"In all, the U.S. commitment to overthrow the Taliban had been about 110 CIA officers and 316 Special Forces personnel, plus massive air power.

Tenet, the CIA director, was extremely proud of what the agency had accomplished. The money it had been able to distribute without traditional cost controls had mobilized the tribals. In some cases, performance standards had been set: Move from point A to point B, and you get several hundred thousand dollars. A stack of money on the table was still the universal language. His paramilitary and case officers in and around Afghanistan had made it possible -- a giant return on years of investment in human intelligence.

The CIA calculated that they had spent only $70 million in direct cash outlays on the ground in Afghanistan, and some of that had been to pay for field hospitals. In an interview, Bush said, "That's one bargain," and he wondered aloud what the Soviets had spent in their disastrous war in Afghanistan that had contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union."

An excerpt from Bob Woodward's new book, Bush At War, which was excerpted in three days of the Washington Post last week.

The Argument

Continuing the topic of religious debate... click to read where it started...

What strikes me about conversations between religious people and agnostics is how they mirror each other. Furthermore, those who don't believe in religion (or don't believe in God or don't see proof of God or whatever other synonymous phrase you want to use) employ the same types of arguments as those who are religious. Usually people engaged in friendly intellectual argument about something try to reach middle ground and utilize metaphors and other tactics to bridge divergent ideas. But when it comes to religion, the agnostics I've spoken to use the same exact ferocity, tone of voice and dedication that their counterparts do.

As much as my friend discounts faith I espouse my confidence in faith. As much as he can't allow for the existence of God I am steadfast in my stance. As much as he can't believe religion isn't made by man I can't see how it isn't divinely inspired. No joining. No middle ground. No compromise. I allow for many of his arguments regarding the horrors caused by religion, the "inability" to "prove" God's existence, the tenuous nature of people's beliefs, the evolution of ideas supposedly dictated by an unchanging God, the occasional psychological convenience of belief and on and on and on. I buy that. I see those arguments. I even call them out. But nevertheless, I can't take the next step, which agnostics do, to the determination that because of all that I shouldn't be Jewish.

I can't take that next step because I see something else that they won't allow for. I do not feel the threat of the unknown. I am more comfortable believing as fact something I can't prove. They'd die before saying that. Call it a hunch. Call it a feeling. It isn't certainty. It isn't logically-reasoned proof - which is the only thing they'd allow for. And I'm ok with that. That's what allows me to continue my religious practices.

It is ironic that a hysterical yet blatantly harsh short film should cross my inbox today when my mind is filled with thoughts of authenticity, truth, beliefs, etc.

Watch this short film now!

The Parents Did It

I had an interesting evening yesterday. First, I attended the launch/fundraising party for The Good Apple, a new, free literary arts magazine run by a friend of a friend. Second, I hung out with Kevin Kearney, the mastermind behind Monoki.com (a GAZM.org partner).

Before continuing I need to apologize for taking a week between postings. I was searching for something of enough significance to write about.

The reason for the this post is a challenging and stimulating conversation-slash-argument that I had with Kevin over drinks and billiards on Smith Street, in Brooklyn. I'd like to point out that in writing this entry I am taking liberties that perhaps I shouldn't when it comes to describing the thoughts and opinions of others. I can talk a lot about what I believe and will try to best paraphrase others' ideas. Kevin is an agnostic, meaning that he neither believes in the existence of a God nor does he rule out the possible existence of a God. He puts all his trust in reason. If something can't be arrived at through reasonable argument then it can't be accepted or denied (i.e. God).

According to Kevin, and the great minds he references often (such as Aristotle, Galileo, Einstein, Nietzsche, etc.) there is no other process to arrive at a defendable conclusion besides reason, logic and fact-based processes. Faith, belief, tradition, "feelings" or anything else are less valid, if not outright ludicrous, as methods of arriving at conclusions.

Kevin's biggest point, as he mentioned in the current hot-topic on GAZM.org which is coincidentally about religion, is that religion is completely man-made and passed-on through families: "Of course, I'd be defensive too if all I had was a bunch of preposterous superstitions my mommy and daddy taught me to live life by."

We've all heard the "reasons" why religion was "created" - for man to feel secure and have senses of right, wrong, justice, truth, etc. man needs a higher power where the dictates spring from. Religion is about feeling comfortable, not being scared of death, not having to come up with rules on our own or exerting control over things we disagree with. We've all heard about how religion is satan incarnate because of all the anguish it has wrought throughout history. The modern and postmodern explanations for religion are well known and played out. Yet people, lots of people, still believe in religion very strongly.

Why? Why am I a Jew? Why do I engage in conversations such as these? Why do I separate myself from lots of other Jews? The answers to those questions and my responses to the opinions of Kevin and others like him are coming shortly, hopefully tomorrow. I just have to go consult my psychic first...