PUBLISHER JIM BAEN has been putting up his books for free on the Web. Now author Eric Flint explains what happened: it sold a lot more books. And he’s got the numbers to prove it.

PUNDITWATCH IS UP! Don’t miss it.

UTHANT.COM unveils a new Middle East Peace Plan^TM that, well, is as likely to work as any of the others!

Perhaps the international community wouldn’t be so stumped by the conflict had it bothered to ask Uthant for advice. [It’s not like we weren’t Secretary General of the United Nations for ten years for fuck’s sake.] That being said, here at last is the long un-awaited Uthant Peace Plan:

The Palestinians formally get control of all 2,165 square miles of the West Bank, with full autonomy, open borders, and if it turns out that there are any civil rights that come with being citizens of an Arab nation, they can have those too. It’s up to them. No questions asked.

In return, the Israelis get to take back 20 square miles of land every time an Israeli dies at the hands of a Palestinian. No questions asked.

Christiane Amanpour also comes in for some gratuitous abuse, as do many other major mideast political figures.

MORE CRACKS IN THE GLOBAL GUN-CONTROL FACADE: This article from the Los Angeles Times says that the global gun-control movement is in trouble, and gives a lot of reasons. But here’s the part that struck me — er, well, once reader John Thacker pointed it out, anyway:

Italian Defense Minister Antonio Martino suggested in a radio interview Monday that the country’s gun laws should be loosened. Martino cited the U.S. Bill of Rights’ 2nd Amendment, protecting the right of citizens to bear arms, as a model.

Critics said the minister’s comments reflected a rising sense of insecurity as the population ages and the number of immigrants rises. Unlike in other European countries, fear in Italy has increased even as the number of violent crimes has gone down slightly.

If the “critics” are right about the concerns motivating this position, then such views are likely to spread to other European countries, despite cultural resistance among the elites.

I’VE BEEN PROPERLY CHASTENED BY READERS for my remarks about Le Pen, below. A French reader writes:

“A Le Pen administration might provide a salutary and much-needed wake-up call to the corrupt and intellectually bankrupt Europolitical crowd. The ideal outcome for me, I guess, would be for Le Pen to lose, but by a tiny margin.”

I do not know if you have read the guy’s proposals, apart from his populist formulas like “the euro is an occupation money” that you seem to enjoy, but a Le Pen victory would not just be a “wake up call”. It would most likely mean a civil war in our country, not to mention the prospect of a commercial war between France and about the rest of the world (the guy wants to “protect our national industry” by all means).

In addition, I’m quite surprised and saddened that you see it as just another thing to laugh at about us damn Frogs. This event certainly shows that we are indeed the “sick man of Europe”, but I don’t quite see what’s so great about it, and I certainly do not feel that a Chirac victory by a quick margin would bring about what you seem to envision. At best, I could only send the wrong message to our politicians who would feel obliged to be even more nationalist and protectionist. Finally, Le Pen is, for the record, a great admirer and supporter of Sadam Hussein (his wife his president of an association that raises money for the Iraki regime)…would you really feel delighted if such a guy was close to winning the French presidency ?

Meanwhile reader Adam Felber notes:

As much as I enjoy watching the French squirm, I can’t say I’d like to see Le Pen win. It’s worth remembering that France is a nuclear nation with more warheads than China. I know Cold War H-bomb fears are long out of vogue, but a Le Pen government might be just crazy enough…

Both are quite right, and I shouldn’t have been so flippant. I suppose it’s been too hard for me to really imagine Le Pen winning to take the threat seriously, but of course that doesn’t mean that his victory would be a good thing.

I guess I was just responding to the unwillingness of Eurocrats in general and the French political system in particular to accept any less dramatic correctives. But I agree that a Le Pen victory would very likely be disastrous, even if (as I expect) it never led to nuclear war.

UPDATE: Reader David Shulman writes in response:

I think you were right about Le Pen the first time. Although he is frequently called an “anti-semite” by the Left, I think that he would be “good for the Jews.” He would not put up with the violent crimes being committed on a daily basis by Arab hooligans. I’m Jewish, and if I lived in France, I’d probably vote for him.

Interesting. Maybe he has got a shot. . . .

DJ Pieter K created this image of North & South Korea. Advantage: Capitalism!

BRETT THOMAS wonders why there isn’t more of an outcry about gender apartheid in Saudi Arabia.

DAN HARTUNG’S LakeFX blog is back after a long absence. I like his post on how Harper’s has gone downhill.

DON’T WRITE OFF LE PEN YET, writes David Carr. I’m torn. On the one hand, I don’t actually like Le Pen, for obvious reasons. On the other hand, it’s delightful to see the French so upset and embarrassed, and that happy state would no doubt continue for quite some time if Le Pen actually won. I mean, this is a guy who calls the Euro “occupation money”. And while I don’t like Le Pen, it’s not like I like the other French politicians all that much, either. A Le Pen administration might provide a salutary and much-needed wake-up call to the corrupt and intellectually bankrupt Europolitical crowd.

The ideal outcome for me, I guess, would be for Le Pen to lose, but by a tiny margin.

This photo, if you haven’t seen it, is way cool. It’s the earth from space, at night. But for a real contrast, look at the difference between North and South Korea — and remember that the North used to be the industrialized part.

(Note — if you flunked Geography, find Japan (if you can’t do that, skip this — you’re hopeless) then look due west. What looks like an island of light is South Korea — if you look closely you can see just enough points of light to realize that North Korea is actually there, but just barely.)

The always visible difference between capitalism and communism couldn’t be much more visible than that.

JOHN ELLIS says that Karen Hughes is part of a growing exodus from the high-stress corporate/political lifestyle.

NORAH VINCENT says that Arab terrorists don’t measure up in the masculinity department.

VIA BILL QUICK I found this story about Putin rival Alexander Lebed dying in a helicopter crash. Quick connects it with the highly suspicious Venezuelan crash that killed a lot of anti-Chavez brass.

Of course, nobody was trying to rub out Stevie Ray Vaughan or Bill Graham: helicopters are dangerous, and if you fly in them a lot you have a nontrivial chance of being killed. But it is a bit suspicious.

A READER sends this Iranian cartoon. Quite a self-image, eh?

UPDATE: Reader Philippe Richards says that this is a self-critical image, not a celebratory one.

SEN. BILL FRIST AND CLONING: I can’t find it on their website, but the Knoxville News Sentinel is reporting that Bill Frist abandoned his support for therapeutic cloning because he is under consideration for the slot as Bush’s running mate in 2004. Cloning and Condi Rice supporters are likely to be disappointed to hear this — and those, like me (and, for different reasons, Asparagirl) who would like to see Condi Rice cloned are doubly unhappy, of course.

KATIE ALLISON GRANJU is a freelance writer (a book on parenting for Simon & Schuster, and articles for everything from Salon to Hipmama to Cooking Light) and she now has a weblog, too. She’s also written a terrific essay on why she lets her kids play with guns. Excerpt:

They’re toys made of plastic, wood, and metal. Some shoot caps, some shoot clothespins, and one shoots ping pong balls. Of course, lots of them squirt water. But they still look like guns and are played with as weaponry by the boys who race around my yard making shooting noises and ducking behind trees.

There was a time, at the beginning of my parenting journey nine years ago, when I would have shuddered at the thought of this scene playing itself out at our house. While still pregnant with my now nine year old son, Henry, I announced to anyone who would listen that my child would never engage in violent play with toy weapons. With the perfect confidence born of never having actually parented a child myself, I lectured friends and relatives on the dangers to society of raising boys on a diet of toy guns, swords, and soldiers. My comeuppance began almost immediately.

Read the whole thing; it’s very good.

CANADIAN READER NATHAN MCLEOD WRITES:

A great article today in the Opinion Journal by WSJ by Peter Worthington describing the current Canadian situation with regards to our military.

I am not surprised that you receive a lot of e-mail from frustrated Canadians living in a socialized utopia. I look at the current strife in Argentina and unfortunately see Canada’s future. The sad reality is that Canada, like the European sophisticates that we seem to follow on most issues, is a has been country heading nowhere fast.

The right of centre party, the Canadian Alliance, has a new leader, Stephen Harper, that gives me some hope for the future. Living under a corrupt quasi dictator like Jean Chretien and his governing liberals is enough to drive any reasonable person insane.

THE ISRAELIS have apparently foiled some WTC-type skyscraper bombing attacks. Had such an attack succeeded, the West Bank would look like Tokyo in 1945, writes the reader who sent this link.

Do the Palestinians know this? They must. Do they care? They must not.

THIS ONLINE POLL FROM NETSCAPE shows 71% of respondents doubting that gun controls can prevent mass shootings. Will they pull a CAIR and disappear it?

JIM BENNETT contrasts “Le Penism” with its counterpart “Euro-Le Penism.” Both turn out to be rather stupid, insular, and xenophobic. The latter variety is widely held among Euro-politicians:

But Patten was using a newer and different definition. His “European civilization” is a synthetic construct floated by the European Union and certain sets of Europhile intellectuals. What is absurd is the way in which this new “European civilization” is defined to fit geographical coincidence and political convenience. This new “European civilization” extends to those nations that are in the European Union, and those which the consensus of Europhile opinion thinks ought to be. . . .

In short, this definition of “European civilization” defies any logic of cultural or civilizational taxonomy. It is as absurd a category as the “Moldavian” language invented by Stalin’s linguists to justify stealing Bessarabia from Romania, and just as blatantly political a construct.

The political purpose of the synthetic concept of “European civilization” is obvious. It is a response to the failure of the Eurocratic elite to find any kind of socio-political glue to hold their creation together. . . .

Once the Euro-elites recognize they have a problem, it is likely they will search for stronger social glue to hold together their Union. They could, of course, resolve their structural problems and loosen their centralist grip, opening themselves to the world and balancing their Continental ties with the external ties many of their members have had to sacrifice for Europeanism. But that would contradict 50 years of centralizing ideology.

Rather, having have found the pull of economic rationalism insufficient, they will start looking for pushes. The most readily available push is fear of enemies, internal and external.

The greatest danger with Europe is not from the little Le Pens seeking to return to inward-looking national protectionism and hatred of foreigners. It is from Eurocrats seeking to construct a grand Euro-Lepenisme of inward-looking continental protectionism and contempt for non-“Europeans,” in the sense of the “European civilization” Patten and others seem to be trying to define.

In the search for enemies, it’s pretty obvious who will be Candidate Number One. America, already a favorite whipping boy economically, politically, and culturally, will be further elevated as Europe’s main rival. As for internal enemies, the European Union is defining a class of “xenophobes” whose xenophobia is evidently exhibited primarily by opposition to the European Union. Ironically, openly Zionist Jews may soon find themselves categorized as “xenophobes.”

I think that Bennett’s hit the nail on the head with this one. It’s why I’ve been worried for some time about where Europe is headed. Corrupt and intellectually bankrupt elites — which the EU has in spades — generally turn to hatred in an effort to maintain their power.

MATT WELCH has some observations about the L.A. Times that make me think his new newspaper is going to be damn good.

MICKEY KAUS asks if People for the American Way and the Children’s Defense Fund are financial flypaper, soaking up donations that might otherwise go to effective groups. No doubt the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy will have him silenced for revealing this clever plan.

HARVEY GOLDSTEIN writes about the idiocy of airport security. He’s right, of course. My big question is, given that the powers-that-be have screwed up airport security so obviously, how much faith can we have in their ability to handle the things that we can’t see?

THE HASHEMITE OPTION is endorsed in this Washington Post oped by Yossi Klein Halevi:

As a first step, the Palestinian Authority must go the way of the Taliban. Arafat should be placed on a plane to Baghdad and his terrorist “police” apparatus dismantled. Israel would then cede most of the territories to Jordan, concentrating the settlements in areas close to the 1967 borders. Until the situation stabilizes, Israel would remain in control of a united Jerusalem, though it would cede the Temple Mount to the Hashemites who, as descendants of the Prophet Muhammad’s family, have a compelling claim as custodians of the site. Finally, Israel would retain a military presence along the Jordan River.

Jordan is the only Arab country that has entered into a strategic relationship with the Jewish state. The Hashemites fear a PLO state no less than the Israelis do. Ironically, Ariel Sharon, who once advocated transforming Jordan into Palestine, has become one of the stalwarts of the Israeli-Jordanian relationship. Perhaps Sharon is the man to help transform Palestine back into Jordan.

Note the passing reference to the Hashemites’ “compelling claim” as custodians of Muslim holy places.

I’ll bet Prince Abdullah just loves hearing about that.

SOME THOUGHTS ON GERMAN GUNS: Germany has strict gun control. Most of the stories I’ve seen say there are about 10 million legally-owned guns in a country of 82 million. The estimates on illegal guns tend to be about double that, or 20 million guns. That means with strict gun control — far stricter than one could reasonably expect in the United States, where owning guns is a deeper-rooted tradition, and where obedience to authority is not — there are about 3/8 as many firearms as there are people. In the United States the ration of guns to people is approximately one to one.

It’s thus probably fair to take the 3/8 ratio as an upper bound for the effectiveness of gun control were it enacted in the United States. 3/8 of the U.S. population would be something over 90 million. So the most gun-controllers could hope for would be to reduce the number of guns in America to 90 million, which still sounds like a lot to me. And it could be accomplished only via a program that would be enormously polarizing politically, and sure to do immense damage to civil liberties — if it didn’t set off something like a civil war, which it very well might. All to produce a society that is not exactly disarmed, in which criminals (as in Germany) can still get guns easily.

Sounds like a dumb idea to me.