Category Archives: Intelligence

Update #II: Oops, Iran’s Innocent

Bush, Intelligence, Iran, Islam, Neoconservatism

A new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran’s dormant nuclear program confirms the following:

* If a Pinocchio proboscis that grew with each lie uttered was a feature on the faces of political leaders, the Cheney-Bush-Rice gang would put the Ahmadinejad-Hussein knaves to shame in the nose department.
* The Intelligence community has been somewhat deterred by its failures in Iraq; not so the brazen Bush Administration.
* Since the Iranians halted their weapons program well before this latest unjust round of sanctions, economic punitive measures penalizing all Iranians seem more unjust than ever, to say nothing of futile.
* Americans remain criminally clueless about the Arab mentality and culture: Since national pride and honor are at stake, Arab leaders would sooner lie and claim to have the know-how to manufacture WMD, than admit to lacking it. Therefore, when habitual blowhards such as Saddam and Mad Mahmoud tone down their truculence and confess to having no weapons, they’re probably being truthful because truly terrified of an American invasion.
* Hillary has been a hawk on Iran except when the political expediency of the campaign has dictated otherwise. The new intelligence discredits the Democratic frontrunner—and all the GOP candidates bar Ron Paul.

Update #I: I just KNEW someone would take issue with my tagging of the Iranian leadership as typifying the Arab mentality. Everyone knows Ancient Persia was not Arab and that the Iranians are descendants of a medley of non-Arab people. However, since the Islamic conquest, the place has gone the way all places under Islam have gone—to the dogs.
With respect to more recent developments, I’ve written this on BAB: “Reza Shah and son hated Arab culture and identified themselves completely with pre-Islamic Persia. Not so the clerics who came to power after the Islamic revolution in 1979; they endeavored to expunge the Achaemenids, the Sassanids, and Zoroastrianism from Iran’s historical memory. To Islamists, history begins with Mohammad and his exploits; all that went before doesn’t count.
Shortly after the revolution, Islamic mobs in Iran tried to Talibanize Cyrus’s tomb. Persian names were changed to Islamic names, and references to the Achaemenid kings were banned on the state broadcaster. In post-revolutionary Iran, children were no longer named Darius or Cyrus (but Mo and Hussein, like one presidential candidate).”
In any event, I’m sticking with the “Arab-mentality” appellation for Iran’s leadership. It fits.

Update # II (Dec. 5): The neocons are still in power among the punditocracy. Their adherents are hanging on for dear life too. Not that they’ve been truly challenged; reality doesn’t seem to interfere with hereditary rights in American media. Still, I thought that by now they’d have the decency and sense to steer clear of the “left-liberal” libel when it comes to my views—and certainly not expect to be hosted on my blog. Alas, hubris is another of their distinguishing trademarks.
Libel aside, I’m extremely cautious about Iran, but I’d like to see other powers do the heavy lifting—let Israel take care of itself. The IAEA is a good option too, so long as an American president doesn’t kick them out of the inspected region to start a war.

Here are my pieces on the “Persian Pussycat”:

“The Persian Pussycat”
“Satan’s Little Helpers“

IQ & Aggregate Groups Differences

Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Intelligence, Race, Science

I said in the interview I gave our friend the Bad Eagle that

“Broad statements about aggregate group characteristics, provided they are substantiated by hard evidence, not hunches, are not incorrect. Science relies on the ability to generalize to the larger population observations drawn from a representative sample. People make prudent decision in their daily lives as to where to invest scarce and precious resources—to wit, one’s life and property—based on probabilities and generalities.”

Although most professional (read safe) individualists have yet to figure this out, individualism, ultimately, doesn’t mean denying aggregate group differences, but, rather, treating every individual on his merit.

Steve Sailer’s thoughts on James Watson underscore the same incongruity. On the one, hand most people refuse to acknowledge the less laudable aspects of diversity. On the other hand, the decisions people take to protect their prized possessions and promote their precious children demonstrate they are more than aware of these unacknowledged differences:

“In reality, American homebuyers (most of whom, I’m sorry to say, are not VDARE.com readers) are obsessively interested in the ethnic make-up of local public schools. Without my help, they appear to accept the “stereotype” that white and Asian students will provide a more studious peer group for their children than blacks and Latinos.

Thus, houses in districts with mostly white and Asian students often sell for tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars more than in districts populated mostly by black and Hispanic students.

Moreover, many middle class parents are obsessed with getting their children into exclusive gifted and magnet public schools…

So, even though any MSM mention of average racial IQ differences is ferociously punished, as demonstrated yet again the forced retirement of Dr. Watson, home prices nevertheless show that the average American has somehow come to a rough but reasonably accurate understanding of the statistical realities.

How did he ever learn this without reading it in the newspaper? Apparently, as Yogi Berra once said, ‘You can observe a lot just by watching.’”

Also via Sailer is this comprehensive “exposition of the present state of scientific understanding concerning IQ and race,” courtesy of “Gene Expression.” It’s pretty unremarkable stuff. What’s remarkable is that these statistically significant intergroup differences (a standard deviation or more) are denied, downgraded in significance, or put down to a methodological artifact of the tests—their validity and reliability. Also buried in the denunciations is the correlation between intelligence and various socio-economic indicators.

IQ & Aggregate Groups Differences

Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Intelligence, Race, Science

I said in the interview I gave our friend the Bad Eagle that

“Broad statements about aggregate group characteristics, provided they are substantiated by hard evidence, not hunches, are not incorrect. Science relies on the ability to generalize to the larger population observations drawn from a representative sample. People make prudent decision in their daily lives as to where to invest scarce and precious resources—to wit, one’s life and property—based on probabilities and generalities.”

Although most professional (read safe) individualists have yet to figure this out, individualism, ultimately, doesn’t mean denying aggregate group differences, but, rather, treating every individual on his merit.

Steve Sailer’s thoughts on James Watson underscore the same incongruity. On the one, hand most people refuse to acknowledge the less laudable aspects of diversity. On the other hand, the decisions people take to protect their prized possessions and promote their precious children demonstrate they are more than aware of these unacknowledged differences:

“In reality, American homebuyers (most of whom, I’m sorry to say, are not VDARE.com readers) are obsessively interested in the ethnic make-up of local public schools. Without my help, they appear to accept the “stereotype” that white and Asian students will provide a more studious peer group for their children than blacks and Latinos.

Thus, houses in districts with mostly white and Asian students often sell for tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars more than in districts populated mostly by black and Hispanic students.

Moreover, many middle class parents are obsessed with getting their children into exclusive gifted and magnet public schools…

So, even though any MSM mention of average racial IQ differences is ferociously punished, as demonstrated yet again the forced retirement of Dr. Watson, home prices nevertheless show that the average American has somehow come to a rough but reasonably accurate understanding of the statistical realities.

How did he ever learn this without reading it in the newspaper? Apparently, as Yogi Berra once said, ‘You can observe a lot just by watching.’”

Also via Sailer is this comprehensive “exposition of the present state of scientific understanding concerning IQ and race,” courtesy of “Gene Expression.” It’s pretty unremarkable stuff. What’s remarkable is that these statistically significant intergroup differences (a standard deviation or more) are denied, downgraded in significance, or put down to a methodological artifact of the tests—their validity and reliability. Also buried in the denunciations is the correlation between intelligence and various socio-economic indicators.

Malkin Or Sailer?

Ethics, IMMIGRATION, Intelligence, Journalism, Media

My mouth dropped open in amazement: Malkin, on Fox News, mustered more than bare-bones, “enforce-immigration-law” mantra for her argument. When asked as to the purpose of immigration law, she unusually referred to the injunction in the Preamble to the Constitution to “promote the general Welfare.”

I was impressed, but also baffled. Malkin is a straightforward reporter, who very rarely is capable of jumping a level of abstraction, beyond the facts, to come up with an original angle. How did she suddenly galvanize a principle to bolster her case? What was going on? (Then I went back to eating, so I forgot the whole episode…drool.)

Today, as I was catching up on Steve Sailer’s latest, I found a possible explanation for Malkin’s buoyed brain. In attempting to answer the question of “What is it that immigration policy is supposed to achieve?”, Sailer quotes from the Preamble:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity…”

He then adds this:

“In other words, American policy should be for the benefit of Americans and our descendents, not for the advantage of, say, the five billion potential immigrants who live in countries with average per capita GDPs lower than Mexico.”

Speaking of third-rate pundits who borrow from their betters without crediting, a line first used in this column, recently “found” its way into a new book by this pseudo-libertarian. The line is: “The National Education Association is the al-Qaida of education.” I wonder where he got it.

Update: In response to the legitimately wry comments hereunder by our reader, let me clarify: This space is generally not given over to speculation. When you have an uncreative, unoriginal, yet immensely popular “pundit,” come up with formulations and ideas a creative, original thinker came up with; when the time line indicates the good guy said it before the gimp did; when the parties are well-acquainted (in one case, the one party used to advertise reading this column, often commented on it, and in more honest moments even acknowledge using it); when there is a power differential between the parties, in other words, when the good guy is nowhere near as influential and as known as the gimp—well, then, it is not unreasonable to wonder out loud about the mysterious, osmotic diffusion at play, enunciated in this post.