Saturday, January 24, 2015

Soup With a Companion

[Photo By: KPA]
Cow from "The Pasture"
Toronto Dominion Centre
Foe F

I had this calm and pleasant companion as I sat in the TD Centre in downtown Toronto, as I warmed up with a Tim Horton's Cream of Broccoli soup on that sunny but very cold day. The soup was delicious ("A lush soup made with broccoli florets combined in a velvety cream base"), and the companion quietly, and politely, solicited this photograph.
Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat

Laura Wood of The Thinking Housewife: Fundraisng

Laura Wood, of The Thinking Housewife is holding a fundraising at her website. I have none worthwhile to give right now, but I hope this posting will direct the attention of those who might not know about it.

THANK YOU to readers who have generously donated. However, I still have a long way to go with my fundraising campaign. Unfortunately (or fortunately), if I don’t reach my modest goal by February 7th, this blog will become a subscription e-mail magazine. I will explain how this will work later. The nice thing about a magazine is that it would allow for longer pieces about the issues discussed here. Anyone who donates will receive some number of editions of this magazine, which I hope will include commentary by regular contributors here, whom readers have come to know and appreciate. Please donate today if you’d like to help prevent this change — or let me know if you want to donate but actually prefer the idea of a magazine format. Thank you again for your support.
Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

How the Muslim world is being left behind:
Why each new terror attack only further marginalizes the Muslim world

The article below is from the recent Macleans, a Canadian weekly current affairs magazine. I've posted the entire article, which is online, since I don't know for how long it will remain online (the alternative is to subscribe to Macleans online,or to buy the magazine. I was going to buy the print edition today, but forgot to do so).

I have a few of criticisms on the article:

1. Why not call the Charlie Hebdo killers Jihadists? They are committed Muslims who are following the madates of the Koran. They have a religious motive, and not a political or personal vendetta.

2. There is much written about the glories of the Muslim world as Europe lived in the dark ages of the Medieval times. I think this is not entirely accurate. The Muslim world has never been as advanced as some Islamic historians opine, and much of their knowledge was borrowed from Christian or Jewish scholars. I will expand on this later.

3. Gilmore describes the combative jihadist activities of Muslims as "terrorist" activities by a few

4. He at times blames the jihadist behavior of Muslims to foreign activities. But jihadist Muslim activity has always occurred whether Muslims were being oppressed, whether there is regional war in the Middle East, or if the West somehow insults Islam.

Other than that, I think it is as straight forward an article we can get from apologist western journalists.


How the Muslim world is being left behind
Scott Gilmore
Macleans Magazine
January 14, 2015

July 2013: Damaged buildings in front of the Khaled bin Walid mosque, Homs, Syria (Sam Skaine, Getty)


On the morning of the shooting at Charlie Hebdo in Paris, Maclean’s contributor Scott Gilmore filed this column. In the Jan. 29 issue of the magazine, he expands on his argument:

On Jan. 7, Islamist gunmen ran through the offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo screaming “The Prophet is avenged!” By coincidence, at the very moment they were killing the journalists, the International Space Station passed silently over Paris.

Consider that for a moment.

As terrorists committed a primitive act of tribal savagery in the name of a prophet who lived 1,400 years ago, right above them, orbiting through space, was the most sophisticated expression of mankind’s ability to transcend ignorance and fear with hope and reason.

Twenty-five nations from around the world have come together to build the space station. They include old enemies who fought each other for centuries over God and gold, Cold War rivals, small countries and large. But none are Islamic nations.

It has become a cliché to point out that science and reason once flourished in the Islamic world. Nonetheless, it is true. While Europe stumbled through the Dark Ages, Islamic scholars made dramatic advances in every field of science including mathematics, optics and experimental physics. Our modern world was built on the scientific breakthroughs of Islam. From the eighth century, mathematicians such as Muhammad ibn Mūsā al-Khwārizmī, who helped develop algebra, there is a direct line of progress that ends with the space station itself. But we no longer associate Islam with progress. In fact, a Muslim astronaut would surprise us as much as a non-Muslim terrorist (although there are many examples of each).

When the Parisian police siege ended on the blood-smeared floor of a kosher supermarket, the Prophet had not been avenged. He was diminished. This terrorist attack, and the others before it, merely isolated the Islamic world further from the global mainstream. In its aftermath, we and our leaders repeat, again and again, “Not all Muslims”—and yet we collectively treat Muslim nations as a threat that must be contained. Equal members of the global community? No. Partners in the space program? Impossible.

The Islamic world is in relative decline. Or, more precisely, a large number of countries with a Muslim majority are not developing as rapidly as the rest of the world, and in some cases, like Syria, they are even regressing.

This is a golden age for most. In the last 100 years life expectancy has more than doubled. In the last 50 years the poverty rate has fallen by 80 per cent. During that same time, the number of wars fell by a similar figure and the number of nations governed democratically tripled.

But, while the global community leapt forward, Islamic nations (as defined as members of the Organization of Islamic Co-operation) have progressed at a much slower pace. This is the case across a wide variety of metrics.

The Social Progress Index, a comprehensive measurement of a nation’s well-being, which includes everything from access to water to freedom of movement, ranks Islamic countries behind every other region in the world, including non-Muslim African countries. The Muslim world does even worse on Transparency International’s Perceptions of Corruption Index. Life expectancy numbers are among the world’s lowest, more than 15 years fewer than North America. And, not surprisingly, on a per capita basis, Muslim nations publish scientific papers at less than one-tenth the frequency of Europeans.

If we are surprised by these numbers, Najmuddin Shaikh is not. The former foreign secretary of Pakistan recently lamented, “The Islamic world is in disarray and decline and that Muslim communities find themselves under siege-like conditions in the West and elsewhere is perhaps an understatement.”

Why has the Muslim world been unable to keep pace? Why is it besieged? The easiest response is to say they did this to themselves. The evidence of this is so pervasive it is hard to refute. For example, just last week alone, while the world was focused on France, there were dozens of other terrorist attacks where Muslims killed Muslims.

In Yemen, a large group of young men were applying for entry into the police academy. They were queued up along a stone wall, which intensified the blast of a car bomb - 33 died.

In Iraq, a wholesale market is held every Saturday morning in Baghdad’s western district of Baiyaa. There a bomb killed five. Later that morning another blast killed three more people in the nearby town of Madian.

In Lebanon, on the same day, a suicide bomber walked up to the crowded Omran Café in Tripoli and triggered his vest. Bloodied survivors were pulling themselves out of the rubble when a second bomber stepped in amongst them. There were nine dead and 37 injured.

In Pakistan, as people gathered to celebrate the Prophet’s birthday by distributing alms at a mosque in Rawalpindi, a bomber pushed his way in. The blast shattered all the nearby windows and killed seven.

In Nigeria, militants wrapped explosives around the midriff of a small 10-year old girl, and told her to walk into the market. When she reached the stalls where the chickens are sold, it went off, killing 19.

This is an incomplete list, from just last week, but it illustrates the broader story well. Internecine conflict in the Islamic world is endemic. The unrelenting Shia and Sunni schism dominates it, but it also includes tribal and ethnic divides. In 2013, there were 12 Western victims of terror attacks compared to 22,000 non-Western fatalities. These do not include those killed by the barrel bombs that Syrian President Assad dropped on his own people, or civilians killed by warfare in Afghanistan or Iraq. From the jungles of Sulawesi to the deserts of Libya, Muslims are killing Muslims at a rate that dwarfs the more highly publicized conflict with the West. In that light, it is hard to subscribe to the theory this is a clash of civilizations. Rather, it is one culture turning on itself.

The self-inflicted wounds are not always violent. The Taliban banned girls from being educated. In Syria, Islamic State closed all schools. In 2013, militants in Mali burned the fabled and ancient libraries of Timbuktu. In a speech just days before the Paris attacks, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi pleaded for an end to this self-destruction: “The Islamic world is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost. And it is being lost by our own hands.”

Focusing just on the violence does not take into account the broader context, the economic and geographic circumstances in which these countries find themselves. The Maghreb (northwest Africa), the Arabian Peninsula, the Central Asia steppes, the Gulf of Guinea, the Indus valley, the Indonesian archipelago: each of these presents different but equally daunting barriers to building modern economies and functioning states. Whether it is drought or monsoons, a lack of harbours or impassible mountain ranges, the Islamic world was not dealt the best geographic hand.

It has faced economic hurdles, too. The international demand for heroin has created a lucrative but destructive poppy trade that the United States and all its allies could not even slow. Similarly, but perhaps less dramatically, the oil reserves of the Middle East and West Africa have been both a blessing and a curse, fuelling building booms, corruption and instability.

There are also the historical circumstances that must be acknowledged. The legacy of disastrous foreign intervention is everywhere. For hundreds of years the Dutch treated Indonesia as a warehouse, merely to be raided for its wealth, forestalling the evolution of local institutions. When independence came, dictators Sukarno and Suharto merely perfected what the Dutch had begun.

Bangladesh faced a similar colonial legacy, but one that was followed by partition and a brutal civil war. The elites who emerged redefined corruption, and it is difficult to judge which has done more damage: the typhoons or the politicians.

Further west, the arbitrarily drawn Durand Line was established in the 19th century to separate Pakistan and Afghanistan by cutting right through the Pashtun homeland. This colonial relic has remained a festering wound that makes both countries virtually ungovernable.

A similar exercise produced a comparable result in the Middle East. The secretly negotiated Sykes-Picot Agreement, creating spheres of influence for the Great Powers during the First World War, produced fractious borders and lit a bonfire of ethnic and sectarian violence that this week burned the Baiyaa market and the Omran Café.

Even recent history has been unkind to the Islamic world. The U.S.-led invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan exploded into regional instability. repeated conflicts with Israel have drained meagre budgets from militaries who spend most of their time blaming Zionist conspiracies for the repressive chaos they themselves create at home.

When one considers the heavy weight of these extenuating circumstances, it is easier to see that the terrorism of the last 20 years is not the reason the Islamic world has been left behind. But it is perhaps the reason it is staying there.

Lockerbie. Embassies in Africa. Sept. 11. Subways in London. A memorial in Ottawa. A café in Sydney. A magazine in Paris. We have witnessed a steady series of attacks against the West. Some of these were large and well-organized conspiracies, others lone-wolf attacks by mentally unstable men with tenuous connections to Islam. But they had the same effect: to provoke a fear in the West that Islam is a threat, and the impression that the Muslim world is not a partner, but a challenge to be managed.

We, and our governments, don’t say this. In fact, we do all we can to make it appear otherwise. We talk about engagement and launch various initiatives to build “constructive dialogue.” These are just euphemisms.

President Barack Obama wanted to use the space program as a tool to engage the Islamic world. He instructed NASA to help Muslim nations “feel good about their historic contribution to science, math and engineering.” In Canada, we reached out by, among other things, naming a special envoy to the Organization of Islamic Co-operation (OIC) and by sending its member countries over $12 billion in aid since 2002. During that same period, the United States sent $137 billion.

These efforts were not about expanding mutually beneficial relations with peers to create new opportunities. They were about preventing problems and neutralizing a threat. Most of our energy has gone into isolating, not engaging, the Islamic world. Compare, for example, what has been spent on intelligence, homeland security and military operations. Since 9/11, Canada tripled its spy budget and spent $18 billion sending troops to Afghanistan. The United States spent between $4 trillion and $6 trillion on military campaigns (including Iraq)—over 25 times more than they spent on engaging through aid.

With every act of terror, we push the Muslim world farther way. We launch more drones. We deploy more troops. We fortify more embassies. We watch more mosques. We accept fewer refugees. We issue fewer visas.

A passport from an Islamic nation is less welcome than one from any other region of the world. Citizens of the OIC enjoy visa-free travel to fewer countries than anyone else. This small fact tells a much larger story about the lack of interpersonal contact between Islamic nations and the rest of the world. It illustrates the fear that some of us feel when we see that the man boarding the flight ahead of us is wearing a shalwar kameez. It highlights the difficulty any of us have had bringing Muslim colleagues to international conferences, or transferring money to business partners in the Middle East. It makes us realize we can’t remember the last time someone talked about going to Egypt to see the pyramids. And it explains why last year less than two per cent of the visitors to Canada were from the Islamic world, despite those countries comprising 25 per cent of the world’s population.

It is not just the West. Russia, China, India: all the global powers have developed similar postures toward the Islamic world. Occasionally, although less frequently than the West, they talk about engagement. But really, like us, their strategy is primarily focused on containment.

The isolation also exists at the multilateral level. Only 19 per cent of global economies are not members of the World Trade Organization, but that short list is dominated by Islamic nations. The centrally important Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has only one Islamic member: Turkey. Canada belongs to 207 international organizations. The average Islamic nation belongs to about half that, making them less connected and included than are European, Latin American, Caribbean and Asian countries.

Of course, it is not all containment. The international community does engage more constructively with some Islamic countries than with others. For example, while Malaysia is not a member of the International Space Station partnership, it did second an astronaut to Russia, who then sent him to the space station. Turkey is not only a member of the OECD, it is also part of NATO. (But is hard to imagine it being invited to join today, given that just this week the United States cancelled the transfer of two frigates to the Turkish navy, due to growing concerns about its Islamist tendencies.)

The United States and Canada are negotiating with Indonesia so that we can enter the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement. And Western oil companies are deeply entrenched in Saudi Arabia and Nigeria. But these exceptions prove the rule. Unless you are among the most moderate members of the OIC, or drowning in oil, the international community is not interested.

Ironically, this isolation may be what the extremists actually want. Many of the terrorist attacks were meant to drive a wedge between the Muslim world and the West, to eliminate the degenerate influences of the outside. They want to be left behind, or at least left alone.

Can we change this dynamic? Will we continue to pull back from the Muslim world? It is difficult to find signs that this pattern can be broken. Our economies now depend on trillion-dollar industries whose sole purpose is to protect us from the Islamist threat by building better body scanners and faster cruise missiles. Our own governments have restructured themselves as vigilant watchdogs, safeguarding us from terror. Even as the Paris attacks were still unfolding, the Canadian government was announcing even more anti-terror legislation. And our political institutions have been rewired, dramatically shifting the balance between our personal freedom and our collective security. All of this is intended to build blast-proof walls between us and them.

But perhaps, if we realize that with every terrorist attack our collective instincts to contain the Muslim world grows stronger, we can change this. It would take some patience and courage on our part, and a few leaps of faith, to increase the free flow of our peoples and in their wake, perhaps ideas and values. Of course, it would also require an effort on the part of Islamic nations to reach out, too. We can’t drag them into the OECD.

Terrorists like those who captured our attention in France are not responsible for the relative decline of the Islamic world, but they are prolonging its isolation. This attack and all the others before it have compelled the international community to instinctively respond by containing the threat. But this is merely palliative. As the Muslim world is further contained, it becomes further alienated from the global community, and it falls further behind. This trend must change. We must recognize that as mankind moves further into space, some of us are being left behind.


Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat

Monday, January 19, 2015

Atheist Parasites

Charles Wild (1781–1835)
The Choir of Amiens Cathedral, c. 1862
Hand-colored aquatint mounted on heavy card stock
16 3/8" x 21 1/2"

2008 Photograph of the Choir of Amiens Cathedral

In this time of religious existenialism, this is what I wrote about secularists (i.e. atheists) here in Camera Lucida in 2009.

Heather MacDonald, who writes for the group blog Secular Right, and who participated in a video-taped dialogue entitled "God and Man on the Right", had this to say about religion:
Secular Right has also been arguing that morality comes out of a human, innate moral sense...and religion is parasitic on humans' own moral sense [this is around 3:30 mark and goes on until around 4:00].
Part of her argument is that she doesn't think it is necessary to bring "any kind of appeal to revelation" to support and argue for morality, since morality is grounded on "reason, observation of human nature and evidence."

Of course, that begs the question that an "appeal to revelation" is also grounded on "reason, observation of human nature and evidence."

Since humans innately managed to conjure up all these moral codes, who is to say that they couldn't have the innate ability to appeal to revelation, and interact with whoever manages this revelation to produce to those moral codes? Perhaps believers are the folks really grounded in reason.

There is a supreme arrogance in MacDonald's soft-spoken voice when she equates religion as parasitic on humans' moral sense. So, religious people steal from those hard-working secularists (to eventually destroy them, since that is what parasites do) all the morality they've innately developed, and turn around and attribute them to divine revelation.

I've never heard of this argument before. But, it shows a closed-mindedness and dearth of imagination that MacDonald must have that she can't even speculate that just as morality is innate, appeal to revelation is equally innate and acts as precursor to those moral values she thinks she plucks out of the independently working human mind.

In my bias and ignorance, I know that it is secularists who are killing off Europe, which has given up on an "appeal to revelation", as MacDonald so cleverly puts it. Whatever moral codes they have inherited came from this appeal, while their secularists friends thought otherwise. So, who are the parasites now?
Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat

Sunday, January 18, 2015

Sunday Gentleman

Photographic Portrait of a Victorian Gentleman
Failte Irish Pub
[Photo By: KPA]

This photograph hangs in one of the alcoves in the Failte Irish Pub and Restaurant. It may be hanging in a pub, but it surely merits a Sunday post. This gentleman looks kind enough not to scare away little children, but firm enough to get things straight. He may have a pint (but not two), but won't have any qualms over others (men, of course) doing so.

Here is a photo I took of the alcove at another time. The room is, appropriately, called "The Victorian Parlour."

Failte Irish Pub, The Victorian Parlour
[Photo By: KPA]

Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat

Saturday, January 17, 2015

Camel at the Cloisters

Wall Painting of a Camel, first half 12th century (perhaps 1129–34)
From the hermitage of San Baudelio de Berlanga
Fresco transferred to canvas; 65 x 134 in. (165.1 x 340.3 cm)
The Cloisters Collection, 1961 (61.219)

[Photo By: KPA, December 13, 2012]

I just found a way to get to my XD-Picture Card files, from my old Olympus camera. Apparently, this card is pretty much out of date now, but I managed to find a memory card reader, which allows me to download a variety of files.

This is not a great photograph (my camera then was having problems with interiors and using a flash would produce too much glare). I only recently found it (or was able to find it due to the reader).

I took the photograph in August 2012, when I came to New York for a brief summer trip. I met Larry Auster for several outings, despite his ill health, and we went to the Cloisters together. I went twice, (the first time is when I took the photograph). The second time, I went with Larry, having figured out that it would be possible for him to make the trek all the way out there.

I think this photograph is symbolic of our times, and also symbolic of the battle Larry was fighting. It is a reminder not to stop, and not to lapse into complacency. We may stop, but this hard and determined enemy doesn't. I will explain below.

For some reason, I didn't take any photos of Larry. I think I was just being polite. But below is one of him taken at the dinner planned for (and by) him, to celebrate Christmas together with his friends.

He sent me the photo with these remarks: "A photo of me at the dinner with my little pig eyes... My eyes are already small, and when I haven't had much sleep they get even smaller."

Larry was never one to fall to vanity, nor was he one to mince his words. I think he looks cheerful. We came from far and wide to celebrate Christmas with him. He was happy to be amongst friends.

Larry Auster
Kennedy's Pub and Restaurant, New York City
December 8, 2012

Now back to the camel.

Here is how the Metropolitan Museum of Art describes this wall painting:
The hermitage of San Baudelio de Berlanga was constructed in the beginning of the eleventh century at the heart of the frontier between Islamic and Christian lands. Its interior was transformed 150 years later with the addition of two cycles of vibrant wall paintings. The upper walls of the church were decorated with a series of scenes from the life of Christ, while the lower sections include boldly painted hunt scenes and images of animals, all of which derive from earlier Islamic objects.

Associated with aristocratic power and pursuits, the camel was a subject often seen on the courtly fine arts of the Umayyad caliphate and Ta’ifa monarchies. Islamic court art was known and admired by inhabitants of the Christian kingdoms for its costly materials and unparalleled craft. Though the Christians under Alfonso VII had definitively wrested Berlanga from Islamic forces in 1124, the paintings in the hermitage suggest that they continued to rely on Islamic motifs and the style of the Islamic court when seeking to create a luxurious setting.
We are back again in that fascinated mode of the medieval Christian kingdoms. Camels are desert creatures, belonging to their Muslim masters. The medieval artist who created this wall painting didn't quite know how to depict the camel's hooves. He cleverly made them flat and wide, suitable for travel along unstable desert sands. But why create camels in the first place, other than a desire to bring the exotic closer? It was this openness, and "tolerance" that eventually led to the Islamic conquest of Spain.

In our eagerness to experience the exotic, we contemporary folk have made our cities dangerous for conquest once again. It seems that we in the West will always have this perennial cycle of openness, then conquest (by those we opened our doors to), then war, then freedom once again. But this time, it may not have that desired ending.

Larry spent a good deal of his time writing about this civilization we might lose. He exhorted us to stop our lazy ways and not to neglecting this civilization. And he warned us about the dire consequences if we did.

In view of the recent shocking events in France, where armed Jihadis were in the middle of the streets of Paris with sophisticated weaponry, I say that we pay especial heed to his words.

Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat

Tuesday, January 13, 2015

The Poor, Discomfited George Clooney

The usually debonair George Clooney looks discomfitted, here with his new wife, Amal Alamuddin

I wonder why?

Here's the scoop on her, from last March 2014 (I collected these from a variety of sources - there may be more to add):

- She’s Druze, which is an offshoot of Islam.

- She is defending Julian Assange, of the Wikileaks fame in his extradition case with Sweden

- Her mother, Baria, is a foreign affairs editor at Al Hayat, a Lebanese newspaper

- She attended NYU School of Law

- After graduation, she joined the New York firm Sullivan & Cromwell, where she worked for three years before moving to London

- She clerked for Sonia Sotomayor when the future Supreme Court justice was a judge at the US Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, which covers New York

- She's worked as an adviser to the UN Special Envoy, Kofi Annan, on Syria

- She has been been Counsel to the inquiry launched on the use of drones in counter-terrorism

- She's the legal advisor to the King of Bahrain

- Sh has written on international criminal law

- She has edited a book entitled The Law and Practice of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon

- At the Doughty Street barristers' chambers, she represented Yulia Tymoshenko, the former Ukrainian Prime Minister

- She represented Abdullah Al Senussi, former Libyan intelligence chief and Muamar Gaddafi’s right-hand man in a case of alleged crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Court

Alamuddin with Julian Assange

Clooney looks peaked and stressed. I don't think it is the new life as a married man, as the new life as a man married to Alamuddin. I wonder what they talk about? The terrible United States, with all those war criminals? The wonderful Middle East, blighted and maligned by the West?

Alamuddin looks like she's close to her family. Family dinners must be something special. Debbie Schlussel writes this about her experience with the family:
Over the past few months, actor George Clooney’s been photographed all over the place with Amal Alamuddin, a very anti-Israel Lebanese Arab who worked for the United Nations and represented Wikileaks’ anti-American former chief, Julian Assange. The Lebanese legal book she authored is extremely anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian. Alamuddin, who was Clooney’s date to the Obama White House last month, is not Muslim. I’m familiar with Ms. Alamuddin (pronounced “Ah-lah-muh-DEEN”) and her family because I met her and them at the wedding of her cousin in the mid-1990s. They are extremely anti-Israel, and I was subjected to their absurd, non-stop anti-Israel questions and comments as the only non-Arab (other than the bride and her family) at a dinner the night before the wedding.

I went to law school with Alamuddin’s cousin (who has the same last name) and the cousin’s wife. I was friends with the cousin’s wife (who is not an Arab), and when they were dating in law school, I repeatedly heard from him about how he hated Israel and sided with the Palestinians and the P.L.O. Later, when I was invited to the the Alamuddin wedding, I was on the receiving end of more of that. As I noted, I was the only non-Arab at the pre-wedding dinner at Chicago’s now-defunct “Uncle Tonoose” restaurant. They all knew I was Jewish, and the conversations and questions directed at me were a mix of myself as both Jewish museum exhibit and target of anti-Israel questioning. Clooney’s future girlfriend was there, too, and she was in her late teens at the time (I was in my mid-20s).

The situation with the Alamuddin family was surreal, as I was asked repeatedly about “Jewish Europeans” “invading” Israel, er . . . “Palestine.”
Clooney, I think, is in over his head. His Druze-lawyer-anti-Israeli wife will be nothing but a handful. What a stupid man.

And one strange thing. He wore the same suit he wore to his wedding at the Golden Globes. Yes he was there for Golden Globes' lifetime achievement award, the Cecil B. DeMille Award, but doesn't that warrant its own "special" suit?

This is the confident and debonair Clooney of a couple of years ago.

Posted By: Kidist P. Asrat