today. While Reagan had a few problems of his own with terrorism, he was focused on bringing the Soviet Union down. I don't think at the time realized that our war with the terrorists actually began with the Beirut bombing. Still, Clinton's failure to act against Bin Laden when he had the chance I believe led to 9/11. And, yes, I think Clinton should have retaliated for the Cole attack and not left that bag of worms for Bush.

Thank you Coach and "the posse" for all of your poetic pedagogy, gorgeous demonstration, and insightful instruction. It's refreshing to be involved with a group of people focused around such a positive endeavor. I am grateful to have found CrossFit before falling into the 'margins of decrepitude"

Eva, nine days to kipping :)

Ron-

Wearing the hat is a much better option than bursting into flames, as Mr. MM no doubt would absent such a garment.

-D.

My dog quit talking to me, so I took her for a row.
4.1k, 27 minutes. Open water, training scull. This will probably come back to haunt me tomorrow.
You guys all make me want to go to a cert. I'm giving myself a year of doing this, then gonna go there and get some. Training, that is.

barry cooper, great post!

Ken #41:

While you blame others for aping republicans, you ape dems.
The truth is that, at least against al-Queda, it is us vs. them. They want to destroy us because of our beliefs and practices are anathema to them. We want to destroy them to protect ourselves. Neither can be safe while the other survives.

Did my first muscle-up today. Got the first one easy and power through the second. Suggestions on progressing to higher reps?

Group Moffett

Three rounds of:

Run 800 meters
20 Pushups

The second round of 800 meter run was faster than the first and third round.

Barry and Steve
I'm not defending the Clinton administration, I never voted for the man. I just refuse to tolerate false accusations that fill my in box on a daily basis. It's hard to believe that individuals (left and right) can spend so much time creating and spreading B.S.

Now it appears that the right is trying to make this a Clinton war that W. has had to come in and cleanup. I suspect it is a scare tactic to help preserve seats during the mid-term elections.

W's administration has to take the blame and the heat for their mistakes and then fix them. Staying the course isn't a game plan it's a talking point for the uninformed. It's time to listen to what the battle field commanders are saying and then fight the war not the propoganda.

#63 Nate
Congrats. Just keep trying. On day you'll get the kip just right and #2 and #3 will come surprisingly easy. I find that the faster I let myself down the easier it is to create the energy in the kip to propel back up.

Dan's keeping it real. I forgot Mike was a superhero.

I've seen his effortless muscle ups.

Keep it shiny, Mike.

Throughout U.S. history our enemies have thought that we would be too weak to fight. Our soldiers weren't brave enough or strong enough or dedicated enough.

In the American Revolution the British thought that no one was the equal of the British infantryman - certainly not the Americans. The Redcoats came from sturdy peasant stock. The peasants could survive the winter without coats and shoes. What could be tougher. The American farmers and peasant types had coats and shoes. They couldn't be very tough. Well, I think the British found out different.

The Barbary pirates thought that we wouldn't do any fighting to protect our ships. While the rest of the world was paying them tribute American Marines and soldiers walked across a desert to conquer Tripoli.

In World War One the Germans weren't concerned about our entry. They would beat us easily. Well, the Germans found out differently.

In World War Two the Germans and the Japanese thought they could beat us. Again, they found out differently.

Now, according to the experts, the terrorists are thinking that we won't fight them to the finish. Maybe 35 years ago they would have been partially right. I was in the Marines then and we were advised not to wear our uniforms into town. I ws never personally called a baby killer or anything like that but you could tell that the military wasn't popular. It's a different story today. The military is held in much higher esteem and the terrorists attacked within our borders and they'll do it again. Those factors make a lot of difference. In summary, I don't think we're weak enough for the terrorists to win. It may take years and we probably won't eradicate them completely but we won't lose to them.

There's been a very odd thread running through the comments on today's piece, following the implication of the piece itself:

Mr. Lewis:
"...on their side, they are firm and convinced and resolute. Whereas on our side, we are weak and undecided and irresolute..."

Treelizard
"Let's continue to stand firm and convinced and resolute!!!!"

Barry Cooper
"It seems to me that the Soviets ... did an excellent job of winning minds to their cause by, among other things, COMMITTING themselves to it."

Now maybe I'm reading way too much into these statements, but they all seem to say "they're committed and we're not." Weren't there similar comparisons made by the Fascists and Soviets between themselves and the Western democracies of the time? Is it that the fascists are resolute and the democracies are vacillating weaklings? Or is it that they're fascists and we're people who allow dissent, including allowing to speak (or rant, or scream and jump up and down and be stupid) those who question the wisdom of the current policy -- even if they don't have a better solution to hand (that is, they can see that we're in a mess and the current "plan" isn't really doing much to improve the situation, but they don't have a pat answer to how to solve the mess).

Are we really saying we should be more like fascists in order to fight fascism? Isn't that the gist of what Rumsfeld said to the Foreign Legion in Utah? Frankly, I think that's insane.

I believe we should stay in Iraq and finish what we started -- it would be dishonorable at best if we left the Iraqis with the bag, now. In addition, I think that many here are right that it would send the wrong message to those who would like to destroy our civilization.

But I don't believe that "our problem" is all these "appeasers" and people who question the wisdom of the Bush administration. I think that many are confusing allowing opposition with weakness in irresoluteness. There probably are people in this country who actually fit the caricature that Barry Cooper draws in post #54, but I would warrant that it ain't very many. My guess is that the intensity of your (not unwarranted) ideological and intellectual disgust with what you consider to be the "leftist" point of view, you're tarring all those who question the Bush adminstration with the same broad brush. Unfortunately, I believe that you're being either disingenuous or intellectually lazy. Either way, you're failing to distinguish between critics of the Administration who likewise want to see a strong U.S. crush the terrorist/radical Islamic threat, but are less than sure that the current way of going about it is the right way (some of whom are in both major political parties), and those who are actually appeasers and think that if we play nice the bad guys will all leave us alone (granted, virtually all of them are Dems or some other leftward persuasion).

This is a very difficult war we're fighting and I believe it merits more than a rousing shout of "go again." Sometimes it's a good idea to reconsider whether what you're doing is the wrong thing, and not just the right thing incompetently executed.

Usama bin Laden himself has said that Iraq is ground zero for the war. Agree or disagree with whether or not we should have gone in the first place- if we were to pull out, Iraq would be taken over by Iran and the terrorists. The people of Iraq would have been taken out of the fire and put into the frying pan.

Also, while we are here worrying about Monday Night Football, the latest I-pods, and getting that big-screen TV, the terrorists are working 24-7 to do us in.

GENERALLY SPEAKING, there seem to be two types of muslims: those that want us dead, and those who are indifferent.

We'd better wake up, unite, and stop playing politics with our future. Last week, in our own country, Chavez is playing to the crowd and insulting our culture and our president to overwhelming applause by the UN. This table was set for him by the democrats. It is no wonder that Bush has no international respect with the idiot Jimma Carter denouncing US policy (read Bush policy)around the globe.

Although Clinton is on his personal mission to rewrite history, perhaps this will wake some of the appeasers to the seriousness of the problem...wishful thinking, I know.

Wake up America.

Barry #51,

"There WERE attacks prior to 9/11. Quite a few of them. Did you not know that, or is that just a rhetorical posture?"

I may not have been very clear. By saying "There wasn't an attack in the United States for a long time before 9/11 either" I was referring to the fact that the previous islamic terrorist attack on US soil (the first WTC bombing) was 8 years before 9/11, whereas it's only been 5 years post-9/11. My point is that it's far too early to make any conclusions about whether our response to 9/11 changed the frequency of terror attacks on US soil.

Madman,
I don't think being as firm and resolute as fascists makes one a fascist. I just think if one is not as firm and resolute as fascists, the fascists win.

I'm not saying that democracy is weak, but I agree with Sun Tzu that the affairs of the military should not be regulated by the state.

I've been spending all this time on sonshi.com trying to find the quote and I think it's this one: "One whose general is able and is not interfered by the ruler will be victorious. "Sun Tzu

Of course people should be ALLOWED to dissent, but I just find it interesting that some people in this country are towing the same party line as the terrorists are. I don't really care. They are free to think whatever they want and express it however they want, as long as they don't hurt anyone--and by saying that I also mean, as long as they don't dictate military policy.

People can certainly whine and scream about how they hate current policy even if they don't have any better solutions and their information is inaccurate. I prefer to be strong and firm and resolute.

I'm not saying we should shout "Go again," but rather shout "keep going." I am not a warrior, but the other day I was playing MMA with a buddy and trying to get a really difficult technique that he wasn't letting me have, and I just stopped. He said, "Why did you stop? I was just about to tap out. You almost had it." There's a lesson in there-- and I'm not saying people should never reconsider what they're doing, and of course changing techniques when something isn't working is an important skill. But a lot of the protestors in this country were all about giving up before we even started. They didn't want to go to war and wanted the war to end from the get go. They never want to go to war, they just want to bury their head in the sand and pretend everything is happy. And I do think terrorists count on that, just like predators look for easy targets.

I don't think all the appeasers are weak, but I do think that when people who AREN'T weak listen to them and allow their irresoluteness to dictate public policy, it looks like a sign of weakness. And I really don't think terrorists would care very much WHY their sworn enemies are acting weak or in the reasoning behind it, just like a predator wouldn't care WHY his intended victim walking down that ally by herself without any weapons. They just want to kill us.

First I'd like to thank everyone at the CF seminar for the hard work and good times!
Second, Nicole, I will be waiting to hear about your first kipping pull-up..I know you'll do it!
Third, about CF/BJ Penn. There is one really important thing you need to know about CF workouts: you have to do them in order for them to work.

Who's that OLD guy in the back right??? And where's Rob?

5 rounds
100 m Hill sprint
3 Snatch grip deadlifts X 185#
5 Heaving snatch balance X 85#
5 Weighted pull ups X 35#
5 Flying pull ups

21:00

Hang for time 2:30
Tabata Kettlebell Swings (Pet Rock style)
Hang for time 1:00

THE CULT OF ISLAM
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. Islam in general, forbids lying. The Quran says, "Truly Allah guides not one who transgresses and lies." Surah 40:28.

In the Hadith, Mohammed was also quoted as saying, "Be honest because honesty leads to goodness, and goodness leads to Paradise. Beware of falsehood, because it leads to immorality, and immorality leads to Hell." However, this has not been the case in Islam. Islam is based on big lies and contradictions.

The biggest scam in Islam, especially Shi’a Islam is perhaps the notion of "Taqqiyeh," an immoral tactic to lie for a good cause and later retract your words (the belief that the end justifies the means.) Islam is all about schemes, war, and violence.

Prophet Mohammed was an extremely violent man, a man of war. Historically, Jesus set the example for love, as did Moses. The opposite is true of Prophet Muhammad. That is why we see so many suicide bombers in our era. They simply are following what the prophet of Islam had planned for them. Islam rewards those who become martyrs with 72 virgins. So, sex is what the Arab Muslim murderers die for. It is all about sex. This must tell us a lot about the prophet’s own appetite for sex. He did not spare anyone; even 9-year-old girls were not immune to his sexual wrath. Worship a sex-maniac and a child molester? I think NOT.

Muslims are true victims of Islam. However, they fail to realize that Islam is a cult, and the prophet was a demon, possessed by a huge sexual appetite. Yes, true Muslims firmly believe, that those who die in the act of killing the infidels (Christians, Jews, and other non-believers) will not only gain entrance into heaven, but will be greeted by 72 virgin women -- most likely, all 9-year-old girls.

Being politically correct has backed fired and the world seems to be taken hostage by the Islamic fanatics. The more politicians give in and declare Islam as a peaceful religion, the more they give the Muslim fanatics impetus to harass and intimidate people of the host countries where they have been given shelter to live.

Galileo said, "I do not think it is necessary to believe that the same God who has given us our senses, reason, and intelligence wished us to abandon their use, giving us by some other means the information that we could gain through them."

The statement above was true at the time, and it so true today. God has bestowed upon humans many different senses, including intelligence so that we use them for a better life. The senses he has given us should lead us to enlightenment and prosperity, not the other way around. Is it possible that the almighty has given these treasures to only a few people and abandoned the rest of his creatures in bewilderment?

Intelligence is discerning between true and false or the real and illusory. Islam ultimately defines the real nature of intelligence as coming to realize the absolute nature of Allah and the relativity of all else that is other than He. The Quran calls those who have gone astray from religion as those who cannot think, 'la ya'quilun', those who cannot use their intelligence correctly.

It is true that all religions are founded on fear. Fear of the unknown. Fear of death. However, throughout the years, many of the world religions were able to find ways to reform themselves, but NOT Islam. Islam prides itself on having remained unchanged. The Islamic Revolution in Iran presents a clear image of Islam. We do not need to go back to 1,400 years ago and see what the prophet of Islam did. We can see a total replica in the words of his disciples, Ayatollah Khomeini, and the newly selected president of Iran, Mr. Ahmadinejad. That is how Islam advanced rapidly around the world, with terror and fear.

Quran says; kill, imprison! Why are you only clinging to the part that talks about mercy? Mercy is against God. Mehrab means the place of war, the place of fighting. Out of the mehrabs, wars should proceed, just as all the wars of Islam used to proceed out of the mehrabs. The prophet has [had] sword to kill people. Our [Holy] Imams were quite military men. All of them were warriors. They used to wield swords; they used to kill people. We need a Khalifa who would chop hands, cut throat, stone people.

"In the same way that the messenger of God used to chop hands, cut throats, and stone people; in the same way that he massacred the Jews of Bani Qurayza, because they were a bunch of discontented people. If the Prophet used to order to burn a house or exterminate a tribe, that was justice," said Ayatollah Khomeini.

Many Islamic scholars vow that Islam is a religion of logic, wisdom, moderation, and peace. They vow that Islam invites people towards insight and knowledge and uplifts the position of women in society. This is far from the truth. Islam cannot stand what is logical and it does not invite people towards insight, but entraps humans with a deadly poison. Once one becomes Muslim, there is no way out.

Islam is about forcing women to wear the "hejab" the symbol of backwardness, stupidity, and fanaticism. Women are second class citizens in the Muslim world. The prophet Muhammad takes his 9-year-old wife to bed. What kind of man, not to mention a prophet of God, would commit such horrible act of pedophilia? The Quran says women are to be beaten by their husbands, yet Muslim women apparently are fine with this violence, or they could not wait to divorce Islam and run away. Quran says four wives are allowed, but Muhammad had at least 20 or even more. They say, in paradise, women are chained in different areas for men's pleasure.

Islam definitely is not compatible with logic and democracy. As a matter of fact, Islam is against liberty and freedom. The problem with the Islamic scholars is that they are in denial that the genie is out and now it is way too late to put it back in the bottle.

Khoshroo Gholamali, Deputy Minister for International and Legal Affairs of the Islamic Republic at the Munich Conference on Security Policy said, "Islam’s prime objective is to strike a balance between Islamic tenants and democratic mechanisms. The extremists have manipulated, misconstrued, and tried to hijack Muslim tenants."

What Mr. Gholamali said in the conference is misleading and untrue. What Mr. Gholamali did not talk about was the achievements of the Islamic republic for the past 27 years as a model country for the Muslim world. He did not mention about the Islamic executions, floggings, stoning, and amputations of limbs in public since this peaceful religion invaded Iran.

He did not speak about the promotion of international and domestic terrorism through Islamic jihad, the creation of the Hezbollah who have conducted many terrorist attacks against innocent people and the promotion of Islamic fundamentalism. He did not say this moderate religion has oppressed the religious minorities in Iran and made them to flee their country. He did not mention how savagely the Islamists in Iran have raped innocent girls before executing them because Islam forbids executing virgins, so raping them was very Islamic. Yes, Islam is very democratic, but only for the Islamic terrorists.

Javid Amir in his article "Views of a Muslim-American" wrote, "It must be understood that it is a mistake to imagine that Islam is an inherently violent and fanatical faith. Islam is a universal religion and there is nothing extremist, monolithic and anti-western about it. Doctrinally, Islam is as blameless as other of the great Universal religions."

But, Mr. Amir, Islam 'is' an inherently violent and fanatical faith. It is all written in the holy book of Quran. So, please stop lying to the population and face the facts. The problem with Islam lies not only in the holy book, but it lies in the life of the prophet himself. Muslims incessantly proclaim that the mainstream schools of thought misinterpret the holy book of Quran, yet they fail to recognize that the prophet of Allah lived such an unholy life himself and it is due to his narcissistic life and personality that his followers savagely follow his behavior.

It is due to Muhammad’s way of life that Muslims act barbaric and run amok and burn cars and Embassies each time someone draws a picture of the holy prophet. Behaviorally, the prophet of Allah hallmarks a cult. In other words, we cannot compare Islam to other religions because due to the prophets narcissistic manners, Islam falls in the category of a cult, not a religion. Yes, Islam is a cult founded by an Arab man from Mecca in Arabia, by the name of Mohammed, who lived from 570-632 A.D. A huge problem is that cults are incredibly difficult to dismantle intellectually. The brainwashing is grandiose.

Indeed, the Prophet of Islam’s deeds and words, Islamic Law and its interpretation, has always been totally intolerant and the Prophet practiced an unholy life. According to Muslims, the prophet of Islam was Khataman Nabiyyeen (the last prophet) and Allah will no longer send prophets. Well, if God chose a man like Muhammad who butchered, raped, terrorized, massacred, and killed so many innocent people with the sword of Islam as his messenger, then we are dealing with a terrorist God at the top.

Until we come to terms with these issues and end what is a contagious disease, many innocent people will continue to die. The very survival of the civilized world is dependent upon our understanding that Islam is mankind’s greatest enemy.

Amil Imani is an Iranian born, pro democracy activist who resides in the United States of America. Imani is a poet, writer, literary translator, novelist and an essayist who has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran.

Predator95,

I agree with much of what you say, but I think that just because Islam has not reformed yet, that it cannot reform. Both Iraq and Iran have had periods of relative moderation, and Lebanon, of course, was at one time the "Paris of the Middle East".

In my view, radical Islamists are not just preying on us, they are attacking their own peoples, and trying to hijack political processes, and bend them far from the moderate paths they otherwise would have taken.

Who does most of the dying, today, in Iraq? It isn't us. Not even close. It's ordinary, Muslim, Iraqis. I can't imagine that those who lose family in bombings are happy with the people who did it. And Lewis comments that the Iranian people quite possibly look to us as potential saviors from the medieval savagery they are currently living under. The Iranians are--the press notwithstanding--a very imaginative, resourceful, passionate people. I've counted several as good friends. If you look at the mullahs, they are not different than the Nazis were in Germany. Many Germans hated the Nazis, but once they had power, it was tough to fight back. America had to liberate them.

With respect to Madman's comments, I agree up to a point. There is unquestionably room for reasonable dissent. It just seems to me, that at the back of most of the criticim I see, the dominant emotion is not a sincere desire to develop better ideas, but a sort of "schadenfreude" that conservative policies are not working out.

The caricature I drew, I do literally believe defines a certain type of person, who is often found in teaching positions. I know people whose kids have literally been rotated 180 degrees politically by teachers. Let's call that caricature the "Idealist Type" (with modest apologies to Weber), who spouts ideas that are utterly unconnected with reality. Those ideas, in muted form, spread like dandelion seeds in the wind, landing in various forms all around them.

That is a virus that needs to be stamped out by intellectual rigor and consistent effort to think clearly.

did yesterdays wod (kinda) today
15 chair jumping doorframe pullups/15 dips
10/10 10/10 10/10 10/10 10/10 10/10 10/10
20 min

Predator95N @ #76
Thank you for that exposition and for the reference to Amil Imani, and the courage to say what you have said.

I've been reading much lately on Islam and the life of Muhammed, and was moving toward very similar conclusions, perhaps best expressed by Jonah Goldberg's recent commentary on Muslim reaction to the Pope's speech: "Islam is a religion of peace, and if you don't agree with me, I'll cut your head off."

I'm slowly and reluctantly coming to the view that the "Islamic Fascists" are quite in tune with the teachings of Mohammed, and that whatever noble insights motivated Mohammed in his early days, he later became corrupted by a lust for power, and preached perverse doctrines explicitly aimed at motivating his armies to conquest.

The fact that Muslim atrocities are not condemned by other Muslims is telling. Incidents like the recent prosecution of a Muslim in Afghanistan who converted to Christianity (the court was about to give him the death penalty) add up over time to a very scary scene.

And if I recall my history correctly, the only way that Kemal Attaturk was able to bring Turkey into the modern world was via a rather bloody purge of the imams who opposed him. He saw a definite conflict between Islam and modern civilization.

They say we should accept Islam or they will kill us. It's time to start believing them.

I got home from the CrossFit certification late Monday night so this is the first time I have to post. I have taught and coached sports (soccer and tennis) and health and conditioning for about 26 years (at high school and university). I have been an athlete during that time also (and still try to be!).

I can certainly and enthusiastically echo the comments of the others from the course who have posted already.

But I would add that I find CrossFit to be a sensible and insightful synthesis of what I have come to believe as a practitioner and someone whose job involves reading and teaching the relevant research. When I first read the “CrossFit Foundations” article I was like a kid in a candy store....I was so excited. I then started to think “why couldn’t I put these concepts together in such a coherent package”? All the pieces were kind of there in my head? And of course the answer is....there is genius to be able to understand, synthesize and simplify (in its presentation) complex issues....and I didn’t have that genius. But Greg Glassman does....and if you get the chance to learn from him.....take it.

I got to thinking about this at lunch, and it seems to me our principle enemy is pride, in the sense that the people opposing us use Islam--and their commitment to it--as an anchor for their lives, and as their principle means of deriving a sense of personal importance.

We need to begin thinking about an end-game, which would among other things require a strategy for deradicalizing radicals, in the same way that German Nazi's were pacified after WW2.

I hadn't thought about it until this moment, but it seems to me it's likely the very scope of the need for a focus on rebuilding their countries likely helped in the rehabilitation of both Japan and Germany. It gave both nations a clear focus, and the end result was justified pride in their accomplishment.

How do we help the Arabs in particular, and Muslims more generally, find a path which is focused on building, and not on destroying? That is the principle question we need to be asking ourselves, it seems to me. This is different than asking what we need to do to pacify them. That is a dumb question, as the very act of attempting to pacify them makes them more violent.

Apropo: http://www.opinionjournal.com/la/?id=110008997

Good quote
:
"The world is full of people who wish to think ill of America. And most of them would like to be Americans."

If I were to be accused of monomania, I don't think I could use my activity here as a defense. Still, these are important issues, so I wanted to add a few more thoughts.

We have to keep in mind a number of factors:

There are multiple Islams, just as there are multiple Christianities. Anyone heard of Nestorian Christians?

What is written is generally not what is done. I've spent a lot of time studying religion, and absent on-the-ground anthropological study, you have no idea what parts they actually take seriously.

Jihad is work. All human beings have dual tendencies towards sloth and activity. A principle goal Bin Laden set for himself was to "wake up" his slumbering Islamic fellows. You know what, though? Men who love their wives, and parents who love their children and extended family tend, over time, to prefer peace to war, and prosperity to poverty.

Islamists work hard to create war, and succeed in creating poverty. They're doing great in Iraq. We, on the other hand, are working in the opposite direction on both counts. At some point that should matter increasingly.

Some people seem surprised to learn how brutal the history of Islam actually is. Others seem surprised to learn they haven't always been aggressively insane. We need to balance both realities. We need to be careful on the one hand not to underestimate the aggressiveness on the part of non-radicalized Arabs and other Muslims. On the other, we need to NOT underestimate their actual desire for peace and prosperity, either.

In life generally, hard and soft tend to alternate naturally. For many hundreds of years, muslims have been essentially moribund. That has changed recently only with the funding of Wahhabism with oil money, and the Iranian Revolution. Bin Laden is trying to stoke a fire he sees as already lit.

However, they, too, have a tough, tough road ahead. We look at our difficulties, but theirs are substantially larger, provided we as a nation stick to our guns, literally and figuratively, and don't back down, don't retreat, and keep relentless pressure on them.

At the same time, that pressure is what I would call hard. It is meeting force with force. That is only going to stabilize the situation in place. What we also need to be doing is seeping, culturally, like water through the sand underlying their radicalism. There is no need to attack Islam, per se. Keep in mind Judaism still calls for animal sacrifice in expiation for sin, and the only sins I recall Christ specifically condemning are hypocrisy and divorce. There is already a notion that Jihad can refer to inner struggles to submit to the will of God.

Strategy is a creative combination over time of pressure in some places, and absence in others. In the long term, it is like carving something out of clay. The better it is done, the less visible it is. We can and should win this war, and whatever follows it.

Here a a couple good links on that cult we call Islam

http://www.primechoice.com/philosophy/listIslam.htm

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

http://www.amitiesquebec-israel.org/texts/criminal.htm

And one of My favorites....
http://www.protestwarrior.com/

enjoy!!