Hitchens On 9/11
Christopher Hitchens writes on Slate about how 9/11 changed his thinking:
So, for me at any rate, the experience of engaging in the 9/11 politico-cultural wars was a vertiginous one in at least two ways. To begin with, I found myself for the first time in my life sharing the outlook of soldiers and cops, or at least of those soldiers and cops who had not (like George Tenet and most of the CIA) left us defenseless under open skies while well-known "no fly" names were allowed to pay cash for one-way tickets after having done perfunctory training at flight schools. My sympathies were wholeheartedly and unironically (and, I claim, rationally) with the forces of law and order. Second, I became heavily involved in defending my adopted country from an amazing campaign of defamation, in which large numbers of the intellectual class seemed determined at least to minimize the gravity of what had occurred, or to translate it into innocuous terms (poverty is the cause of political violence) that would leave their worldview undisturbed. How much easier to maintain, as many did, that it was all an excuse to build a pipeline across Afghanistan (an option bizarrely neglected by American imperialism after the fall of communism in Kabul, when the wretched country could have been ours for the taking!).My solidarity with soldiers, cops, and other "responders" didn't make me a full convert to the police mentality. I was a named plaintiff in the lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union against the National Security Agency, for its practice of warrantless wiretapping. I found a way of having myself "waterboarded" by former professionals, in order to satisfy my readers that the process does indeed constitute torture. I have visited Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, those two grotesque hellholes of American panic-reaction, and written very critically from both. And I was and remain unreconciled to the stupid, wasteful, oppressive collective punishment of Americans who try to use our civil aviation, or who want to be able to get into their own offices without showing ID to a guard who has no database against which to check it. But I had also seen Abu Ghraib shortly after it was first broken open in 2003, and could have no truck with the moral defectives who talked glibly as if that mini-Auschwitz and mass grave was no worse. When Amnesty International described Guantanamo as "the Gulag of our time," I felt a collapse of seriousness that I have felt many times since.
One reason for opposing excesses and stupidities on "our" side (actually, why do I defensively lob in those quotation marks? Please consider them as optional) was my conviction that the defeat of Bin-Ladenism was ultimately certain. Al-Qaida demands the impossible--worldwide application of the most fanatical interpretation of sharia--and to forward the demand employs the most hysterically irrational means. (This combination, by the way, would make a reasonable definition of "terrorism.") It follows that the resort to panicky or degrading tactics in order to combat terrorism is, as well as immoral, self-defeating.
Ten years ago I wrote to a despairing friend that a time would come when al-Qaida had been penetrated, when its own paranoia would devour it, when it had tried every tactic and failed to repeat its 9/11 coup, when it would fall victim to its own deluded worldview and--because it has no means of generating self-criticism--would begin to implode. The trove recovered from Bin Laden's rather dismal Abbottabad hideaway appears to confirm that this fate has indeed, with much labor on the part of unsung heroes, begun to engulf al-Qaida. I take this as a part vindication of the superiority of "our" civilization, which is at least so constituted as to be able to learn from past mistakes, rather than remain a prisoner of "faith."
That's a pretty dense passage. I think the problem isn't that he's being clever, it's just that he's had to explain it to people five times a day for ten years and has run out out of plain words.
Favorite part:
Peaceniks and fuckheads who want to complain about the bloodshed or mere expense of war could readily demonstrate their understanding that these challenges must and will be met by Americans in (and over) their own territory by firing Janet Napolitano and every last one of her underwear-probing, diabetes-wracked high-school dropouts.
Do that, then complain about 'unnecessary wars'. It's a moral seriousness thang.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at September 5, 2011 9:23 AM
It just so happens I'm going to see Ian Hunter (yes, again, shut up, Crid) in New York on Friday. We plan on sauntering on down to Ground Zero and checking things out. I know I'll cry, because I cry every time I go. Then I'll wipe my tears, we'll go the see the show, and I'll thank the gods yet again that I live in the USA. Idiot/asshole career politicians and all. I love my country, if not my government right now (why that idiot hasn't been assassinated yet is beyond my comprehension. I mean, really, not even an attampt yet??), and I remain optimistic. Okay, so I'm a curable optimist.
I haven't decided where we'll eat yet (it's probably a toss-up between the Old Homestead, on 15th, and Carmine's on 44th near Times Square. But I'd really like to see if we can get into Lombardo's. But that's uptown, and we're going waaaay downtown.). But no matter where we go (that would be me and my BFF, because BF is sitting this one out), we will still honor and love this city and its heroes.
Flynne at September 5, 2011 12:45 PM
> yes, again, shut up
It's just that I confuse him with that guy who died, so it seems kinda ghoulish.
(PS- I envy you the night in the City.)
(Take pictures for us.)
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at September 5, 2011 1:29 PM
"Do that, then complain about 'unnecessary wars'. It's a moral seriousness thang."
Well, of course, that's because the "antiwar" movement and moral seriousness have nothing in common. The "antiwar" movement is nothing more than a leftist propaganda machine, whose purpose is to attack conservatives and libertarians on any issue that they think will resonate with the more lightweight voters. That's why they are in hibernation now. Being serious has nothing to do with it.
Cousin Dave at September 5, 2011 1:44 PM
Let's see--since 9/11, more than 300,000 Americans have died in auto accidents, and another 180,000 by domestic gunshots (non-terrorist).
3,000 died in 9/11. A one-time deal.
No one lionizes the nearly half-million Americans who died in auto accidents or gunshots since 9/11. No one sings the praises of heroes who rescued living victims from auto accidents or gunshots (sheesh, I assume that latter number is in the millions).
But 9//11? The national boo-hoo-a-thon and glorification-arama is beginning. It's the 10th anniversary! Boo-hoo-hooo and waa-waa.
Can we forget 9/11? What do they do in countries like Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya, where populations have actually suffered at the hands of madmen and terrorists? Cry all day on the ground during weekly national days of mourning?
Forget 9/11.
The biggest tragedy of 9/11 was the immense waste of federal money on coprolitic and parasitic military outlays. We are out trillions of dollars, and have gained nothing.
BOTU at September 5, 2011 2:17 PM
> the immense waste of federal money on coprolitic
Can you be made to understand, 'BOTU', that other people aren't as fascinated with backdoor functions as you are? And that when these juvenile yukyuks appear (never less than once) in everything you talk about, it's difficult to take you seriously?... Even BEFORE you belittle the violent, intentional taking of thousands of lives?
> Forget 9/11.
Interesting perspective; we'll be in touch.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at September 5, 2011 2:29 PM
BOTU - a little perspective for your stupid ass:
9/11 has secondary effects amounting to trillions of dollars.
Can you honestly say that people dying in car accidents come anywhere near that?
9/11 also has the significance of being the first military attack against United States soil since 1941.
Gang-bangers compare to that how, precisely?
No, you've got your little boner out and you're whacking it furiously over the idea that if only we got rid of the military all the world's problems would go away.
You are an ignoramus, and an insufferable asshole to boot.
brian at September 5, 2011 3:55 PM
I agree with the poster who finds fault with Hitchens' overly-complex manner of expressing himself, when a more condensed piece would work just fine. But not with Hitchens' position that Al Qaeda is an evil group and there's no way their evil acts can be explained as anything other than evil.
Many, maybe most Americans don't agree with all the measures our gov't has undertaken in the battles against Al Qaeda. But I am pleased that two presidents in a row of different parties have not turned the other cheek to this organization. Our country has not experienced a subsequent attack since 9/11/01. However, there's no telling what would've happened had our gov't not gone after these people. They have no redeemingly values, and we know they aspire (aspired) to get hold of WMDs. So I say take some pride in the fact that our soldiers and some dedicated civilians have killed so many of these atrocious people, including the biggest cajuna. The battle isn't done yet, but I think we Americans should feel good that we've shown real resolve and mettle in the battle against these goons.
Iconoclast at September 5, 2011 5:03 PM
This isn't related to Hitchens' article but...
One thing that's bugged me about the war on terror is that the burdens of the war have fallen on so few. Our elected reps have not even raised any taxes on the people to fund the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and more recently, the NATO endeavor in Libya. However, a lot of vets are struggling with terrible injuries. Many others have PTSD; are unemployed and/or homeless. There are many who need help. So one way to support the war against terrorists is to help the many vets and soldiers in need. My state allows people to donate as much of their income tax refund as they like to a fund to support Injured Military Veterans. Perhaps your state also has some such fund. I've donated part of my refund at least since tax year 2007, convinced that injured vets needed the money more than I. But there are other ways to help veterans, such as visiting a V.A. hospital. So don't forget the soldiers & veterans and their families.
Iconoclast at September 5, 2011 5:18 PM
> One thing that's bugged me about the war on
> terror is that the burdens of the war have
> fallen on so few.
Exacta-mun-tado! Precis-a-molio! Correct-a-villa!
> Posted by: Iconoclast
Henceforth, I shall call you "Connie". And you, Connie, are my Best Blog Friend of Labor Day Twenny-'lebben.
I'm middle aged! I remember stories from when my mother was a little girl during the Big One. People would roll up their toothpaste tubes, made of lead, and pass them to the government, so they could be melted down for bullets. Almost everything in public life, every scrap of fabric or materiel or FOOD, would be considered in terms of what it could mean to the children fighting the war overseas... Who were, let's face it, likely to be your own sons.
I cannot name a SINGLE sacrifice I've been asked to make over the last ten years in the War on Terror... Beyond watching my girlfriend have her tits fondled as she boards an airplane. Everything else has been big screen TVs, bogus mortgages, Ipods and and energy drinks.
I've whined about it here, on this blog, a hundred times... If the American STREET PUBLIC had taken an interest in converting these shitty nations into modernity, with "sister cities", Boy Scout exchanges and all the rest*, these wars would have been over and won within five years.
But here were are.
___________________________________
* By "all the rest", I mean exactly GIRL SCOUT exchanges. Nothing could do more for the impoverished, doomed people of Afghanistan than for their LITTLE GIRLS to learn how good life could be, if only....
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at September 5, 2011 6:12 PM
Forget 9/11. - BOTU
I didn't think it possible you could be a bigger asshole than you've demonstrated on this site time and time again.
But you proved me wrong.
jimg at September 6, 2011 12:57 AM
You are an ignoramus, and an insufferable asshole to boot.
I believe, Brian, that that would make him an ignoranus.
(I'd be happy to take pics, Crid; I'll send them to Amy for posting...)
Flynne at September 6, 2011 5:34 AM
9/11 was a middling event, of little importance in of of itslef. Unike Pearel Harbor, it did not signal that a major military power had declared war on us.
9/11 was a heinous publicity stunt, designed to intimidate, and frighten the US into wasteful expenditures.
It worked.
We have spent $3-4 trillion on Iraqistan, we are not out yet, and we have created backward, Islamic states in both countries (Afghanie is really bad, a narco-thug state, where women and religious minorities have little to look forward to, and the state executee Christians.)
It is sad my fellow Americans are so easily duped by the spending imperatives of federal agencies.
BOTU at September 6, 2011 9:23 AM
Meanwhile the leadership of Iraq is no longer paying Palestinians to kill Jews, the leadership of Al-Qaeda is dead, Libya, Egypt, Syria, and Iran are either fallen or on the verge of so becoming.
And even if they end up as sharia islamostates, they don't have the ability to project power, and after the beating AQ took, they aren't likely to fund any more ventures into the US.
You're just a putz. You're the person who would have whined in 1942 "Why haven't we gotten Hirohito yet?" And in 1946 "Why did we spend all this money on the atomic bomb when we could have just walked away instead?"
It's because you have no vision beyond the end of your stubby little dick. You don't think ahead, don't think toward the future, and certainly don't care what happens when you run down the curtain and join the choir invisible.
brian at September 6, 2011 9:29 AM
If we have to constantly pettifog about 9/11, and re-define completely failed foreign policy boondoggles (Iraqistan) into triumphs, you know the feeble have inherited this nation.
Sheesh, what should they do in Israel, where everyday is 9/11? Fall down and cry--happily for them, they choose to go on living.
As we should. 9/11 was a footnote in history at best, the pathetic heinous publicity stunt of a group that had zero military power, and so resorted to terrorism, as the powerless do.
A real threat was the Soviet Union, with 3 million men in uniform, blue water navy with submarines, ICBMs, a KGB, satellites, supersonic bombers etc. The SU was producing hundreds of warships and thousands of tanks every year.
Al Queda doesn't even have one airplane or tank. It is a microscopic threat to our survival.
People who crap in their panties about Al Queda probably are afraid their make-up will smear if they exercise, or work too hard.
BOTU at September 6, 2011 10:57 AM
Of course, BOTU being the dickhead that he is completely neglects to mention the way Israel lives.
Armed soldiers on the streets and in the airports.
Rocket drills.
Rocket attacks.
Suicide bombers.
They don't "get on with life". They've had to redefine "normal" to mean "cloudy with a chance of falling body parts."
We're trying to prevent ourselves getting to that level, and trying to end it for the rest of the world at the same time.
Given that you can't even get beyond zeroth-order effects, I'd bet even I could kick your ass at chess.
brian at September 6, 2011 12:35 PM
Chess?
Anytime. Although it has been a decade or two since I played, it is the perfect game.
BOTU at September 6, 2011 1:21 PM
"If the American STREET PUBLIC had taken an interest in converting these shitty nations into modernity, with "sister cities", Boy Scout exchanges and all the rest*, these wars would have been over and won within five years."
An excellent point... Perhaps the biggest mistake made in the whole enterprise was on the night when Bush made his first speech after 9/11, and the question was asked: "What can the average American do?", and the answer was "Go about your normal life". If I'm ever President (hey now, you didn't need to laugh that loud), and there's a debate about whether we should enter a war, my statement is going to be: "If you, the American public, think we should engage in this war, know that it will be total war. All luxuries will cease for the duration, and basic goods will be rationed. Every aspect of the economy will be focused on the war effort, and every able-bodied adult will have a role to play. Once we begin, we will not stop until the enemy surrenders unconditionally or is annihilated to the last man. Unless you, the American public, agree to these terms, I am not prepared to commit American blood and treasure."
Cousin Dave at September 6, 2011 5:44 PM
Crid said:
If the American STREET PUBLIC had taken an interest in converting these shitty nations into modernity, with "sister cities", Boy Scout exchanges and all the rest*, these wars would have been over and won within five years.
_______________________
Logical conclusion, yes, but Sam Harris (who's a pretty smart guy) believes otherwise - and not without reason.
See "The End of Faith" - pages 133 and 134, for starters. (Search in Google Books on "Muslim prosperity might even make matters worse.") There's also a section - I forgot where it is, but it's probably the endnote #29 as noted on page 133 - where Harris claims that despite past wars, when the U.S. defended Muslim countries, the clerics have taught young people that this assistance by infidels was an infliction of "humiliation" of Muslims rather than something to be grateful for.
lenona at September 7, 2011 4:25 PM
Naw, Muslim moderation will come with modernity. It's not definitional, but it's certain.
I think your mistake is described in these six minutes.
The ugliness in Islamic fundamentalism is profound, but it's not ugliness itself.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at September 7, 2011 5:49 PM
Found it -it wasn't #29, it was another endnote relating to pages 29-30.
"It is important to specify the dimension in which Muslim “extremists” are actually extreme. They are extreme in their faith. They are extreme in their devotion to the literal word of the Koran and the hadith (the literature recounting the sayings and actions of the Prophet), and this leads them to be extreme in the degree to which they believe that modernity and secular culture are incompatible with moral and spiritual health. Muslim extremists are certain that the exports of Western culture are leading their wives and children away from God. They also consider our unbelief to be a sin so grave that it merits death whenever it becomes an impediment to the spread of Islam. These sundry passions are not reducible to “hatred” in any ordinary sense. Most Muslim extremists have never been to America or even met an American. And they have far fewer grievances with Western imperialism than is the norm around the globe. Above all, they appear to be suffering from a fear of contamination. As has been widely noted, they are also consumed by feelings of “humiliation”—humiliation over the fact that while their civilization has foundered, they have watched a godless, sin-loving people become masters of everything they touch. This feeling is also a product of their faith. Muslims do not merely feel the outrage of the poor who are deprived of the necessities of life. They feel the outrage of a chosen people who have been subjugated by barbarians. Osama bin Laden wants for nothing. What, then, does he want? He has not called for the equal distribution of wealth around the globe….He seems most exercised over the presence of unbelievers (American troops and Jews) in the Muslim holy land and over what he imagines to be the territorial ambitions of Zionists. These are purely theological grievances. It would be much better, for all concerned, if he merely hated us."
The endnote is on pages 240-241.
Part of it:
P. Berman, Terror and Liberalism, also points out that most of our conflicts of recent years have been fought in defense of various Muslim populations; the first Gulf War was fought in defense of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, and was followed by a decade of air protection for the Iraqi Kurds in the north and the Iraqi Shia in the south… Our original support for the mujahideen in Afghanistan belongs in this category as well. As Berman says, ‘In all of recent history, no country on earth has fought so hard and consistently as the United States on behalf of Muslim populations.’ This is true. And yet the Muslim world-view is such that this fact, if acknowledged at all, is generally counted as a further grievance against us; it is yet another source of Muslim ‘humiliation.’
lenona at September 8, 2011 10:42 AM
If anyone cares, here's what Harris said on pages 132-133:
"It is also true that poverty and lack of education play a role in all of this, but it is not a role that suggests easy remedies. The Arab world is now economically and intellectually stagnant to a degree that few could have thought possible, given its historical role advancing and preserving human knowledge. In the year 2002 the GDP in all Arab countries combined did not equal that of Spain. Even more troubling, Spain translates as many books into Spanish each year as the entire Arab world has translated into Arabic since the ninth century. This degree of insularity and backwardness is shocking, but it should not lead us to believe that poverty and lack of education are the roots of the problem. That a generation of poor and illiterate children are being fed into the fundamentalist machinery of the madrassas (Saudi-financed religious schools) should surely terrify us. But Muslim terrorists have not tended to come from the ranks of the uneducated poor; many have been middle class, educated, and without any obvious dysfunction in their personal lives. As Zakaria points out, compared with the nineteen hijackers, John Walker Lindh (the young man from California who joined the Taliban) was "distinctly undereducated." Ahmed Omar Sheikh, who organised the kidnapping and murder of the Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl studied at the London School of Economics. Hezbollah militants who die in violent operations are actually less likely to come from poor homes than their nonmilitant contemporaries and more likely to have a secondary school education. The leaders of Hamas are all college graduates, and some have master's degrees. These facts suggest that even if every Muslim enjoyed a standard of living comparable to that of the average middle-class American, the West might still be in profound danger of colliding with Islam. I suspect that Muslim prosperity might even make matters worse, because the only thing that seems likely to persuade most Muslims that their worldview of problematic is the demonstrable failure of their societies. If Muslim orthodoxy were as economically and technologically viable as Western liberalism, we would probably be doomed to witness the Islamification of the earth."
And here's an endnote, regarding the second-to-last sentence:
"Indeed, this may be happening in Iran. Having truly achieved a Muslim theocracy, the Iranian people now have few illusions that their problems are the result of their insufficient conformity to Islam."
lenona at September 8, 2011 12:23 PM
No. Review Ecclesiastes 1:9.
Lenny, are you a girl commenter or a boy commenter? Duzzenmadder... It'll take about 14 hours to mop all this up.
First, give 10 or 12 hours to this book. It's about France, but read it anyway. Power summary— For calculations to determine the correct length of a meter near the end of the 18th century, two science-y men started from each end of the country, north-south wise, and surveyed by lines of sight until they met in the middle. It was all very mathematical... So much so that they fucked it up. But the descriptions of what they found along the way are fascinating. The countryside was not the home of wig-powdering doily-tuggers sipping tea and arguing about textual deconstruction. Most of them weren't even speaking anything we'd recognize as French. Many hadn't heard of Paris, and they wanted to know why these poof-sleeved were trying to tote all sorts of dangerous-looking equipment to the highest patch of land they could find in the village. Society was CRAZY primitive. This was not that long ago. Nowadays, all of France is French, in very modern and annoying ways. After a revolution or two, they pulled it together.
Second, take two hours to watch this video. The guy says about a hunnert interesting things. A favorite goes like this: The United States has already gone through all the problems the rest of the world is dealing with... Illiteracy, slavery, geographic challenges, resource contention, everything. (Warning: Link may not include this particular topic, but it drowns it in relevant insight. Searching Google Video will show you more good presentations from him.)
And that includes hillbilly preachers, which is what your friend Harris is talking about. Listen, 150 years ago down in the hollers of Appalachia, there were PLENTY of fire-&-brimstone preachers sayin' there weren't no need for no women to do no readin' or writin'.
I don't understand why people want to pretend there's something special about Islam. Some of it (not in your case, I'm certain) is abject racism. Some of it is just a love of drama-queen hysterics.. We've never faced a monster like THIS before! But of course we have. The Bible is full passages —and Christianity has been peppered with practitioners— every bit as monstrous as what we find in Islam. It's a continuing battle, but a non-violent one at this point: Christianity is not a problem, and is generally regarded as a source of strength in our country.
Muslims. Yeah... They're some of the last of the last to get hooked up. But what do you think is going on in their lives, at an animal level, that would make them harder to bring to modernity than anyone else? If stole their ten brightest babies and raised them in loving American homes, would they not do as well as anyone else in the graduating class of MIT in 2032? What specifically is new about this problem?
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at September 8, 2011 9:39 PM
I don't understand why people want to pretend there's something special about Islam.
___________________________
Maybe because almost all Christian countries stopped approving (legally OR otherwise) of things like "honor killings" for rape victims at least two centuries ago, but plenty of Muslim countries still happily look the other way when it happens in theirs?
Not to mention edicts like "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live...."
lenona at September 9, 2011 2:13 PM
> Maybe because almost all Christian countries
> stopped approving (legally OR otherwise) of
> things like "honor killings" for rape victims
> at least two centuries ago
So, like, you're conceding there's nothing special about these people except that they're going to have to be dealt with by your generation as opposed to your great-great-great-great grandfather's, right?
I can dig it! Pain in the ass. I wish we weren't burdened with this chore. Human civilization is incomplete, and that sucks.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at September 9, 2011 3:34 PM
And why exactly didn't they start seeing such practices as barbaric as early as other nations did?
Regarding racism, here's more from Harris:
"Any systematic approach to ethics, or to understanding the necessary underpinnings of a civil society, will find many Muslims standing eye deep in the red barbarity of the fourteenth century. There are undoubtedly historical and cultural reasons for this, and enough blame to go around, but we should not ignore the fact that we must now confront whole societies whose moral and political development—in their treatment of women and children, in their prosecution of war, in their approach to criminal justice, and in their very intuitions about what constitutes cruelty—lags behind our own. This may seem like an unscientific and potentially racist thing to say, but it is neither. It is not in the least racist, since it is not at all likely that there are biological reasons for the disparities here, and it is unscientific only because science has not yet addressed the moral sphere in a systematic way. Come back in a hundred years, and if we haven't returned to living in caves and killing one another with clubs, we will have some scientifically astute things to say about ethics. Any honest witness to current events will realize that there is no moral equivalence between the kind of force civilized democracies project in the world, warts and all, and the internecine violence that is perpetuated by Muslim militants, or indeed by Muslim governments. Chomsky seems to think that the disparity either does not exist or runs the other way."
lenona at September 10, 2011 12:19 PM
> And why exactly didn't they start seeing such
> practices as barbaric as early as other
> nations did?
1. Isolation. Read this. Primitives are primitive until someone storms in there and steals their candy and rapes their women and chokes their children with horrible diseases, so they can learn a better way to live. It's a tremendous pain in the ass, not really worth the trouble unless there are resources you want to steal.
2. "Other nations" often didn't "start seeing such practices as barbaric". Human progress is not a fait accompli. Nobody promised you anything.
3. Chomsky is fucked in the head.
4. There's not much of interest in that paragraph. Yeah, man... Primitives are, like, primitive!
You agree with me... I can feel it. You just don't want to say so.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at September 10, 2011 1:29 PM
It's more than a little difficult to take seriously anyone who wrote what you did in point 1.
How do I know what you really mean and what you don't, anyway?
If you're going to call Muslims who behave like barbarians "primitives," how do you know it ISN'T about Islam? One can't blame stonings for "crimes" such as I mentioned on any country's foreign policy, after all.
If you have issues with Harris' book in general - or certain chapters - do let me know what they are. It's a pretty smooth read.
lenona at September 11, 2011 11:44 AM
> how do you know it ISN'T about Islam?
Where did I say it wasn't?
> It's a pretty smooth read.
There's most to life than simplicity
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at September 11, 2011 4:38 PM
Leave a comment