I've been posting daily over at the 'Tude, but the treatment I wanted to give this isn't really in line with what Hill and the gang are going for over there. So, for your consumption:
The Danziger Bridge Killings: How New Orleans Police Gunned Down Civilians Fleeing the Flood
Democracy Now!:
On the second anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, we take a look back the Danziger Bridge killings. Seven police officers been indicted for opening fire on two African American families on the Danziger Bridge days after the storm, killing two people and wounding four others. At the time, the official story was that they gunned down snipers. Now the question is why they shot at two families fleeing the flood.
Last December, seven police officers were indicted for killing two people walking across the bridge. They were from two families, the Bartholomews and the Madisons. James Brisette, a young man who was a friend of the Bartholomews, was killed by seven bullets in his back and legs. Susan Bartholomew's arm was partially blown off. Her daughter and husband had three gunshot wounds each. Their trial is ongoing.
Ronald Madison, a forty-year-old mentally disabled man, was one of the two people killed. He was walking across the bridge with his older brother Lance, when, according to police, he was shot in the back and died. Lance was initially arrested and jailed for attempting to murder the police officers. He was later released after a grand jury cleared his name.
Dr. Rommel Madison is the brother of Lance and Ronald Madison. He is a dentist, and he testified this week at the International Tribunal on Hurricane Katrina that was put together by the People’s Hurricane Fund.
DR. ROMELL MADISON: My brothers were seeking help to get to safety on the east side of the Danziger Bridge by officers on the west side, and it hadn’t flooded, so they had refuge there. But they didn't have food or water, so they would go to the east side, where everyone was being picked up to be brought to safety to the dome and to the Convention Center.
On the day of September 4th, there was a family at the foot of the bridge, a husband, wife, daughter, three small kids and a teenager. During that time they were on the bridge, they noticed a rental truck, a moving van-type-sized truck, about a mid-sized van. It pulled up where the family was. They exited the truck. About seven men exited the truck, and they opened fire on the family at the foot of the bridge. One individual was killed. Everyone was wounded, but one of the children. The children's ages were from fourteen to nineteen.
After seeing that, they started retreating back to the westbound side of the Danziger Bridge back toward my office again. And at that point the police officers opened fire on them. They wounded my brother Ronald in the back twice. My brother Lance was able to get him to the other side of the bridge and put him on the grass, and then he ran for help. When he did return, he was relieved to find the National Guard and the state police, and he was telling them what happened.
At that point, the police officers walked up, and then they finally disclosed that they were police, because when they originally got out of the van, they were dressed in shorts, T-shirts, just plain shirts. They never identified themselves as being police. And to see them open fire on a small group of individuals, African American individuals, at the foot of the bridge, they just figured they were out to, you know, go hunting and shooting and killing people.
[snip]
AMY GOODMAN: What do you think needs to be done now? In the case of your family, the police officers are going on trial, Dr. Madison. Your family has also sued?
DR. ROMELL MADISON: My mother and brother have. But presently, we're still faced with the uphill fight with the judicial system. OK, when the indictments were handed out to the police on December 28th of ’05, they were allowed to turn themselves in January 2nd of ’06, so that they could have this time to spend with their families.
The second thing that the judge did that I feel was incorrect was that he provided bail for first-degree murder. Nowhere in the United States is anyone provided bail for first-degree murder. These individuals were provided bail. One of the officers quit and was allowed to move to Houston, Texas, to leave the state. And that's unheard of also. They were supposed to be on house arrest, and they shouldn't have left -- he shouldn’t have gone anywhere.
Third, they were allowed to go back to work as police in the police department, which is really a tragedy to the public. They’ve fired police for second-degree battery, let alone for being charged for first-degree murder, and allowed them to come back to work as police officers.
The last thing is that the violation of the grand jury testimony, too, by giving it to the defense attorneys for the police, to allow them to find out what’s [inaudible] in it and whether it would have a means to try to have the charges dropped against their clients. Now, that is another violation of civil rights injustice, because no one's allowed to view the grand jury testimony. If that was the case, they could have let the defense attorney decide whether or not they should be charged or not.
Everything has really been the complete opposite of what should be. And finally the judge -- there was a motion for the judge to recuse himself. I don't think just because of this, but because of his air of impropriety that was given in his disclosure. So at this point, that's what we're all working on: his recusal from the case and trying to obtain a judge that will deal with everything strictly by the book and fairly.
ROSANA CRUZ: And just to clarify, the judge on this case is a close friend of the police department, has three staff members who have direct family relationships or business relationships with the defense attorneys.
If and when the state of affairs in this country deteriorates to the point of Martial Law being declared, which Arthur thinks may be closer than one is comfortable thinking about, the social structure will likely show immediate signs of fracture along the lines of race and economic status. It is not difficult to imagine a bloodbath the likes of which would make the above chronicled events look like a schoolyard shoving match.
The fault lines that such a fracture would follow exist today and have existed for hundreds of years. No amount of military defeats or proclamations or legislative acts have been able to alter the deep seated traditions and beliefs of white people towards people of color, specifically African Americans. Part of it is the resistance toward governance by a body thousands of miles away that has no perceived frame of reference to the local circumstances, but the greater part is the deep seated human tendency to continue to vilify what has been viewed as that which is not a part of us, past and present and future, simply out of the fear of change. Sadly, the circumstances that will most likely bring upon an escalation of this behavior are also the greatest opportunity for the dismantling of those attitudes and barriers.
The choice to continue down the path of separation and marginalization through intimidation and violence is easier than the uncertain choice to cross the barriers and engage. A very unique set of circumstances need to fall into place in order for this to happen and they need to be met with an open eyed attitude. This is not usually the mindset people are operating in when faced with the daunting scenarios found during a large natural (or man made, in the case of the Levees rupturing) disaster or a police or militarily enforced social regimen (which is what Martial Law essentially is.)
One would hope that we have evolved far enough that there are people whose cooler heads would prevail in some situations like this, as they did in the case of Houston Mayor Bill White overruling Harris County Judge Robert Eckels in the matter of accepting the bulk of evacuees from New Orleans two years ago. Unfortunately, the possibility of examples of the conduct detailed above cannot be ruled out.
Friday, August 31, 2007
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Their Loss=Our Gain
John McClain:
Looking back at March 22, the day Matt Schaub was acquired by the Texans, I'll never forget the haunting words of one member of the Falcons organization: "We just traded the wrong quarterback."
Little did he or anyone in Atlanta understand just how prophetic those words would become.
Before the Texans made the trade, Schaub got strong endorsements from two coaches Kubiak knows well from working with them for so many years at Denver.
Bill Musgrave, who coaches quarterbacks at Atlanta, tutored Schaub last season and at the University of Virginia. Alex Gibbs was a Falcons assistant during Schaub's first three years. They told Kubiak that Schaub was just about everything he wanted in a quarterback and that he would make a smooth transition into the Texans' system.
As a Texans fan, this is a development of such proportions that one tends to get a bit giddy at the prospect of the team's performance in the next few years. It also is an example of such bitter irony for the Falcons organization and their fans that you can't help but feel some empathy. How can you giggle behind a bunched hand or chuckle to yourself mentally at the man who gets clocked by a falling safe in the middle of a meadow?
While the statement from the Falcons representative quoted above does indicate the knowledge of potential issues with Vick both on field and off, there can't be any way of foreseeing the firestorm that is in motion and will most likely end in jail time and the end of his NFL, if not his entire professional football, career. However, the statement seems to cut in another direction, this one strictly football related.
The running quarterback's days are numbered. This is not to say that we are looking at a return of the proliference of the classic immobile pocket passer in the NFL, but more to the passing quarterback with good pocket instincts--the ability to feel pressure and avoid it long enough to gain a small amount of yardage or avoid a large loss fifty percent of the time or more. Yes, this is a lot to ask, but players can be developed (and can develop themselves) to meet this criteria.
The classic running quarterback (notice I didn't say 'scrambling') is a dying breed mainly due to his own attractiveness in two ways: the potential for yards and touchdowns both through the air and on the ground, and the potential gate and television revenue generated by an exciting player who can potentially provide an amazing play worthy of Sunday night highlights and play of the year accolades at every snap of the ball. Based on the value attached to those two attractive possibilities, owners such as Norman Braman, Zygi Wilf, and Arthur Blank secured running quarterbacks Randall Cunningham, Dante Culpepper and Vick with huge contracts and signing bonuses.
However, this strategy soon came to reveal itself as a sharp double edged sword. Along with the gate value and improvement that this new generation of QBs brought to the team, it also exposed them to more serious types of injury more often than the classic pocket QB. Another, perhaps even more serious issue that reared its ugly head was the matter of conditioning that showed itself in the tendency of these quarterbacks to fade a little or succumb to more minor injuries that they might have been able to play through earlier in the season in the last quarter of the season or (worse) during the playoffs.
This has proven itself to be a recurring factor in the late season and playoff performances of the Eagles in the eighties and nineties with Cunningham, and again here in the aughts with McNabb, the Vikings in the nineties with both Cunningham and Culpepper, the Steelers in the late nineties with Kordell Stewart, and the Falcons in recent years with Vick. Contrast that with the QBs who have made it deep into the playoffs and to the Super Bowl and won it such as Brady, Manning, Warner, Elway, Favre, and Aikman. The only two examples of classic running QBs who made it to the Super Bowl are McNair with the Titans in the 1999 season, and you can hardly pin the outcome of that game on his ability--the entire team played their hearts out and almost snatched that game out from under Kurt Warner and Dick Vermeil's noses, and McNabb with the Eagles two years ago--and that loss can be attributed more to the questionable late game play calling of Andy Reid than McNabb's performance, the inane comments of Terrell Owens not withstanding.
You have to think that GM's and coaches pay attention to these results and act accordingly. David Carr was an above average QB at Fresno State, but the NFL isn't the WAC and the schedule is a bit more intense than what he experienced in college. The sieve of an offensive line that he had to work with for most of his career also had a lot to do with it, but McClain also makes these good points:
Schaub gets rid of the ball fast. He's been sacked once in three games. Kubiak wants the Texans to have fewer than 30 sacks, which would be a franchise-record low.
Schaub feels pressure and knows how to sidestep it. Sage Rosenfels, who's capable of being a starter in Kubiak's system, also has that pocket presence coaches talk so much about.
Schaub makes good decisions. In other words, he doesn't throw the ball to the wrong spot or step into sacks. He's authoritative in the huddle, it's clear he's in charge, and no one else talks.
Schaub doesn't say the wrong thing. He listens and soaks in everything he hears that might benefit him. He doesn't make excuses. He takes the blame whether he deserves it or not. He accepts criticism. When he makes a mistake, he gets angry at himself, not anyone else, and vows not to make the same mistake again.
Sorry Falcons. You pay your money, you take your chances...
Looking back at March 22, the day Matt Schaub was acquired by the Texans, I'll never forget the haunting words of one member of the Falcons organization: "We just traded the wrong quarterback."
Little did he or anyone in Atlanta understand just how prophetic those words would become.
Before the Texans made the trade, Schaub got strong endorsements from two coaches Kubiak knows well from working with them for so many years at Denver.
Bill Musgrave, who coaches quarterbacks at Atlanta, tutored Schaub last season and at the University of Virginia. Alex Gibbs was a Falcons assistant during Schaub's first three years. They told Kubiak that Schaub was just about everything he wanted in a quarterback and that he would make a smooth transition into the Texans' system.
As a Texans fan, this is a development of such proportions that one tends to get a bit giddy at the prospect of the team's performance in the next few years. It also is an example of such bitter irony for the Falcons organization and their fans that you can't help but feel some empathy. How can you giggle behind a bunched hand or chuckle to yourself mentally at the man who gets clocked by a falling safe in the middle of a meadow?
While the statement from the Falcons representative quoted above does indicate the knowledge of potential issues with Vick both on field and off, there can't be any way of foreseeing the firestorm that is in motion and will most likely end in jail time and the end of his NFL, if not his entire professional football, career. However, the statement seems to cut in another direction, this one strictly football related.
The running quarterback's days are numbered. This is not to say that we are looking at a return of the proliference of the classic immobile pocket passer in the NFL, but more to the passing quarterback with good pocket instincts--the ability to feel pressure and avoid it long enough to gain a small amount of yardage or avoid a large loss fifty percent of the time or more. Yes, this is a lot to ask, but players can be developed (and can develop themselves) to meet this criteria.
The classic running quarterback (notice I didn't say 'scrambling') is a dying breed mainly due to his own attractiveness in two ways: the potential for yards and touchdowns both through the air and on the ground, and the potential gate and television revenue generated by an exciting player who can potentially provide an amazing play worthy of Sunday night highlights and play of the year accolades at every snap of the ball. Based on the value attached to those two attractive possibilities, owners such as Norman Braman, Zygi Wilf, and Arthur Blank secured running quarterbacks Randall Cunningham, Dante Culpepper and Vick with huge contracts and signing bonuses.
However, this strategy soon came to reveal itself as a sharp double edged sword. Along with the gate value and improvement that this new generation of QBs brought to the team, it also exposed them to more serious types of injury more often than the classic pocket QB. Another, perhaps even more serious issue that reared its ugly head was the matter of conditioning that showed itself in the tendency of these quarterbacks to fade a little or succumb to more minor injuries that they might have been able to play through earlier in the season in the last quarter of the season or (worse) during the playoffs.
This has proven itself to be a recurring factor in the late season and playoff performances of the Eagles in the eighties and nineties with Cunningham, and again here in the aughts with McNabb, the Vikings in the nineties with both Cunningham and Culpepper, the Steelers in the late nineties with Kordell Stewart, and the Falcons in recent years with Vick. Contrast that with the QBs who have made it deep into the playoffs and to the Super Bowl and won it such as Brady, Manning, Warner, Elway, Favre, and Aikman. The only two examples of classic running QBs who made it to the Super Bowl are McNair with the Titans in the 1999 season, and you can hardly pin the outcome of that game on his ability--the entire team played their hearts out and almost snatched that game out from under Kurt Warner and Dick Vermeil's noses, and McNabb with the Eagles two years ago--and that loss can be attributed more to the questionable late game play calling of Andy Reid than McNabb's performance, the inane comments of Terrell Owens not withstanding.
You have to think that GM's and coaches pay attention to these results and act accordingly. David Carr was an above average QB at Fresno State, but the NFL isn't the WAC and the schedule is a bit more intense than what he experienced in college. The sieve of an offensive line that he had to work with for most of his career also had a lot to do with it, but McClain also makes these good points:
Schaub gets rid of the ball fast. He's been sacked once in three games. Kubiak wants the Texans to have fewer than 30 sacks, which would be a franchise-record low.
Schaub feels pressure and knows how to sidestep it. Sage Rosenfels, who's capable of being a starter in Kubiak's system, also has that pocket presence coaches talk so much about.
Schaub makes good decisions. In other words, he doesn't throw the ball to the wrong spot or step into sacks. He's authoritative in the huddle, it's clear he's in charge, and no one else talks.
Schaub doesn't say the wrong thing. He listens and soaks in everything he hears that might benefit him. He doesn't make excuses. He takes the blame whether he deserves it or not. He accepts criticism. When he makes a mistake, he gets angry at himself, not anyone else, and vows not to make the same mistake again.
Sorry Falcons. You pay your money, you take your chances...
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Just leave 'em alone!
Houston Press:
Freaking ferrets. They're insidious. Their cuteness conquers all. It makes people forget the high price of keeping them, measured in both vets' bills and time spent entertaining them. It trumps the fact that you're going to be spending a lot of time cleaning up ferret shit. It blinds you to the realization that you're loving a weasel.
"I call them the 'Thief of Hearts,'" Clark says. "They will steal your heart, but they will also break it pretty bad when they go. Next year I'll have to get another to replace Vladi."
My brother had several of these little critters when we were in college and both living at home. The most annoying thing about them was their habit of chewing on the back of my Timberland boots, which gave them a well worn look but made it hazardous to move in a rolling chair after sitting for a period of time more than, say, thirty seconds. When Rikki died he had him cremated and still has the ashes in an Urn at his house (he has two dogs now). The other two Ferrets were being boarded while the medical clearances to go to Japan to live with his girlfriend at the time's sister and her husband.
Yeah, they smelled, and the percentage of accuracy in terms of the litter box did leave a bit to be desired, but they lived primarily in his room, so it wasn't that much of an issue. It certainly wasn't as serious a problem as some people make it out to be:
Giuliani: This conversation is over, David. Thank you. [Mr. Giuliani cuts him off.] There is something really, really, very sad about you. You need help. You need somebody to help you. I know you feel insulted by that, but I'm being honest with you. This excessive concern with little weasels is a sickness.
I'm sorry. That's my opinion. You don't have to accept it. There are probably very few people who would be as honest with you about that. But you should go consult a psychologist or a psychiatrist, and have him help you with this excessive concern, how you are devoting your life to weasels.
There are people in this city and in this world that need a lot of help. Something has gone wrong with you. Your compulsion about it, your excessive concern with it, is a sign of something wrong in your personality. I do not mean to be insulting. I'm trying to be honest with you and I'm trying to give you advice for your own good. I know you, I know how you operate, I know how many times you called here this week. Three or 4 o'clock in the morning, David, you called here.
You have a sickness. I know it's hard for you to accept that, because you hang on to this sickness, and it's your shield, it's your whatever. You know, you gotta go to someone who understands this a lot better than I do. And I know you're real angry at me, you're gonna attack me, but actually you're angry at yourself and you're afraid of what I'm raising with you. And if you don't deal with it, I don't know what you're gonna do. But you called here excessively all week, and you called here at 3 o'clock in the morning. And 4 o'clock in the morning. Over weasels. Over a ferret.
The fact that they're illegal to be kept as pets in some municipalities across the country and here in the Houston metropolitan area under the pretense that they are as dangerous as predatory cats is ludicrous. People keep animals as pets that are more dangerous and more eccentric than Ferrets, sometimes with deadly results. Whoever heard of a Ferret choking the life out of its owner? And when the little guys do bite you, it's all in play and totally harmless (as long as they've had their rabies shots), unlike
this:
From ALLAN HALL
in Berlin
A MAN who lived in his own “zoo” of lizards and insects was fatally bitten by a pet black widow spider — then eaten by the other creepy-crawlies.
Police broke in to Mark Voegel’s apartment to find spider Bettina along with 200 others, several snakes, a gecko lizard called Helmut and several thousand termites had gorged on his body.
It may not be illegal, but, man, that's just STOOOPID...
Pets are great, not matter what anyone else thinks about them. They provide companionship, and their love is unconditional as long as you treat them with respect and compassion. Whoever heard of a well loved pet going bad?
One more thing about Ferrets. They don't take kindly to being called weasels, and they're not afraid to speak out against attempts at oppression:
Freaking ferrets. They're insidious. Their cuteness conquers all. It makes people forget the high price of keeping them, measured in both vets' bills and time spent entertaining them. It trumps the fact that you're going to be spending a lot of time cleaning up ferret shit. It blinds you to the realization that you're loving a weasel.
"I call them the 'Thief of Hearts,'" Clark says. "They will steal your heart, but they will also break it pretty bad when they go. Next year I'll have to get another to replace Vladi."
My brother had several of these little critters when we were in college and both living at home. The most annoying thing about them was their habit of chewing on the back of my Timberland boots, which gave them a well worn look but made it hazardous to move in a rolling chair after sitting for a period of time more than, say, thirty seconds. When Rikki died he had him cremated and still has the ashes in an Urn at his house (he has two dogs now). The other two Ferrets were being boarded while the medical clearances to go to Japan to live with his girlfriend at the time's sister and her husband.
Yeah, they smelled, and the percentage of accuracy in terms of the litter box did leave a bit to be desired, but they lived primarily in his room, so it wasn't that much of an issue. It certainly wasn't as serious a problem as some people make it out to be:
Giuliani: This conversation is over, David. Thank you. [Mr. Giuliani cuts him off.] There is something really, really, very sad about you. You need help. You need somebody to help you. I know you feel insulted by that, but I'm being honest with you. This excessive concern with little weasels is a sickness.
I'm sorry. That's my opinion. You don't have to accept it. There are probably very few people who would be as honest with you about that. But you should go consult a psychologist or a psychiatrist, and have him help you with this excessive concern, how you are devoting your life to weasels.
There are people in this city and in this world that need a lot of help. Something has gone wrong with you. Your compulsion about it, your excessive concern with it, is a sign of something wrong in your personality. I do not mean to be insulting. I'm trying to be honest with you and I'm trying to give you advice for your own good. I know you, I know how you operate, I know how many times you called here this week. Three or 4 o'clock in the morning, David, you called here.
You have a sickness. I know it's hard for you to accept that, because you hang on to this sickness, and it's your shield, it's your whatever. You know, you gotta go to someone who understands this a lot better than I do. And I know you're real angry at me, you're gonna attack me, but actually you're angry at yourself and you're afraid of what I'm raising with you. And if you don't deal with it, I don't know what you're gonna do. But you called here excessively all week, and you called here at 3 o'clock in the morning. And 4 o'clock in the morning. Over weasels. Over a ferret.
The fact that they're illegal to be kept as pets in some municipalities across the country and here in the Houston metropolitan area under the pretense that they are as dangerous as predatory cats is ludicrous. People keep animals as pets that are more dangerous and more eccentric than Ferrets, sometimes with deadly results. Whoever heard of a Ferret choking the life out of its owner? And when the little guys do bite you, it's all in play and totally harmless (as long as they've had their rabies shots), unlike
this:
From ALLAN HALL
in Berlin
A MAN who lived in his own “zoo” of lizards and insects was fatally bitten by a pet black widow spider — then eaten by the other creepy-crawlies.
Police broke in to Mark Voegel’s apartment to find spider Bettina along with 200 others, several snakes, a gecko lizard called Helmut and several thousand termites had gorged on his body.
It may not be illegal, but, man, that's just STOOOPID...
Pets are great, not matter what anyone else thinks about them. They provide companionship, and their love is unconditional as long as you treat them with respect and compassion. Whoever heard of a well loved pet going bad?
One more thing about Ferrets. They don't take kindly to being called weasels, and they're not afraid to speak out against attempts at oppression:
Attitude
I'm honored to have been asked to be a part of a new newsblog that my fellow blogger Hill has started, the Tude. There is a great team of news hounds with strong opinions and writing skills working to keep people informed on the fast developing situations in our world today and providing some alternative perspective on them. Check it out when you get a moment.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Motivation
GIs' morale dips as Iraq war drags on
With tours extended, multiple deployments and new tactics that put them in bare posts in greater danger, they feel leaders are out of touch with reality.
"I don't see any progress. Just us getting killed," said Spc. Yvenson Tertulien, one of those in the dining hall in Yousifiya, 10 miles south of Baghdad, as Bush's speech aired last month. "I don't want to be here anymore."
Arthur's latest post highlights the oft overlooked and/or actively denied reality of the deliberate manner in which the U. S. has forced its will upon the nations of the world merely for the sake of doing so.
He cites a passage from The March of Folly by Barbara Tuchman, part of which follows:
Wooden-headedness, the "Don't-confuse-me-with-the-facts" habit, is a universal folly never more conspicuous than at upper levels of Washington with respect to Vietnam. Its grossest fault was underestimation of North Vietnam's commitment to its goal. Enemy motivation was a missing element in American calculations, and Washington could therefore ignore all the evidence of nationalist fervor and of the passion for independence which as early as 1945 Hanoi had declared "no human force can any longer restrain." Washington could ignore General Leclerc's prediction that conquest would take half a million men and "Even then it could not be done." It could ignore the demonstration of elan and capacity that won victory over a French army with modern weapons at Dien Bien Phu, and all the continuing evidence thereafter.
American refusal to take the enemy's grim will and capacity into account has been explained by those responsible on the ground of ignorance of Vietnam's history, traditions and national character: there were "no experts available," in the words of one high-ranking official. But the longevity of Vietnamese resistance to foreign rule could have been learned from any history book on Indochina. Attentive consultation with French administrators whose official lives had been spent in Vietnam would have made up for the lack of American expertise. Even superficial American acquaintance with the area, when it began to supply reports, provided creditable information. Not ignorance, but refusal to credit the evidence and, more fundamentally, refusal to grant stature and fixed purpose to a "fourth-rate" Asiatic country were the determining factors, much as in the case of the British attitude toward the American colonies. The irony of history is inexorable.
The colonial Americans were committed to their independence from the rule of Imperial England under George III in a much stronger way than the British army regulars and hired Hessian guns were to quelling the rebellion (insurgency?).
Andrew Bacevich(h/t Arthur):
The communists of North Vietnam were less interested in promoting world revolution than in unifying their country under socialist rule. We deluded ourselves into thinking that we were defending freedom against totalitarianism.
They were much more committed to this goal than the French and later U. S. forces were to stopping the misperceived push for worldwide totalitarian revolution (which was ill communicated to the ranks anyway)
Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and the insurgent groups are all similar in at least one way: They all want to see the U.S. out of the region physically, politically, and economically. They don't want to destroy our way of life, they just want to be able to live their way of life in their homeland(s). The fact that we may not agree with some of what that way of life entails (and there are some egregious facets to it to be sure) and that we don't like the way they want to develop natural resources that rightfully belong to them is not an acceptable motive for our actions over the past several decades.
The attempt to tell these people what to do, when to do it, and to do all of it with a smile and shows of grateful subservience only serves to strengthen the resolve of these people to resist these efforts. They're not stupid. They know when they're being told what to do. And it's certainly not the first time, either.
With tours extended, multiple deployments and new tactics that put them in bare posts in greater danger, they feel leaders are out of touch with reality.
"I don't see any progress. Just us getting killed," said Spc. Yvenson Tertulien, one of those in the dining hall in Yousifiya, 10 miles south of Baghdad, as Bush's speech aired last month. "I don't want to be here anymore."
Arthur's latest post highlights the oft overlooked and/or actively denied reality of the deliberate manner in which the U. S. has forced its will upon the nations of the world merely for the sake of doing so.
He cites a passage from The March of Folly by Barbara Tuchman, part of which follows:
Wooden-headedness, the "Don't-confuse-me-with-the-facts" habit, is a universal folly never more conspicuous than at upper levels of Washington with respect to Vietnam. Its grossest fault was underestimation of North Vietnam's commitment to its goal. Enemy motivation was a missing element in American calculations, and Washington could therefore ignore all the evidence of nationalist fervor and of the passion for independence which as early as 1945 Hanoi had declared "no human force can any longer restrain." Washington could ignore General Leclerc's prediction that conquest would take half a million men and "Even then it could not be done." It could ignore the demonstration of elan and capacity that won victory over a French army with modern weapons at Dien Bien Phu, and all the continuing evidence thereafter.
American refusal to take the enemy's grim will and capacity into account has been explained by those responsible on the ground of ignorance of Vietnam's history, traditions and national character: there were "no experts available," in the words of one high-ranking official. But the longevity of Vietnamese resistance to foreign rule could have been learned from any history book on Indochina. Attentive consultation with French administrators whose official lives had been spent in Vietnam would have made up for the lack of American expertise. Even superficial American acquaintance with the area, when it began to supply reports, provided creditable information. Not ignorance, but refusal to credit the evidence and, more fundamentally, refusal to grant stature and fixed purpose to a "fourth-rate" Asiatic country were the determining factors, much as in the case of the British attitude toward the American colonies. The irony of history is inexorable.
The colonial Americans were committed to their independence from the rule of Imperial England under George III in a much stronger way than the British army regulars and hired Hessian guns were to quelling the rebellion (insurgency?).
Andrew Bacevich(h/t Arthur):
The communists of North Vietnam were less interested in promoting world revolution than in unifying their country under socialist rule. We deluded ourselves into thinking that we were defending freedom against totalitarianism.
They were much more committed to this goal than the French and later U. S. forces were to stopping the misperceived push for worldwide totalitarian revolution (which was ill communicated to the ranks anyway)
Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and the insurgent groups are all similar in at least one way: They all want to see the U.S. out of the region physically, politically, and economically. They don't want to destroy our way of life, they just want to be able to live their way of life in their homeland(s). The fact that we may not agree with some of what that way of life entails (and there are some egregious facets to it to be sure) and that we don't like the way they want to develop natural resources that rightfully belong to them is not an acceptable motive for our actions over the past several decades.
The attempt to tell these people what to do, when to do it, and to do all of it with a smile and shows of grateful subservience only serves to strengthen the resolve of these people to resist these efforts. They're not stupid. They know when they're being told what to do. And it's certainly not the first time, either.
Saturday, August 25, 2007
You can't look at both sides of a coin at the same time...
The beat on immigration goes on, in opposite directions from the same mouths.
SSDD:
Romney blasts 'sanctuary cities', calls for tough immigration policy
The Salt Lake Tribune new services
Article Last Updated: 08/22/2007 01:35:57 PM MDT
New York Times News Service
Romney's campaign radio commercial in the early battleground states of Iowa and New Hampshire challenged the "sanctuary policies" of "cities like Newark, San Francisco and New York" that bar local police from alerting federal immigration authorities about arrests of undocumented immigrants.
At least 32 communities and counties nationwide have adopted sanctuary policies, according to a 2006 study by the Congressional Research Service. The cities include: Houston, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Baltimore, Detroit, Minneapolis, New York, Austin and Seattle.
"Sanctuary cities become magnets that encourage illegal immigration and undermine secure borders," Romney's campaign ad said.
And yet:
CAMILO MEJIA: The military is aggressively targeting Hispanics to join the military. Some people may have heard about the DREAM Act, through which the military hopes to recruit undocumented youth who are graduating from high school. The proposal is to serve two years in the military or go to college for two years and then get your green card, which 65,000 people who are undocumented and graduate from high school and are not eligible for financial aid from the federal government are not going to be able to go to college for two years. So, you know, this is one of the ways in which, you know, the military is targeting young immigrants, mostly Latinos, to join the military. You know, it’s -- again, it’s a poverty -- it’s an immigration draft that’s going on.
And yet:
EL PASO, Texas (Reuters) - The mayors of the Texan city of El Paso and the Mexican city of Juarez led a protest by dozens of people on Saturday against a planned border wall to stem illegal immigration into America.
The protesters held hands across the Paso del Norte Bridge, which spans the Rio Grande and connects the downtown cores of the two cities.
El Paso Mayor John Cook and Juarez Mayor Hector Murguia Lardizabal embraced at the top of the bridge.
So, we want to keep these folks out of the country but don't mind them enlisting in our armed forces to fight our ill conceived wars of preemption and aggression, not to mention cleaning our houses, mowing our lawns, and cooking that yummy mexican food we love?
This, my friends, is a classic example of wanting to have one's cake and eat it too.
Can't.
Be.
Done.
Who is gonna build that damn wall, anyway?
SSDD:
Romney blasts 'sanctuary cities', calls for tough immigration policy
The Salt Lake Tribune new services
Article Last Updated: 08/22/2007 01:35:57 PM MDT
New York Times News Service
Romney's campaign radio commercial in the early battleground states of Iowa and New Hampshire challenged the "sanctuary policies" of "cities like Newark, San Francisco and New York" that bar local police from alerting federal immigration authorities about arrests of undocumented immigrants.
At least 32 communities and counties nationwide have adopted sanctuary policies, according to a 2006 study by the Congressional Research Service. The cities include: Houston, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Baltimore, Detroit, Minneapolis, New York, Austin and Seattle.
"Sanctuary cities become magnets that encourage illegal immigration and undermine secure borders," Romney's campaign ad said.
And yet:
CAMILO MEJIA: The military is aggressively targeting Hispanics to join the military. Some people may have heard about the DREAM Act, through which the military hopes to recruit undocumented youth who are graduating from high school. The proposal is to serve two years in the military or go to college for two years and then get your green card, which 65,000 people who are undocumented and graduate from high school and are not eligible for financial aid from the federal government are not going to be able to go to college for two years. So, you know, this is one of the ways in which, you know, the military is targeting young immigrants, mostly Latinos, to join the military. You know, it’s -- again, it’s a poverty -- it’s an immigration draft that’s going on.
And yet:
EL PASO, Texas (Reuters) - The mayors of the Texan city of El Paso and the Mexican city of Juarez led a protest by dozens of people on Saturday against a planned border wall to stem illegal immigration into America.
The protesters held hands across the Paso del Norte Bridge, which spans the Rio Grande and connects the downtown cores of the two cities.
El Paso Mayor John Cook and Juarez Mayor Hector Murguia Lardizabal embraced at the top of the bridge.
So, we want to keep these folks out of the country but don't mind them enlisting in our armed forces to fight our ill conceived wars of preemption and aggression, not to mention cleaning our houses, mowing our lawns, and cooking that yummy mexican food we love?
This, my friends, is a classic example of wanting to have one's cake and eat it too.
Can't.
Be.
Done.
Who is gonna build that damn wall, anyway?
Friday, August 24, 2007
Say it again, brother
Hal:
The war cannot be won militarily. The war cannot be won militarily. The war cannot be won militarily. The war cannot be won militarily. The war cannot be won militarily.
What are those pigs good for, anyway?
The war cannot be won militarily. The war cannot be won militarily. The war cannot be won militarily. The war cannot be won militarily. The war cannot be won militarily.
What are those pigs good for, anyway?
Thursday, August 23, 2007
The Walrus Weighs In
Permit me to utilize the Leatherneck Weapons Inspector to debunk him:
John Bolton:
I hope Iran understands that we are very serious, that we are determined they are not going to get a nuclear weapon capability, and unless they change the strategic decision they’ve been pursuing for close to 20 years, that that’s something they better factor into their calculations.
Scott Ritter:
When the Iranians operate their cascades for any significant duration of time, every single time, the cascades self destruct. This president's trying to tell us that we are at imminent risk from the Iranians. That this Nuclear program represents a real and imminent threat to the security of the United States of America. The Vice President is creating a sense of urgency. The Media is hyping up that we're one year away from a Nuclear armed Iran. I'm telling you right now, even if Iran has a covert Nuclear weapons program, which no one has demonstrated they have, they couldn't build a Nuclear weapon if they wanted to. They just don't have the technological capacity.
Now, how do we know all this? From the inspectors.
Contrary to popular belief, Iran has not kicked out the inspectors.
Iran is operating 100% in compliance with it's legal obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Iran is permitted, under Article 4 of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, to enrich Uranium. We are demanding that Iran be denied that which it is legally allowed to do when we say it must suspend it's Uranium enrichment program.
But even more than this, we're told that the Iranians are "picking a fight," that they're "searching for a conflict."
Iran fought an eight year war with Iraq. Hundreds of thousands of Iranians were killed. Their economy was devastated. They are just beginning to recover from that and they are going through a serious period of economic difficulty with high unemployment. This nation awash in a sea of oil spends 30 billion dollars a year to import gasoline because they don't have the refining capacity to produce indigenous gasoline. They're not looking for a fight. The last thing they want is a fight with the world's sole remaining superpower.
I don't really have anything to add except perhaps this:
NIR ROSEN:
I am skeptical that they are actually sending fighters to Iraq. I just don’t see the need for it. Iraqis are very well trained. [Iran] might be sending some weapons. But then again, there’s also a black market in weapons, so just because a weapon is Iranian doesn’t mean that it’s necessarily been sold by Iran.
John Bolton:
I hope Iran understands that we are very serious, that we are determined they are not going to get a nuclear weapon capability, and unless they change the strategic decision they’ve been pursuing for close to 20 years, that that’s something they better factor into their calculations.
Scott Ritter:
When the Iranians operate their cascades for any significant duration of time, every single time, the cascades self destruct. This president's trying to tell us that we are at imminent risk from the Iranians. That this Nuclear program represents a real and imminent threat to the security of the United States of America. The Vice President is creating a sense of urgency. The Media is hyping up that we're one year away from a Nuclear armed Iran. I'm telling you right now, even if Iran has a covert Nuclear weapons program, which no one has demonstrated they have, they couldn't build a Nuclear weapon if they wanted to. They just don't have the technological capacity.
Now, how do we know all this? From the inspectors.
Contrary to popular belief, Iran has not kicked out the inspectors.
Iran is operating 100% in compliance with it's legal obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Iran is permitted, under Article 4 of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, to enrich Uranium. We are demanding that Iran be denied that which it is legally allowed to do when we say it must suspend it's Uranium enrichment program.
But even more than this, we're told that the Iranians are "picking a fight," that they're "searching for a conflict."
Iran fought an eight year war with Iraq. Hundreds of thousands of Iranians were killed. Their economy was devastated. They are just beginning to recover from that and they are going through a serious period of economic difficulty with high unemployment. This nation awash in a sea of oil spends 30 billion dollars a year to import gasoline because they don't have the refining capacity to produce indigenous gasoline. They're not looking for a fight. The last thing they want is a fight with the world's sole remaining superpower.
I don't really have anything to add except perhaps this:
NIR ROSEN:
I am skeptical that they are actually sending fighters to Iraq. I just don’t see the need for it. Iraqis are very well trained. [Iran] might be sending some weapons. But then again, there’s also a black market in weapons, so just because a weapon is Iranian doesn’t mean that it’s necessarily been sold by Iran.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
The Grumbling Bear
Stirring and beginning to mark out territory:
The Guardian:
Luke Harding in Moscow
Wednesday August 22, 2007
Vladimir Putin announced ambitious plans to revive Russia's military power and restore its role as the world's leading producer of military aircraft yesterday.
The new emphasis on Russia's revived military prowess comes against a backdrop of deteriorating relations with the west. Mr Putin has denounced the US's missile defence plans in Europe, scrapped an agreement with Nato on conventional armed forces, and grabbed a large, if symbolic, chunk of the Arctic.
San Diego Union Tribune:
By Guy Faulconbridge
REUTERS
6:15 a.m. August 2, 2007
MOSCOW – Russian explorers dived deep below the North Pole in a submersible on Thursday and planted a national flag on the seabed to stake a symbolic claim to the energy riches of the Arctic.
Russia wants to extend right up to the North Pole the territory it controls in the Arctic, believed to hold vast reserves of untapped oil and natural gas.
The first item is no doubt a reaction to this inane policy revival on the part of the Bush administration, using the onionskin paper thin justification of a ballistic missile threat to its allies from rogue nuclear nations.
The second item would seem to be more of an insurance policy on the part of Russia in reaction to the continuation of the neo cons' undeterable urge to expand the conflict in the Middle East that could spiral out of the control of anyone or any nation.
Like every other nation, Russia recognizes that energy is the key to survival and a source of energy needs to be secured in order to ensure the security of that survival. The U. S. is and has been for decades making more and more aggressive inroads into the energy resources right in Russia's backyard with no regard for the rights of the nations and peoples who can lay rightful claim to those resources. So, two options present themselves and are being acted upon by Russia. The strategic economic one, in the form of the Arctic claim, and the strategic military option in the form of the increased military production and patrolling:
By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent
Last Updated: 2:11pm BST 22/08/2007
Eurofighter Typhoon jets scrambled for the first time to intercept Russian nuclear bombers approaching British air space, the Ministry of Defence said yesterday.
The Tu-95 Bear nuclear bombers were detected over the Atlantic on Friday, the RAF said yesterday.
Tornado F3 fighters and two Typhoons were scrambled from RAF Leuchars in Scotland.
And let's not forget the Dragon, who also has a big vested interest in the resources of the region:
Iran has become the top oil exporter to China, surpassing Saudi Arabia. Official Iranian statistics have stated that China's oil imports from Iran more than doubled in 2006. In June 2007, China reportedly imported around 567,000 barrels per day (b/d).
As Scott Ritter said in a discussion with Seymour Hersch:
Our oil-based economy is operating on the margins, as we speak. We only have 1.0% to 1.5% excess production capacity. If you take the Iranian oil off the market, which is the first thing the Iranians will do, we automatically drop to around minus-4%, which means there ain’t enough oil out there to support the globe’s thirst for oil, especially America’s thirst for oil. And we're not the only ones drinking it. You think for a second the Chinese and the Indians, the world’s two largest developing economies, are going to say, “Hey, Uncle Sam, we’ll put everything on hold, so we can divert oil resources, so you can feed your oil addiction, because you attacked Iran”?
Energy. It's what inevitably brought down Hitler's Germany when he made the fatal decision to invade the Soviet Union when he did which was in response to the aggressive moves that Stalin was making towards the Ploesti Oil fields in Romania. The Wehrmacht was nothing but a useless mass of steel with out petroleum based products. The decision was made in June of 1941, and the course of the war was essentially set, although it would take several years and millions of lives to secure the ultimate result.
The Japanese push in the Pacific six months later was essentially a similar grab for resources, although not in reaction to aggressive moves by rival nations but to the power vacuum left in the Pacific following the marginalization of the European colonial powers in 1940 with the fall of France and the Battle of Britain and the tying up of the Soviet military in the West six months earlier. Ultimately the defeat of Germany and the over stretching of the Japanese Army and Navy (along with key battles such as Midway) determined the outcome of the war in the Pacific.
Energy. Once again rearing its ugly head as the primary reason that nations threaten and attack each other. I have a sinking feeling that even when the so called 'renewable' energy sources become the preferred option people will find ways to fight over the wind and sunlight.
And speaking of Solar Power:
The Guardian:
Luke Harding in Moscow
Wednesday August 22, 2007
Vladimir Putin announced ambitious plans to revive Russia's military power and restore its role as the world's leading producer of military aircraft yesterday.
The new emphasis on Russia's revived military prowess comes against a backdrop of deteriorating relations with the west. Mr Putin has denounced the US's missile defence plans in Europe, scrapped an agreement with Nato on conventional armed forces, and grabbed a large, if symbolic, chunk of the Arctic.
San Diego Union Tribune:
By Guy Faulconbridge
REUTERS
6:15 a.m. August 2, 2007
MOSCOW – Russian explorers dived deep below the North Pole in a submersible on Thursday and planted a national flag on the seabed to stake a symbolic claim to the energy riches of the Arctic.
Russia wants to extend right up to the North Pole the territory it controls in the Arctic, believed to hold vast reserves of untapped oil and natural gas.
The first item is no doubt a reaction to this inane policy revival on the part of the Bush administration, using the onionskin paper thin justification of a ballistic missile threat to its allies from rogue nuclear nations.
The second item would seem to be more of an insurance policy on the part of Russia in reaction to the continuation of the neo cons' undeterable urge to expand the conflict in the Middle East that could spiral out of the control of anyone or any nation.
Like every other nation, Russia recognizes that energy is the key to survival and a source of energy needs to be secured in order to ensure the security of that survival. The U. S. is and has been for decades making more and more aggressive inroads into the energy resources right in Russia's backyard with no regard for the rights of the nations and peoples who can lay rightful claim to those resources. So, two options present themselves and are being acted upon by Russia. The strategic economic one, in the form of the Arctic claim, and the strategic military option in the form of the increased military production and patrolling:
By Thomas Harding, Defence Correspondent
Last Updated: 2:11pm BST 22/08/2007
Eurofighter Typhoon jets scrambled for the first time to intercept Russian nuclear bombers approaching British air space, the Ministry of Defence said yesterday.
The Tu-95 Bear nuclear bombers were detected over the Atlantic on Friday, the RAF said yesterday.
Tornado F3 fighters and two Typhoons were scrambled from RAF Leuchars in Scotland.
And let's not forget the Dragon, who also has a big vested interest in the resources of the region:
Iran has become the top oil exporter to China, surpassing Saudi Arabia. Official Iranian statistics have stated that China's oil imports from Iran more than doubled in 2006. In June 2007, China reportedly imported around 567,000 barrels per day (b/d).
As Scott Ritter said in a discussion with Seymour Hersch:
Our oil-based economy is operating on the margins, as we speak. We only have 1.0% to 1.5% excess production capacity. If you take the Iranian oil off the market, which is the first thing the Iranians will do, we automatically drop to around minus-4%, which means there ain’t enough oil out there to support the globe’s thirst for oil, especially America’s thirst for oil. And we're not the only ones drinking it. You think for a second the Chinese and the Indians, the world’s two largest developing economies, are going to say, “Hey, Uncle Sam, we’ll put everything on hold, so we can divert oil resources, so you can feed your oil addiction, because you attacked Iran”?
Energy. It's what inevitably brought down Hitler's Germany when he made the fatal decision to invade the Soviet Union when he did which was in response to the aggressive moves that Stalin was making towards the Ploesti Oil fields in Romania. The Wehrmacht was nothing but a useless mass of steel with out petroleum based products. The decision was made in June of 1941, and the course of the war was essentially set, although it would take several years and millions of lives to secure the ultimate result.
The Japanese push in the Pacific six months later was essentially a similar grab for resources, although not in reaction to aggressive moves by rival nations but to the power vacuum left in the Pacific following the marginalization of the European colonial powers in 1940 with the fall of France and the Battle of Britain and the tying up of the Soviet military in the West six months earlier. Ultimately the defeat of Germany and the over stretching of the Japanese Army and Navy (along with key battles such as Midway) determined the outcome of the war in the Pacific.
Energy. Once again rearing its ugly head as the primary reason that nations threaten and attack each other. I have a sinking feeling that even when the so called 'renewable' energy sources become the preferred option people will find ways to fight over the wind and sunlight.
And speaking of Solar Power:
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Setting a good example...
There's been a lot of angst and gnashing of teeth lately over a series of products ranging from clothing to hygiene items manufactured in China that are, shall we say, of sub par quality. Many folks are asking why this has appeared so suddenly, and I think I may have a theory (first of all it's not all that sudden):
2002:
The US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has announced the following recalls:
Hair Dryers. Remington Products Co, LLC has announced the recall of about 3,000 hair dryers made in China. The hair dryers are not equipped with an appliance leakage current interrupter plug to cut off electrical current in case of contact with water.
Extension Cords. STK International Inc has recalled approximately 190,000 extension cords made in China, which have undersized wires, presenting a shock hazard.
And second of all, when the Chinese Communist government made the decision to move from corrupt Communism to corrupt Corporatism as the basic model for the country, who do you think they looked to for inspiration?
Ford:
On June 9, 1978, Ford Motor Company agreed to recall 1.5 million Ford Pinto and 30,000 Mercury Bobcat sedan and hatchback models for fuel tank design defects which made the vehicles susceptible to fire in the event of a moderate-speed rear end collision. The action was the result of investigations by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Office of Defect Investigations (Case #C7-38), sparked by a petition from Center for Auto Safety, publicity generated by national publication expose of the hazard (Mother Jones News Magazine, "Pinto Madness" by Mark Dowie, Sept/Oct, 1977) and publicity over the largest punitive damages awarded by a California jury to a young man who had been severely injured in a Pinto fuel tank fire (Grimshaw v Ford).
Chevrolet:
General Motors has refused to voluntarily recall and retrofit its pickup trucks with saddlebag gas tanks, even though its own internal records and testing experience in other models, and in proto-types, show that it has long mastered the engineering technology to enhance the safety of the gas tanks on these trucks.
Brunswick:
"Hey, Lou, I'll have anoth--" **CCCRRAACCKK** "WHOAAAAA!!" *THUD*
The following product safety recall was voluntarily conducted by the firm in cooperation with the CPSC. Consumers should stop using the product immediately unless otherwise instructed.
Name of Product: Frameworx Table Height Chairs and Bar Stools
Units: About 22,400
Manufacturer: Brunswick Bowling & Billiards Corp., of Lake Forest, Ill.
Hazard: The down shaft on the seat plate assembly can fracture, which can cause an occupant of the seat to fall.
Incidents/Injuries: Brunswick has received reports of 20 incidents in which the seat plate assembly has failed. Three injuries resulting from falling from a seat have been reported.
Good old American ingenuity, marketing and sales skills. That's where the Chinese looked for guidance. Of course, at least one of the men in charge let his conscience get the better of him:
Zhang Shuhong, the boss of a major supplier to Mattel, hung himself at the weekend after his export licence was suspended and 1.5m products withdrawn because of safety fears about toys sold in the US, Britain and other parts of Europe.
But he may have just been taking matters into his own hands before the Chinese government decided to:
The FDA issued a warning Friday after toothpaste containing DEG was detected in a shipment seized at the border. The government says at least 100 people died after taking cough syrup containing DEG, an industrial solvent used in paint and antifreeze.
China's dismal drug-safety record was underscored this week by a Chinese court's decision to sentence to death the country's former top drug regulator.
You couldn't make this shit up no matter how hard you tried.
2002:
The US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has announced the following recalls:
Hair Dryers. Remington Products Co, LLC has announced the recall of about 3,000 hair dryers made in China. The hair dryers are not equipped with an appliance leakage current interrupter plug to cut off electrical current in case of contact with water.
Extension Cords. STK International Inc has recalled approximately 190,000 extension cords made in China, which have undersized wires, presenting a shock hazard.
And second of all, when the Chinese Communist government made the decision to move from corrupt Communism to corrupt Corporatism as the basic model for the country, who do you think they looked to for inspiration?
Ford:
On June 9, 1978, Ford Motor Company agreed to recall 1.5 million Ford Pinto and 30,000 Mercury Bobcat sedan and hatchback models for fuel tank design defects which made the vehicles susceptible to fire in the event of a moderate-speed rear end collision. The action was the result of investigations by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Office of Defect Investigations (Case #C7-38), sparked by a petition from Center for Auto Safety, publicity generated by national publication expose of the hazard (Mother Jones News Magazine, "Pinto Madness" by Mark Dowie, Sept/Oct, 1977) and publicity over the largest punitive damages awarded by a California jury to a young man who had been severely injured in a Pinto fuel tank fire (Grimshaw v Ford).
Chevrolet:
General Motors has refused to voluntarily recall and retrofit its pickup trucks with saddlebag gas tanks, even though its own internal records and testing experience in other models, and in proto-types, show that it has long mastered the engineering technology to enhance the safety of the gas tanks on these trucks.
Brunswick:
"Hey, Lou, I'll have anoth--" **CCCRRAACCKK** "WHOAAAAA!!" *THUD*
The following product safety recall was voluntarily conducted by the firm in cooperation with the CPSC. Consumers should stop using the product immediately unless otherwise instructed.
Name of Product: Frameworx Table Height Chairs and Bar Stools
Units: About 22,400
Manufacturer: Brunswick Bowling & Billiards Corp., of Lake Forest, Ill.
Hazard: The down shaft on the seat plate assembly can fracture, which can cause an occupant of the seat to fall.
Incidents/Injuries: Brunswick has received reports of 20 incidents in which the seat plate assembly has failed. Three injuries resulting from falling from a seat have been reported.
Good old American ingenuity, marketing and sales skills. That's where the Chinese looked for guidance. Of course, at least one of the men in charge let his conscience get the better of him:
Zhang Shuhong, the boss of a major supplier to Mattel, hung himself at the weekend after his export licence was suspended and 1.5m products withdrawn because of safety fears about toys sold in the US, Britain and other parts of Europe.
But he may have just been taking matters into his own hands before the Chinese government decided to:
The FDA issued a warning Friday after toothpaste containing DEG was detected in a shipment seized at the border. The government says at least 100 people died after taking cough syrup containing DEG, an industrial solvent used in paint and antifreeze.
China's dismal drug-safety record was underscored this week by a Chinese court's decision to sentence to death the country's former top drug regulator.
You couldn't make this shit up no matter how hard you tried.
Really??? (Mark II)
Reuters:
By Paul Tait
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq has made "extremely disappointing" progress towards reconciling its warring sects, the U.S. ambassador said on Tuesday, just three weeks before he is due to present a pivotal report on Iraq to the U.S. Congress.
ADVERTISEMENT
In some of the bluntest language used by a U.S. official towards Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's fractured coalition government, ambassador Ryan Crocker also warned that U.S. support for Maliki's administration was not open-ended.
Only the U. S. Congress is allowed to take the entire month of August off!!
"Progress on national level issues has been extremely disappointing and frustrating to all concerned, to us, to Iraqis, to the Iraqi leadership itself," Crocker said.
"We do expect results, as do the Iraqi people, and our support is not a blank check," he told reporters in Baghdad.
Because we have other countries to bomb, dammit!!!
See?
AMY GOODMAN: Nir, what about Iran? What about the whole Bush-Cheney push to attack Iran? And what is the significance of this? And how does it play out in these countries?
NIR ROSEN: Well, I think we’re dealing with a mentality on the part of our administration that nobody else is going to have the guts to take on Iran in the future, the next president, so if we don’t do it, who’s going to do it, and we’ll be vindicated in the future just like Reagan was vindicated, allegedly, for bringing down the Soviet Union. So they have this long-term view of how history will treat them, and if they don’t take down Iran, nobody else will.
By Paul Tait
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq has made "extremely disappointing" progress towards reconciling its warring sects, the U.S. ambassador said on Tuesday, just three weeks before he is due to present a pivotal report on Iraq to the U.S. Congress.
ADVERTISEMENT
In some of the bluntest language used by a U.S. official towards Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's fractured coalition government, ambassador Ryan Crocker also warned that U.S. support for Maliki's administration was not open-ended.
Only the U. S. Congress is allowed to take the entire month of August off!!
"Progress on national level issues has been extremely disappointing and frustrating to all concerned, to us, to Iraqis, to the Iraqi leadership itself," Crocker said.
"We do expect results, as do the Iraqi people, and our support is not a blank check," he told reporters in Baghdad.
Because we have other countries to bomb, dammit!!!
See?
AMY GOODMAN: Nir, what about Iran? What about the whole Bush-Cheney push to attack Iran? And what is the significance of this? And how does it play out in these countries?
NIR ROSEN: Well, I think we’re dealing with a mentality on the part of our administration that nobody else is going to have the guts to take on Iran in the future, the next president, so if we don’t do it, who’s going to do it, and we’ll be vindicated in the future just like Reagan was vindicated, allegedly, for bringing down the Soviet Union. So they have this long-term view of how history will treat them, and if they don’t take down Iran, nobody else will.
Monday, August 20, 2007
On to Damascus!
Since they've got the best quality steel to be found and our own production industry went overseas almost fifty years ago...
Holy Joe, courtesy of the (surprise, surprise, surprise!) WSJ:
The United States is at last making significant progress against al Qaeda in Iraq--but the road to victory now requires cutting off al Qaeda's road to Iraq through Damascus.
Syrian President Bashar al Assad cannot seriously claim that he is incapable of exercising effective control over the main airport in his capital city. Syria is a police state, with sprawling domestic intelligence and security services. The notion that al Qaeda recruits are slipping into and through the Damascus airport unbeknownst to the local Mukhabarat is totally unbelievable.
Ah, Diplomacy... what a beautiful thing...
Holy Joe, courtesy of the (surprise, surprise, surprise!) WSJ:
The United States is at last making significant progress against al Qaeda in Iraq--but the road to victory now requires cutting off al Qaeda's road to Iraq through Damascus.
Syrian President Bashar al Assad cannot seriously claim that he is incapable of exercising effective control over the main airport in his capital city. Syria is a police state, with sprawling domestic intelligence and security services. The notion that al Qaeda recruits are slipping into and through the Damascus airport unbeknownst to the local Mukhabarat is totally unbelievable.
Ah, Diplomacy... what a beautiful thing...
Really?!?
Apparently any trait indicating foresight must be surgically removed from one before running for public office.
DN1:
Dems: Wiretap Approval Could Grant Bush Extra Powers
Congressional Democrats are acknowledging President Bush’s broad new spying powers approved this month could be even more extensive than initially claimed. Ambiguous language defining “electronic surveillance” means the so-called Protect America of 2007 Act could go well beyond wiretapping to permit physical searches and financial record-gathering -- all without court approval. The admission comes amidst news the Bush administration has privately said it won’t be held to those limits the legislation does set on surveillance activities. The New York Times reports Justice Department officials refused repeated entreaties to commit to following Congressional rules at a private meeting last week. Participants in the meeting say assistant attorney general for national security Ken Wainstein told former Justice Department lawyer Bruce Fein the administration does not consider itself bound by Congressional restrictions.
DN1:
Dems: Wiretap Approval Could Grant Bush Extra Powers
Congressional Democrats are acknowledging President Bush’s broad new spying powers approved this month could be even more extensive than initially claimed. Ambiguous language defining “electronic surveillance” means the so-called Protect America of 2007 Act could go well beyond wiretapping to permit physical searches and financial record-gathering -- all without court approval. The admission comes amidst news the Bush administration has privately said it won’t be held to those limits the legislation does set on surveillance activities. The New York Times reports Justice Department officials refused repeated entreaties to commit to following Congressional rules at a private meeting last week. Participants in the meeting say assistant attorney general for national security Ken Wainstein told former Justice Department lawyer Bruce Fein the administration does not consider itself bound by Congressional restrictions.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Another chip of the old block...
courtesy of the current administration's hammer and chisel:
Article 1:
Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Not so fast, my friend...
Raw Story:
A US anti-war group has been warned it will be fined 10,000 dollars if it does not remove posters in Washington announcing a march in the capital next month against US involvement in Iraq, a spokeswoman said Wednesday.
1937;
"First they came for the Communists but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out;
Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists but I was not one of them, so I did not speak out;
Then they came for the Jews but I was not Jewish so I did not speak out.
And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me."
Martin Niemoller, 1892-1984
Arthur Silber:
THREE: Tell every politician, Democratic or Republican, that they must stop repeating the Bush administration propaganda on Iran. Above all, they must stop saying that "all options are on the table," which in this context can only refer to a threat to launch an unprovoked war against Iran.
FOUR: Contact every politician you know who appears on television or gives newspaper interviews, and tell them they must be sure to explain briefly in every appearance they make why an attack on Iran at present would be a monstrous crime. IN EVERY APPEARANCE. As I noted above, if this catastrophe is to be stopped, it must be made the NUMBER ONE TOPIC IN THE NATION. If you're well-known enough to create interviews or appearances for yourself, THEN DO IT. Talk about Iran, and why we must not attack that country in the present circumstances.
FIVE: Talk to everyone you can, at work, in your family, among friends, and at social gatherings. Explain the issues to them in a way that is appropriate for the relationship and the occasion, and urge them to take all these actions themselves. Explain briefly why this might be the most important battle they will ever fight.
Talk to them as much as you have to, and take all the time you can afford. Where you can, create more time for this work. Talk to as many people as you can, every single day.
That post was the one that propelled me into the current state of world event heavy blogging you've been reading for the past five months. Arthur has decided to move away from his focus on the looming (some might say already in progress) Iranian crisis in order to work on other essays. His stated reason is a decidedly obvious lack of effect. I'm not offended, but I believe that any discussion (or post) about the topic with anyone is potentially informative and eye opening. Even after the bombing begins and oil prices skyrocket:
SEYMOUR HERSH: But anyway, so the question then is -- we go to war -- tell us what happens next, in your view.
SCOTT RITTER: Well, it’s, you know -- it’s almost impossible to be 100% correct, but I’ll give you my best analysis. The Iranians will use the weapon that is the most effective weapon, because the key for Iran -- you know, Iran can’t afford, if this -- remember, the regime wants to stay in power, so they can’t afford a strategy that gets the American people to recognize three years in that, oops, we made a mistake. I mean, if that was Saddam’s strategy, it failed for him, because he’s out of power. Yeah, we realize we made a mistake now in Iraq, but the regime is gone. So the Iranians realize that they have to inflict pain upfront. The pain is not going to be inflicted militarily, because we're not going to commit numbers of ground forces on the ground that can cause that pain. The pain will come economically.
Our oil-based economy is operating on the margins, as we speak. We only have 1.0% to 1.5% excess production capacity. If you take the Iranian oil off the market, which is the first thing the Iranians will do, we automatically drop to around minus-4%, which means there ain’t enough oil out there to support the globe’s thirst for oil, especially America’s thirst for oil. And we're not the only ones drinking it? You think for a second the Chinese and the Indians, the world’s two largest developing economies, are going to say, “Hey, Uncle Sam, we’ll put everything on hold, so we can divert oil resources, so you can feed your oil addiction, because you attacked Iran”?
And it’s not just Iranian oil that will go off the market. Why do you think we sent minesweepers up there? We’ve got to keep the Straits of Hormuz open. The Iranians will shut it down that quick. They’ll also shut down oil production in the western oil fields of Saudi Arabia. They’ll shut down Kuwaiti oil production. They’ll shut down oil production in the United Arab Emirates. They’ll shut down whatever remaining oil production there is in Iraq.
The bottom line is, within two days of our decision to initiate an attack on Iran, every single one of you is going to be feeling the consequences of that in your pocketbook. And it’s only going to get worse. This is not something that only I recognize. Ask Dick Lugar what information he’s getting from big business, who are saying, “We can’t afford to go to war with Iran.”
I'll be writing about how much of an insane folly any sort of action against Iran was and how the only recourse is to get the Hell out and leave these people and their natural resources alone for them to develop and sell (or not) on their own, for whatever reason they deem fit for the welfare of their own nation and people:
SCOTT RITTER: Well, there can be no doubt that Iran has plenty of oil, but that oil is the only thing Iran has going for it, in terms of a viable world-class economy. In 1976, the Shah of Iran came to the United States, sent his representatives to intercede and say, “Look, we’ve done an analysis, and we’ve got a finite amount of oil. And right now we need to export it. And if we don't export it, we don't make money, etc. We don't have enough oil to sustain this. We need to come up with an indigenous energy policy that frees up our oil for exportation. We want to use nuclear energy.” And the U.S. government went, “Good idea, Shah. We're all for it.” That was Gerald Ford.
The chief of staff of the White House at the time was Dick Cheney. The Secretary of Defense was Donald Rumsfeld. So, this argument that both Cheney and Rumsfeld put out today that Iran is a nation awash in a sea of oil, there is no need for a nuclear energy program, they both supported Iran's goals of achieving nuclear energy in 1976. Not only nuclear energy, but they also supported the Shah when he said, “We cannot allow a nuclear energy program’s fuel to be held hostage by the vagaries of sanctions and war. We need an indigenous fuel-manufacturing capability inclusive of the full uranium enrichment process.” And guess what the U.S. government said in 1976. “No problem, Shah. Good deal.”
So taking that into consideration along with the recent reminders from 1994 should we call this current version of the Shooter "Mark III"?
Article 1:
Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Not so fast, my friend...
Raw Story:
A US anti-war group has been warned it will be fined 10,000 dollars if it does not remove posters in Washington announcing a march in the capital next month against US involvement in Iraq, a spokeswoman said Wednesday.
1937;
"First they came for the Communists but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out;
Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists but I was not one of them, so I did not speak out;
Then they came for the Jews but I was not Jewish so I did not speak out.
And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me."
Martin Niemoller, 1892-1984
Arthur Silber:
THREE: Tell every politician, Democratic or Republican, that they must stop repeating the Bush administration propaganda on Iran. Above all, they must stop saying that "all options are on the table," which in this context can only refer to a threat to launch an unprovoked war against Iran.
FOUR: Contact every politician you know who appears on television or gives newspaper interviews, and tell them they must be sure to explain briefly in every appearance they make why an attack on Iran at present would be a monstrous crime. IN EVERY APPEARANCE. As I noted above, if this catastrophe is to be stopped, it must be made the NUMBER ONE TOPIC IN THE NATION. If you're well-known enough to create interviews or appearances for yourself, THEN DO IT. Talk about Iran, and why we must not attack that country in the present circumstances.
FIVE: Talk to everyone you can, at work, in your family, among friends, and at social gatherings. Explain the issues to them in a way that is appropriate for the relationship and the occasion, and urge them to take all these actions themselves. Explain briefly why this might be the most important battle they will ever fight.
Talk to them as much as you have to, and take all the time you can afford. Where you can, create more time for this work. Talk to as many people as you can, every single day.
That post was the one that propelled me into the current state of world event heavy blogging you've been reading for the past five months. Arthur has decided to move away from his focus on the looming (some might say already in progress) Iranian crisis in order to work on other essays. His stated reason is a decidedly obvious lack of effect. I'm not offended, but I believe that any discussion (or post) about the topic with anyone is potentially informative and eye opening. Even after the bombing begins and oil prices skyrocket:
SEYMOUR HERSH: But anyway, so the question then is -- we go to war -- tell us what happens next, in your view.
SCOTT RITTER: Well, it’s, you know -- it’s almost impossible to be 100% correct, but I’ll give you my best analysis. The Iranians will use the weapon that is the most effective weapon, because the key for Iran -- you know, Iran can’t afford, if this -- remember, the regime wants to stay in power, so they can’t afford a strategy that gets the American people to recognize three years in that, oops, we made a mistake. I mean, if that was Saddam’s strategy, it failed for him, because he’s out of power. Yeah, we realize we made a mistake now in Iraq, but the regime is gone. So the Iranians realize that they have to inflict pain upfront. The pain is not going to be inflicted militarily, because we're not going to commit numbers of ground forces on the ground that can cause that pain. The pain will come economically.
Our oil-based economy is operating on the margins, as we speak. We only have 1.0% to 1.5% excess production capacity. If you take the Iranian oil off the market, which is the first thing the Iranians will do, we automatically drop to around minus-4%, which means there ain’t enough oil out there to support the globe’s thirst for oil, especially America’s thirst for oil. And we're not the only ones drinking it? You think for a second the Chinese and the Indians, the world’s two largest developing economies, are going to say, “Hey, Uncle Sam, we’ll put everything on hold, so we can divert oil resources, so you can feed your oil addiction, because you attacked Iran”?
And it’s not just Iranian oil that will go off the market. Why do you think we sent minesweepers up there? We’ve got to keep the Straits of Hormuz open. The Iranians will shut it down that quick. They’ll also shut down oil production in the western oil fields of Saudi Arabia. They’ll shut down Kuwaiti oil production. They’ll shut down oil production in the United Arab Emirates. They’ll shut down whatever remaining oil production there is in Iraq.
The bottom line is, within two days of our decision to initiate an attack on Iran, every single one of you is going to be feeling the consequences of that in your pocketbook. And it’s only going to get worse. This is not something that only I recognize. Ask Dick Lugar what information he’s getting from big business, who are saying, “We can’t afford to go to war with Iran.”
I'll be writing about how much of an insane folly any sort of action against Iran was and how the only recourse is to get the Hell out and leave these people and their natural resources alone for them to develop and sell (or not) on their own, for whatever reason they deem fit for the welfare of their own nation and people:
SCOTT RITTER: Well, there can be no doubt that Iran has plenty of oil, but that oil is the only thing Iran has going for it, in terms of a viable world-class economy. In 1976, the Shah of Iran came to the United States, sent his representatives to intercede and say, “Look, we’ve done an analysis, and we’ve got a finite amount of oil. And right now we need to export it. And if we don't export it, we don't make money, etc. We don't have enough oil to sustain this. We need to come up with an indigenous energy policy that frees up our oil for exportation. We want to use nuclear energy.” And the U.S. government went, “Good idea, Shah. We're all for it.” That was Gerald Ford.
The chief of staff of the White House at the time was Dick Cheney. The Secretary of Defense was Donald Rumsfeld. So, this argument that both Cheney and Rumsfeld put out today that Iran is a nation awash in a sea of oil, there is no need for a nuclear energy program, they both supported Iran's goals of achieving nuclear energy in 1976. Not only nuclear energy, but they also supported the Shah when he said, “We cannot allow a nuclear energy program’s fuel to be held hostage by the vagaries of sanctions and war. We need an indigenous fuel-manufacturing capability inclusive of the full uranium enrichment process.” And guess what the U.S. government said in 1976. “No problem, Shah. Good deal.”
So taking that into consideration along with the recent reminders from 1994 should we call this current version of the Shooter "Mark III"?
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Anti Zydecoists? Terrorists?
DN!:
AMY GOODMAN: A drive-by shooting targeted Pacifica Radio station KPFT in Houston early Monday morning. A single bullet blasted through a Plexiglas window into the station's studio at 1:00 a.m. No one was injured in the shooting, but the bullet came within eighteen inches of Mary Thomas. She was hosting a Zydeco music program at the time.
More than thirty-five years ago, the Ku Klux Klan blew up the station's transmitters twice within the Houston station’s first year of operation. In October of 1970, five months after the first bombing, KPFT's transmitter was bombed for a second time, just as the station was broadcasting folk legend Arlo Guthrie's song “Alice's Restaurant.”
This came on the heels of the 'Summer Sizzle' fund raising campaign that was held to raise the funds needed to finish out the fiscal year for the operation of the station. Happily the goal was not only met but was exceeded by about 6 grand.
KPFT's Summer Sizzle finished a few hours early, achieved the goal of $135,000 and then some!
The unofficial final total has us at just over $141,000, about 5% over the goal!
Thanks to all the staff, programmers, phone volunteers and everyone who contributed.
AMY GOODMAN: Duane, do you think this could be politically motivated?
DUANE BRADLEY: Well, certainly we can't say it's not. There's nothing that’s been found yet in terms of who may have done this. KPFT has been, as you pointed out, at a point of controversy in Houston since day one, thirty-seven-and-a-half years ago. There were no overt threats to the station. We've received no email or voicemail or letters or anything. No one has claimed responsibility for it, but we do on Sunday evenings, prior to Mary's Zydeco Pas Sale show at midnight, from about 6:00 ’til midnight we have some relatively, you know, controversial programming, Afrocentric programming, that can sometimes be quite heated. And certainly we know from past experience that KPFT has been threatened and indeed attacked.
On Sunday morning during the Blues music show "Blues on the Move" Duane went into a bit of a testimonial about the vital importance of the support from the listeners to the existence of the station (member support accounts for 85% of the annual operating budget--the other 15% comes from a Corporation for Public Broadcasting grant) and spoke of the diversity of the programming as one of the station's greatest strengths. He admitted that there was programming on the station's schedule that he did not care for personally but was committed to supporting just as much as the programming that he does enjoy--not just because he is the GM--but because he believes in the mission and service that the station provides to the community that supports it.
I feel the same way about KPFT, as has been evidenced in past posts. It's an amazing resource, a relative rarity here in the U.S. (there are only five flagship Pacifica stations along with several hundred affiliates), one that will endure despite the attempts of individuals who only know how to speak in the language of force and therefore assume that that is all anyone else can understand.
KPFT bills itself as "Radio for Peace." I guess that is just to much for some folks to handle.
AMY GOODMAN: A drive-by shooting targeted Pacifica Radio station KPFT in Houston early Monday morning. A single bullet blasted through a Plexiglas window into the station's studio at 1:00 a.m. No one was injured in the shooting, but the bullet came within eighteen inches of Mary Thomas. She was hosting a Zydeco music program at the time.
More than thirty-five years ago, the Ku Klux Klan blew up the station's transmitters twice within the Houston station’s first year of operation. In October of 1970, five months after the first bombing, KPFT's transmitter was bombed for a second time, just as the station was broadcasting folk legend Arlo Guthrie's song “Alice's Restaurant.”
This came on the heels of the 'Summer Sizzle' fund raising campaign that was held to raise the funds needed to finish out the fiscal year for the operation of the station. Happily the goal was not only met but was exceeded by about 6 grand.
KPFT's Summer Sizzle finished a few hours early, achieved the goal of $135,000 and then some!
The unofficial final total has us at just over $141,000, about 5% over the goal!
Thanks to all the staff, programmers, phone volunteers and everyone who contributed.
AMY GOODMAN: Duane, do you think this could be politically motivated?
DUANE BRADLEY: Well, certainly we can't say it's not. There's nothing that’s been found yet in terms of who may have done this. KPFT has been, as you pointed out, at a point of controversy in Houston since day one, thirty-seven-and-a-half years ago. There were no overt threats to the station. We've received no email or voicemail or letters or anything. No one has claimed responsibility for it, but we do on Sunday evenings, prior to Mary's Zydeco Pas Sale show at midnight, from about 6:00 ’til midnight we have some relatively, you know, controversial programming, Afrocentric programming, that can sometimes be quite heated. And certainly we know from past experience that KPFT has been threatened and indeed attacked.
On Sunday morning during the Blues music show "Blues on the Move" Duane went into a bit of a testimonial about the vital importance of the support from the listeners to the existence of the station (member support accounts for 85% of the annual operating budget--the other 15% comes from a Corporation for Public Broadcasting grant) and spoke of the diversity of the programming as one of the station's greatest strengths. He admitted that there was programming on the station's schedule that he did not care for personally but was committed to supporting just as much as the programming that he does enjoy--not just because he is the GM--but because he believes in the mission and service that the station provides to the community that supports it.
I feel the same way about KPFT, as has been evidenced in past posts. It's an amazing resource, a relative rarity here in the U.S. (there are only five flagship Pacifica stations along with several hundred affiliates), one that will endure despite the attempts of individuals who only know how to speak in the language of force and therefore assume that that is all anyone else can understand.
KPFT bills itself as "Radio for Peace." I guess that is just to much for some folks to handle.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Exeunt the Brain, Stage Left...
MSNBC:
WASHINGTON - Karl Rove, President Bush’s close friend and chief political strategist, plans to leave the White House at the end of August, joining a lengthening line of senior officials heading for the exits in the final 1 1/2 years of the administration.
WASHINGTON - Karl Rove, President Bush’s close friend and chief political strategist, plans to leave the White House at the end of August, joining a lengthening line of senior officials heading for the exits in the final 1 1/2 years of the administration.
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Pro Life=Anti Woman
A few weeks ago I was talking with a good friend about the current political climate. When the subject of Abortion rights came up she stated that the main reason she felt the right to such procedures needs to be upheld and strengthened is the simple fact that, no matter what the law is, women in certain circumstances will seek access to them in whatever form they are being offered under whatever laws exist at the time.
Another passage from one of my favorite writers' novellas published in the anthology Different Seasons:
In those days [1935], a married pregnant woman was a radiant woman, sure of her position and proud of fulfilling what she considered to be the function God put her on Earth for. An unmarried pregnant woman was a trollop in the eyes of the world and apt to be a trollop in her own eyes as well. They were, in Ella Davidson's word, "easy," and in that world and that time, "easiness" was not quickly forgiven. Such women crept away to have their babies in other towns or cities. Some took pills or jumped from buildings. Others went to butcher abortionists with dirty hands or tried to do the job themselves; in my time as a physician I have seen four women die of blood loss before my eyes as the result of punctured wombs--in one case the puncturing was done by the jagged neck of a Dr. Pepper bottle that had been tied to the handle of a whiskbroom. It is hard to believe now that such things happened, but they did, gentlemen. They did. It was, quite simply, the worst situation a healthy young woman could find herself in.
The novella spans from the early 1970's to its culmination in the telling of the final tale, exerpted above, in 1980. 1980, when Roe v. Wade was still a fresh decision and the Pro Life movement had yet to grow into the multi headed beast it is today.
Arthur Silber:
There are a great many aspects of today's world that are variously horrifying, ghastly, destructive and appalling -- and among the very worst is an idea that appears to be rapidly gaining support: the noxious notion that all questions relating to abortion rights should be returned to the states. For many reasons, only a few of which are discussed below, this idea is completely incoherent as a matter of political theory, and it undercuts any defense of individual rights on the most fundamental level.If you give a damn at all about the liberty of a single human being, you should oppose all such attempts to your last breath.
The human being to which I refer is not the developing fetus, but the woman who carries the child. I well understand that many people believe that the fetus is a human being long before birth, with all the rights that attend to that designation. In the political context, I consider all such beliefs irrelevant, no matter how sincerely and deeply held. Only one ultimate point matters here: whether you think the developing fetus is a human being or not, the fetus is contained in and supported by the woman's body. If the woman's body did not exist, neither would the fetus. Only the woman's existence makes that of the fetus possible.
The fetus only exists because of the woman's body -- not yours, not that of some possibly corrupt and stupid politician in Washington, and not the body of some possibly ignorant and venal politician in a state legislature.
And now we find that there are instances of those rights being placed in the hands of individual Pharmacists:
Last week, a Federal court ruled that, despite Illinois law, pharmacists in Illinois can refuse to dispense emergency contraception. The state passed a law in 2005 that requires all pharmacies to dispense EC. As a result, Wal-Mart (and other companies) have disciplined pharmacists that refused to follow the rule. Then came the lawsuits and the bad news.
U.S. District Judge Jeanne Scott denied a request Tuesday by Wal-Mart to throw out a lawsuit filed by pharmacist Ethan Vandersand. Scott sided with Vandersand, who had claimed he was legally protected from discipline by the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act when he declined to dispense Plan B.
What's next? Pharmacists refusing to dispense physician prescribed
medications for diseases they might believe were contracted by behavior they might think is illegal or immoral? Where does the line get drawn? As Arthur went on to say in his post:
This is, finally, what the battle about abortion concerns. To the extent people choose to limit a woman's right to her own body, they accept and reinforce this endlessly destructive cultural tradition -- and they believe in Original Sin, even if they are atheists. Religion holds no exclusive claim to irrationality of this kind. They seek to control abortion because they seek salvation, whether they recognize that fact or not. To bring salvation nearer, women must be eternally subordinate, and they cannot be allowed to do anything other than what men allow.
And as George Carlin pointed out in his HBO special Back In Town:
If you're pre-born, you're fine, if you're pre school, you're fucked. Conservatives don't give a shit about yo until you reach military age. Then they think you are just fine, just what they've been looking for. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers.
Pro Life. Pro Life. These people aren't pro life, they're killing doctors! What kind of pro life is that? What, they'll do anything they can to save a fetus, but if it grows up to be a doctor, they just might have to kill it?
They're not pro life. You know what they are? They're Anti Woman.
It all boils down to this point:
Posted by theal2 on 08-03-2007 01:40 AM:
quote:Originally posted by live4love
How about some laws that would control men's bodies, like ...say.... it's illegal to ejaculate without the express intent to create life ?? How do you think men would feel about that ?
After all every sperm is a potential life right ??
Gee if we had some laws like that we would rarely need any abortions !!
( ridiculous right ? Just as ridiculous as trying to control womens' biological functions with laws )
Guys...if you don't want babies and don't want to have to pay for them them keep it in your pants or get a vasectomy. If you do want kids then make sure you discuss this before you have relations with a women. Find a partner that wants the same as you do !!
JMO
L4L
If men could get Pregnant, abortions would be legal at drive through fast food joints, the golf course, sports stadiums or whereever they choose.
Another passage from one of my favorite writers' novellas published in the anthology Different Seasons:
In those days [1935], a married pregnant woman was a radiant woman, sure of her position and proud of fulfilling what she considered to be the function God put her on Earth for. An unmarried pregnant woman was a trollop in the eyes of the world and apt to be a trollop in her own eyes as well. They were, in Ella Davidson's word, "easy," and in that world and that time, "easiness" was not quickly forgiven. Such women crept away to have their babies in other towns or cities. Some took pills or jumped from buildings. Others went to butcher abortionists with dirty hands or tried to do the job themselves; in my time as a physician I have seen four women die of blood loss before my eyes as the result of punctured wombs--in one case the puncturing was done by the jagged neck of a Dr. Pepper bottle that had been tied to the handle of a whiskbroom. It is hard to believe now that such things happened, but they did, gentlemen. They did. It was, quite simply, the worst situation a healthy young woman could find herself in.
The novella spans from the early 1970's to its culmination in the telling of the final tale, exerpted above, in 1980. 1980, when Roe v. Wade was still a fresh decision and the Pro Life movement had yet to grow into the multi headed beast it is today.
Arthur Silber:
There are a great many aspects of today's world that are variously horrifying, ghastly, destructive and appalling -- and among the very worst is an idea that appears to be rapidly gaining support: the noxious notion that all questions relating to abortion rights should be returned to the states. For many reasons, only a few of which are discussed below, this idea is completely incoherent as a matter of political theory, and it undercuts any defense of individual rights on the most fundamental level.If you give a damn at all about the liberty of a single human being, you should oppose all such attempts to your last breath.
The human being to which I refer is not the developing fetus, but the woman who carries the child. I well understand that many people believe that the fetus is a human being long before birth, with all the rights that attend to that designation. In the political context, I consider all such beliefs irrelevant, no matter how sincerely and deeply held. Only one ultimate point matters here: whether you think the developing fetus is a human being or not, the fetus is contained in and supported by the woman's body. If the woman's body did not exist, neither would the fetus. Only the woman's existence makes that of the fetus possible.
The fetus only exists because of the woman's body -- not yours, not that of some possibly corrupt and stupid politician in Washington, and not the body of some possibly ignorant and venal politician in a state legislature.
And now we find that there are instances of those rights being placed in the hands of individual Pharmacists:
Last week, a Federal court ruled that, despite Illinois law, pharmacists in Illinois can refuse to dispense emergency contraception. The state passed a law in 2005 that requires all pharmacies to dispense EC. As a result, Wal-Mart (and other companies) have disciplined pharmacists that refused to follow the rule. Then came the lawsuits and the bad news.
U.S. District Judge Jeanne Scott denied a request Tuesday by Wal-Mart to throw out a lawsuit filed by pharmacist Ethan Vandersand. Scott sided with Vandersand, who had claimed he was legally protected from discipline by the Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience Act when he declined to dispense Plan B.
What's next? Pharmacists refusing to dispense physician prescribed
medications for diseases they might believe were contracted by behavior they might think is illegal or immoral? Where does the line get drawn? As Arthur went on to say in his post:
This is, finally, what the battle about abortion concerns. To the extent people choose to limit a woman's right to her own body, they accept and reinforce this endlessly destructive cultural tradition -- and they believe in Original Sin, even if they are atheists. Religion holds no exclusive claim to irrationality of this kind. They seek to control abortion because they seek salvation, whether they recognize that fact or not. To bring salvation nearer, women must be eternally subordinate, and they cannot be allowed to do anything other than what men allow.
And as George Carlin pointed out in his HBO special Back In Town:
If you're pre-born, you're fine, if you're pre school, you're fucked. Conservatives don't give a shit about yo until you reach military age. Then they think you are just fine, just what they've been looking for. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers.
Pro Life. Pro Life. These people aren't pro life, they're killing doctors! What kind of pro life is that? What, they'll do anything they can to save a fetus, but if it grows up to be a doctor, they just might have to kill it?
They're not pro life. You know what they are? They're Anti Woman.
It all boils down to this point:
Posted by theal2 on 08-03-2007 01:40 AM:
quote:Originally posted by live4love
How about some laws that would control men's bodies, like ...say.... it's illegal to ejaculate without the express intent to create life ?? How do you think men would feel about that ?
After all every sperm is a potential life right ??
Gee if we had some laws like that we would rarely need any abortions !!
( ridiculous right ? Just as ridiculous as trying to control womens' biological functions with laws )
Guys...if you don't want babies and don't want to have to pay for them them keep it in your pants or get a vasectomy. If you do want kids then make sure you discuss this before you have relations with a women. Find a partner that wants the same as you do !!
JMO
L4L
If men could get Pregnant, abortions would be legal at drive through fast food joints, the golf course, sports stadiums or whereever they choose.
Friday, August 10, 2007
Easy Money...
Is anything but.
1929:
The Wall Street Crash of 1929, also known as the Crash of ’29, was one of the most devastating stock market crashes in American history. It consists of Black Thursday, the initial crash and Black Tuesday, the crash that caused general panic five days later.
The crash followed a speculative boom that had taken hold in the late 1920s, which had led millions of Americans to invest heavily in the stock market, a significant number even borrowing money to buy more stock. By August 1929, brokers were routinely lending small investors more than 2/3 of the face value of the stocks they were buying. Over $8.5 billion was out on loan, more than the entire amount of currency circulating in the U.S. The rising share prices encouraged more people to invest; people hoped the share prices would rise further. Speculation thus fueled further rises and created an economic bubble. The average P/E (price to earnings) ratio of S&P Composite stocks was 32.6 in September 1929, clearly above historical norms.
1987:
Black Monday is the name given to Monday, October 19, 1987, when the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) fell dramatically, and on which similar enormous drops occurred across the world. By the end of October, stock markets in Hong Kong had fallen 45.8%, Australia 41.8%, the United Kingdom 26.4%, the United States 22.68%, and Canada 22.5%.
The most popular explanation for the 1987 crash was selling by program traders. Program trading is the use of computers to engage in arbitrage and portfolio insurance strategies. Through the 1970s and early 1980s, computers were becoming more important on Wall Street. They allowed instantaneous execution of orders to buy or sell large batches of stocks and futures.
2007:
Central banks on both sides of the Atlantic pumped billions into the financial system to calm nerves over an impending credit crunch today - but their actions only served to heighten alarm, prompting a fresh plunge in global share prices.
The European Central Bank injected an emergency €95bn (£64.5bn) into the markets in its first intervention since the turmoil triggered by the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington DC in 2001.
Bonddad;
2.) These are big funds -- 2 billion+ is not chump change. But the manager can't "``fairly'' value their holdings". That means the 2 billion + in total assets may not even be close to accurate. Remember -- Bear Stearns lost 6 billion in 2 funds just a few weeks ago.
3.) The ECB is flooding the market with liquidity. While this is a good thing in the short run because it eases some concerns, it may not be enough. The bottom line is we are seeing announcements of hedge fund/investment losses coming from all over the world. And the pace is snowballing.
4.) "investors aren't recycling their money back because of subprime concerns" Translation: either the ECC can continue to inject liquidity or we're going to have a continued problem in the markets.
5.) In the 1920s, the US banking system collapsed because of runs on the banks. A similar situation is happening with hedge funds right now:
Union Investment, Germany's third-biggest mutual fund manager, stopped withdrawals from one of its funds on Aug. 3 after investors pulled about 10 percent of the assets. Frankfurt Trust, the mutual fund manager of Germany's BHF-Bank, halted redemptions from a fund after clients removed 20 percent of their money since the end of July.
All because of greedy, bloodsucking, soulless people (primarily while males similar to myself save for the fact that they didn't allow themselves to follow any passion they might have had that didn't involve masses of cash) and their unslakeable lust for money and power:
KEITH ERNST: One of the interesting stories here underneath all of this is how these mortgages came about in the first place. You know, we like to think, or I think most Americans think, that mortgages are made by banks and depository institutions, but especially in the subprime market that's not the case. They're largely made through state-chartered finance companies that don’t have any bank deposits, and so they don’t have any bank regulators.
Where do they go for their money? They go to Wall Street. So Wall Street will supply them the money to make the loans, will buy the loans from these lenders, and then will repackage them into securities and sell them to investors. Now, again, in principle, that's fine. It can make low-cost capital available to families who need mortgages. The problem comes when the insatiable appetite builds for more and more mortgages and lenders get reckless with regard to the quality of the mortgages they’re originating.
Why do they allow themselves to get reckless? Why, because the loans aren't representative of families, or anything important like that. They're just numbers and levels of risk that are to be assumed...
1929:
The Wall Street Crash of 1929, also known as the Crash of ’29, was one of the most devastating stock market crashes in American history. It consists of Black Thursday, the initial crash and Black Tuesday, the crash that caused general panic five days later.
The crash followed a speculative boom that had taken hold in the late 1920s, which had led millions of Americans to invest heavily in the stock market, a significant number even borrowing money to buy more stock. By August 1929, brokers were routinely lending small investors more than 2/3 of the face value of the stocks they were buying. Over $8.5 billion was out on loan, more than the entire amount of currency circulating in the U.S. The rising share prices encouraged more people to invest; people hoped the share prices would rise further. Speculation thus fueled further rises and created an economic bubble. The average P/E (price to earnings) ratio of S&P Composite stocks was 32.6 in September 1929, clearly above historical norms.
1987:
Black Monday is the name given to Monday, October 19, 1987, when the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) fell dramatically, and on which similar enormous drops occurred across the world. By the end of October, stock markets in Hong Kong had fallen 45.8%, Australia 41.8%, the United Kingdom 26.4%, the United States 22.68%, and Canada 22.5%.
The most popular explanation for the 1987 crash was selling by program traders. Program trading is the use of computers to engage in arbitrage and portfolio insurance strategies. Through the 1970s and early 1980s, computers were becoming more important on Wall Street. They allowed instantaneous execution of orders to buy or sell large batches of stocks and futures.
2007:
Central banks on both sides of the Atlantic pumped billions into the financial system to calm nerves over an impending credit crunch today - but their actions only served to heighten alarm, prompting a fresh plunge in global share prices.
The European Central Bank injected an emergency €95bn (£64.5bn) into the markets in its first intervention since the turmoil triggered by the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington DC in 2001.
Bonddad;
2.) These are big funds -- 2 billion+ is not chump change. But the manager can't "``fairly'' value their holdings". That means the 2 billion + in total assets may not even be close to accurate. Remember -- Bear Stearns lost 6 billion in 2 funds just a few weeks ago.
3.) The ECB is flooding the market with liquidity. While this is a good thing in the short run because it eases some concerns, it may not be enough. The bottom line is we are seeing announcements of hedge fund/investment losses coming from all over the world. And the pace is snowballing.
4.) "investors aren't recycling their money back because of subprime concerns" Translation: either the ECC can continue to inject liquidity or we're going to have a continued problem in the markets.
5.) In the 1920s, the US banking system collapsed because of runs on the banks. A similar situation is happening with hedge funds right now:
Union Investment, Germany's third-biggest mutual fund manager, stopped withdrawals from one of its funds on Aug. 3 after investors pulled about 10 percent of the assets. Frankfurt Trust, the mutual fund manager of Germany's BHF-Bank, halted redemptions from a fund after clients removed 20 percent of their money since the end of July.
All because of greedy, bloodsucking, soulless people (primarily while males similar to myself save for the fact that they didn't allow themselves to follow any passion they might have had that didn't involve masses of cash) and their unslakeable lust for money and power:
KEITH ERNST: One of the interesting stories here underneath all of this is how these mortgages came about in the first place. You know, we like to think, or I think most Americans think, that mortgages are made by banks and depository institutions, but especially in the subprime market that's not the case. They're largely made through state-chartered finance companies that don’t have any bank deposits, and so they don’t have any bank regulators.
Where do they go for their money? They go to Wall Street. So Wall Street will supply them the money to make the loans, will buy the loans from these lenders, and then will repackage them into securities and sell them to investors. Now, again, in principle, that's fine. It can make low-cost capital available to families who need mortgages. The problem comes when the insatiable appetite builds for more and more mortgages and lenders get reckless with regard to the quality of the mortgages they’re originating.
Why do they allow themselves to get reckless? Why, because the loans aren't representative of families, or anything important like that. They're just numbers and levels of risk that are to be assumed...
Benchmarks, or Highway Robbery
STIOL:
Overall, the law would secure the agenda of ExxonMobil, Chevon, and the other majors, robbing the Iraqi people of their most basic source of wealth. Much is at stake. With 115 billion barrels of proven reserves ($7 trillion worth at $64 per barrel) and another 215 billion possible or likely ($14 trillion), there’s nearly a million dollars of oil for every Iraqi citizen. It’s a vast and precious national resource—but only if Iraqis are allowed to control it themselves.
Overall, the law would secure the agenda of ExxonMobil, Chevon, and the other majors, robbing the Iraqi people of their most basic source of wealth. Much is at stake. With 115 billion barrels of proven reserves ($7 trillion worth at $64 per barrel) and another 215 billion possible or likely ($14 trillion), there’s nearly a million dollars of oil for every Iraqi citizen. It’s a vast and precious national resource—but only if Iraqis are allowed to control it themselves.
THIS. IS. A. REALLY. BAD. IDEA.
McClatchy:
WASHINGTON — President Bush charged Thursday that Iran continues to arm and train insurgents who are killing U.S. soldiers in Iraq, and he threatened action if that continues.
[Note the word charged. It implies suspicion without any corroborating evidence.]
Vice President Dick Cheney several weeks ago proposed launching airstrikes at suspected training camps in Iran run by the Quds force, a special unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, according to two U.S. officials who are involved in Iran policy.
This is totally illegal, regardless of whether the suspicions of the Shrub are accurate in the least. There is no active PUBLIC discussion about authorizing military action against Iran, either within our own government or with the cooperation of the U. N. Security Council. Whether or not it can be technically classified as legal under the Authorization for Use of Military Force resolution is left to the devious skills of the student-twisters of the law that currently occupy the White House and aid and abet the administration in its current course of action:
Authorization for Use of Military Force
September 18, 2001
Public Law 107-40 [S. J. RES. 23]
107th CONGRESS
JOINT RESOLUTION
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.
NO.
IRANIANS.
WERE.
ON.
ANY.
OF.
THE.
FOUR.
PLANES.
Want to guess who was on the planes?
AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 11
7:45 a.m.: Departed Boston for Los Angeles.
8:46 a.m.: Crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center.
Mohamed Atta, pilot and group leader
Age: 33.
Nationality: Egyptian.
Abdulaziz Alomari
Age: Unknown.
Nationality: Saudi.
Satam M.A. Al Suqami
Age: 25.
Nationality: Saudi.
Wail M. Alshehri
Age: 28.
Nationality: Saudi.
Waleed M. Alshehri
Age: 22.
Nationality: Saudi.
UNITED AIRLINES FLIGHT 175
7:58 a.m.: Departed Boston for Los Angeles
9:02 a.m.: Crashed into the south tower of the World Trade Center
Marwan al-Shehhi, pilot and group leader
Age: 23.
Nationality: United Arab Emirates.
Fayez Rashid Ahmed Hassan Al Qadi Banihammad
Age: 28.
Nationality: Saudi.
Ahmed Alghamdi
Age: 21.
Nationality: Saudi.
Hamza Alghamdi
Age: 20.
Nationality: Saudi.
Mohand Alshehri
Age: 21.
Nationality: Unknown.
AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77
8:10 a.m.: Departed Washington Dulles for Los Angeles
9:40 a.m.: Crashed into the Pentagon
Hani Hanjour, pilot and group leader
Age: 29.
Nationality: Saudi.
Nawaf Alhazmi
Age: 25.
Nationality: Unknown.
Majed Moqed
Age: Unknown.
Nationality: Unknown.
Khalid Almihdhar
Age: Unknown.
Nationality: Unknown.
Salem Alhazmi
Age: Uknown.
Nationality: Saudi.
UNITED AIRLINES FLIGHT 93
8:42 a.m.: Departed Newark for San Francisco
10:01 a.m.: Crashed in Stony Creek Township, Penn.
Ziad Samir Jarrah, pilot and group leader
Age: 26.
Nationality: Lebanese.
Saeed Alghamdi
Age: 25.
Nationality: Saudi.
Ahmed Ibrahim A. Al Haznawi
Age: 20.
Nationality: Saudi.
Ahmed Alnami
Age: 23.
Nationality: Saudi.
Hmmmm, no Iraqis, no Iranians, and a whole bunch of Saudis.
Interesting.
I wonder what we're doing about Saudi Arabia? Oh, right:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States is developing a proposed $20 billion, 10-year arms sales package for Saudi Arabia, a senior administration official confirmed on Saturday.
Why, you may ask. Well, aside form the obvious nepotism laden reasons, there's this load of bunkum:
The proposed sale, first reported in The New York Times, is intended to upgrade the Saudi military's ability to counter possible Iranian aggression in the Persian Gulf region, the official said.
"This is all about Iran," said the official, who spoke to CNN on condition of anonymity because discussions with the Saudis are still going on and the arms sale deal has not been completed.
How about a better, more constructive idea?
Sure, Iran has not suspended its uranium-enrichment program as initially requested by the United Nations Security Council exactly a year ago, but Iran has complied with other aspects of the council's, and the IAEA's, demands pertaining to greater nuclear transparency, access, and the resolution of "outstanding questions".
If the IAEA's reports of Iranians slowing down on the centrifuge program and openly entertaining the "time out" option do not constitute progress and a major plus, then what does? Any undue impatience with the diplomatic approach is uncalled for and indicative of a lack of a sound policy approach by the White House, seemingly riveted by contradictory influences by the moderate-hawk voices coming from different branches of the government.
Alas, it would seem that the words "sound policy approach" and "Bush White House" relate to each other in a manner similar to that of Matter and Anti-Matter.
WASHINGTON — President Bush charged Thursday that Iran continues to arm and train insurgents who are killing U.S. soldiers in Iraq, and he threatened action if that continues.
[Note the word charged. It implies suspicion without any corroborating evidence.]
Vice President Dick Cheney several weeks ago proposed launching airstrikes at suspected training camps in Iran run by the Quds force, a special unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, according to two U.S. officials who are involved in Iran policy.
This is totally illegal, regardless of whether the suspicions of the Shrub are accurate in the least. There is no active PUBLIC discussion about authorizing military action against Iran, either within our own government or with the cooperation of the U. N. Security Council. Whether or not it can be technically classified as legal under the Authorization for Use of Military Force resolution is left to the devious skills of the student-twisters of the law that currently occupy the White House and aid and abet the administration in its current course of action:
Authorization for Use of Military Force
September 18, 2001
Public Law 107-40 [S. J. RES. 23]
107th CONGRESS
JOINT RESOLUTION
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.
NO.
IRANIANS.
WERE.
ON.
ANY.
OF.
THE.
FOUR.
PLANES.
Want to guess who was on the planes?
AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 11
7:45 a.m.: Departed Boston for Los Angeles.
8:46 a.m.: Crashed into the north tower of the World Trade Center.
Mohamed Atta, pilot and group leader
Age: 33.
Nationality: Egyptian.
Abdulaziz Alomari
Age: Unknown.
Nationality: Saudi.
Satam M.A. Al Suqami
Age: 25.
Nationality: Saudi.
Wail M. Alshehri
Age: 28.
Nationality: Saudi.
Waleed M. Alshehri
Age: 22.
Nationality: Saudi.
UNITED AIRLINES FLIGHT 175
7:58 a.m.: Departed Boston for Los Angeles
9:02 a.m.: Crashed into the south tower of the World Trade Center
Marwan al-Shehhi, pilot and group leader
Age: 23.
Nationality: United Arab Emirates.
Fayez Rashid Ahmed Hassan Al Qadi Banihammad
Age: 28.
Nationality: Saudi.
Ahmed Alghamdi
Age: 21.
Nationality: Saudi.
Hamza Alghamdi
Age: 20.
Nationality: Saudi.
Mohand Alshehri
Age: 21.
Nationality: Unknown.
AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77
8:10 a.m.: Departed Washington Dulles for Los Angeles
9:40 a.m.: Crashed into the Pentagon
Hani Hanjour, pilot and group leader
Age: 29.
Nationality: Saudi.
Nawaf Alhazmi
Age: 25.
Nationality: Unknown.
Majed Moqed
Age: Unknown.
Nationality: Unknown.
Khalid Almihdhar
Age: Unknown.
Nationality: Unknown.
Salem Alhazmi
Age: Uknown.
Nationality: Saudi.
UNITED AIRLINES FLIGHT 93
8:42 a.m.: Departed Newark for San Francisco
10:01 a.m.: Crashed in Stony Creek Township, Penn.
Ziad Samir Jarrah, pilot and group leader
Age: 26.
Nationality: Lebanese.
Saeed Alghamdi
Age: 25.
Nationality: Saudi.
Ahmed Ibrahim A. Al Haznawi
Age: 20.
Nationality: Saudi.
Ahmed Alnami
Age: 23.
Nationality: Saudi.
Hmmmm, no Iraqis, no Iranians, and a whole bunch of Saudis.
Interesting.
I wonder what we're doing about Saudi Arabia? Oh, right:
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States is developing a proposed $20 billion, 10-year arms sales package for Saudi Arabia, a senior administration official confirmed on Saturday.
Why, you may ask. Well, aside form the obvious nepotism laden reasons, there's this load of bunkum:
The proposed sale, first reported in The New York Times, is intended to upgrade the Saudi military's ability to counter possible Iranian aggression in the Persian Gulf region, the official said.
"This is all about Iran," said the official, who spoke to CNN on condition of anonymity because discussions with the Saudis are still going on and the arms sale deal has not been completed.
How about a better, more constructive idea?
Sure, Iran has not suspended its uranium-enrichment program as initially requested by the United Nations Security Council exactly a year ago, but Iran has complied with other aspects of the council's, and the IAEA's, demands pertaining to greater nuclear transparency, access, and the resolution of "outstanding questions".
If the IAEA's reports of Iranians slowing down on the centrifuge program and openly entertaining the "time out" option do not constitute progress and a major plus, then what does? Any undue impatience with the diplomatic approach is uncalled for and indicative of a lack of a sound policy approach by the White House, seemingly riveted by contradictory influences by the moderate-hawk voices coming from different branches of the government.
Alas, it would seem that the words "sound policy approach" and "Bush White House" relate to each other in a manner similar to that of Matter and Anti-Matter.
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
I'll beat it out of 'em even if they do want to tell us!
I'm sitting here watching the Astros grudgingly work their way toward the end of a second win against the Cubs after watching the ending of The Great Raid, another of those formulaic WWII films which yearned to catch a ride on the coat tails of Saving Private Ryan with its template of glorifying the experience of the American fighting man during what was one of the most terrible conflicts in recorded history, not to mention one of the most far reaching in terms of how the ultimate outcome of it has shaped and is still shaping the world in countless ways right up to this very moment.
Ahhhh, the king of the run-on sentence is back in the HOUSE....
One of my issues with this series of films (which also includes Windtalkers and The Thin Red Line) is that while one of the apparent aims of all of them is to highlight the horrors of war that the professional fighting man is subjected to during the course of the conflict the main focus is on the experience of the United States fighting man with little attention paid to the opposition which, one must concede, is exposed to and must endure the exact same horrific episodes and conditions. The Japanese forces are shown as fellow Human Beings in a few scenes during Red Line, and there are briefs attempts at glimpsing the plight of the German Army regular soldier in Private Ryan (the surrendering soldiers shot with hands up at the end of the Normandy sequence opening the film, and Steamboat Willie), but they are tinged with humor that renders them without the appropriate weight for what they actually are: glimpses of the Jap or the Kraut as a fellow man in a plight that is chillingly similar to that of the average GI dogface stuck in a foxhole awaiting seemingly random orders from on high. One film that struck me with its (some would say unsuccessful) attempts at evenhandedness is Enemy At the Gates, which presented the plight of an invading army stuck in a circumstance where leadership has seemingly lost all initiative alongside the desperation of a defender pushed to the brink of logistical combat capabilities as well as Human survival in the form of the siege of Stalingrad. The narrow focus of the plot was the cat and mouse pursuit of a Russian sniper by a German master sniper, but the backdrop of a city the size of Cleveland transformed into a raging battlefront from block to block oozed from the back round during the entire film.
The bar to which all these films should be held is, of course, All Quiet on the Western Front, based on the novel by WWI German trench soldier Erich Maria Remarque.
But I digress.
Katherine Eban:
James Mitchell arrived at the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah. He was one of America’s first high-value detainees. He was captured in March of 2002 in a firefight in Pakistan. He wound up in a safe house in Thailand. He was rushed to a hospital in order to save his life from infected wounds. The FBI had agents present at the scene, and because the CIA's interrogation team had not yet arrived, they began to interrogate Zubaydah.
And what they used was classic rapport-building techniques that almost every FBI agent is trained in, which is to find common ground with the person you’re interrogating, to treat them with humanity. And, lo and behold, Zubaydah responded and talked, and not only talked, but gave them the name of the person who had been the entire master planner of 9/11: K.S.M. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, referred to as Mukhtar. He identified him. He identified Jose Padilla. In other words, there was every indicator that rapport-building techniques were completely effective.
This first struck me as amazing, initially because it was one of the first occasions that I had heard about these techniques being used, without inflicting any pain or duress upon the subject, and then because the non pain and duress inductive methods were actually producing results in the form of credible information! Of course it couldn't last:
However, after those disclosures, the CIA interrogation team arrived with James Mitchell it tow and said, “Now, everything is going to change. We’re going to get him to say everything he knows, and we’re going to use these coercive techniques.” And, according to my sources, there was even a coffin present at the interrogation they were going to use to bury Zubaydah alive.
Now, the FBI agents who were present, once the CIA interrogation team introduced these harsh tactics -- basically there was the equivalent of a firefight within the safe house over what kind of tactics were going to be used. And the FBI ultimately deemed that its agents could not be present while coercive tactics were being used. You know, the FBI is a law enforcement agent. Their goal and their training is to bring people to trial using interrogation methods that are permissible at a trial, which don't include any of these coercive techniques. Of course, you couldn't bring anybody to trial saying that you had extracted a confession using these methods. And so, the result of the fight within the safe house between the FBI and the CIA was to give the CIA, which had much less experience with interrogations, control. And that’s how America's interrogation policies unfolded.
Or, as one of my fave authors phrased it in The Tommyknockers:
The FBI was on scene at 6:00 P.M., the CIA a 7:15 P.M. By 8:00, they were yelling about jurisdiction. At 9:15 P.M., a frightened, infuriated CIA agent named Speklin shot an FBI agent named Richardson. The incident was hushed up, but Bobbi and Gard would have understood perfectly--the Dallas Police were on the scene and in complete control of the situation.
All of this vengeful craziness seems to stem from the first few days after 9/11 and the soul searching that went on in the intelligence community about what wasn't done and why (so called 'human' intel and the types of contacts that needed to be initiated and fostered to gain such intel (with government money--who smells another Iran Contra scandal?)) and what needed to be done and whether or not we as a nation wanted to take a trip down that path (infiltrating the human networks and interpreting the intel gleaned from them). Based on the path that the administration has chosen, two conscious choices seem to have been made:
Infiltrating the human networks was going to be too slow and possibly not fruitful if the infiltration was detected and false intel was fed to the agents/assets, so members of the human networks needed to be seized whenever possible and intel was to be extracted from them.
This extraction was to be done in a shroud of secrecy, both due to its total illegality under U.S. and International law and also its total affrontery to human moral decency (when has that ever stopped anyone, though) and the potential fallout from the general population in the event of its diclosure as official policy (which we are witnessing currently, though not nearly on the scale we should be).
A portion of the inertia to enact these policies as well as large portions of the Patriot Act and the Authorization for the Use of Military Force came out of the all to Human emotion of fight when faced with a threat that has already inflicted damage and has the potential to inflict additional damage and flight is not a viable option. Flight to where? We were hit at home, in one of the most damaging episodes since the above mentioned WWII. However, we as a nation have also shown the ability to exercise restraint during the most advantageous of circumstances:
George Will:
Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson's opening statement, delivered in a city reeking from the decomposition of 30,000 bodies still buried in the rubble, said: "That four great nations, flushed with victory and stung with injury, stay the hand of vengeance and voluntarily submit their captive enemies to the judgment of the law is one of the most significant tributes that Power has ever paid to Reason."
Nuremberg, says Dodd, was "the place where America's moral authority in the second half of the 20th century was born." That perishable resource has, he thinks, been squandered by Bush administration decisions inimical to the Constitution and international law.
Whether we will ever get it back in the eyes of the world remains to be seen.
BTW, the Astros managed to pull it out in the end after all...
Ahhhh, the king of the run-on sentence is back in the HOUSE....
One of my issues with this series of films (which also includes Windtalkers and The Thin Red Line) is that while one of the apparent aims of all of them is to highlight the horrors of war that the professional fighting man is subjected to during the course of the conflict the main focus is on the experience of the United States fighting man with little attention paid to the opposition which, one must concede, is exposed to and must endure the exact same horrific episodes and conditions. The Japanese forces are shown as fellow Human Beings in a few scenes during Red Line, and there are briefs attempts at glimpsing the plight of the German Army regular soldier in Private Ryan (the surrendering soldiers shot with hands up at the end of the Normandy sequence opening the film, and Steamboat Willie), but they are tinged with humor that renders them without the appropriate weight for what they actually are: glimpses of the Jap or the Kraut as a fellow man in a plight that is chillingly similar to that of the average GI dogface stuck in a foxhole awaiting seemingly random orders from on high. One film that struck me with its (some would say unsuccessful) attempts at evenhandedness is Enemy At the Gates, which presented the plight of an invading army stuck in a circumstance where leadership has seemingly lost all initiative alongside the desperation of a defender pushed to the brink of logistical combat capabilities as well as Human survival in the form of the siege of Stalingrad. The narrow focus of the plot was the cat and mouse pursuit of a Russian sniper by a German master sniper, but the backdrop of a city the size of Cleveland transformed into a raging battlefront from block to block oozed from the back round during the entire film.
The bar to which all these films should be held is, of course, All Quiet on the Western Front, based on the novel by WWI German trench soldier Erich Maria Remarque.
But I digress.
Katherine Eban:
James Mitchell arrived at the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah. He was one of America’s first high-value detainees. He was captured in March of 2002 in a firefight in Pakistan. He wound up in a safe house in Thailand. He was rushed to a hospital in order to save his life from infected wounds. The FBI had agents present at the scene, and because the CIA's interrogation team had not yet arrived, they began to interrogate Zubaydah.
And what they used was classic rapport-building techniques that almost every FBI agent is trained in, which is to find common ground with the person you’re interrogating, to treat them with humanity. And, lo and behold, Zubaydah responded and talked, and not only talked, but gave them the name of the person who had been the entire master planner of 9/11: K.S.M. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, referred to as Mukhtar. He identified him. He identified Jose Padilla. In other words, there was every indicator that rapport-building techniques were completely effective.
This first struck me as amazing, initially because it was one of the first occasions that I had heard about these techniques being used, without inflicting any pain or duress upon the subject, and then because the non pain and duress inductive methods were actually producing results in the form of credible information! Of course it couldn't last:
However, after those disclosures, the CIA interrogation team arrived with James Mitchell it tow and said, “Now, everything is going to change. We’re going to get him to say everything he knows, and we’re going to use these coercive techniques.” And, according to my sources, there was even a coffin present at the interrogation they were going to use to bury Zubaydah alive.
Now, the FBI agents who were present, once the CIA interrogation team introduced these harsh tactics -- basically there was the equivalent of a firefight within the safe house over what kind of tactics were going to be used. And the FBI ultimately deemed that its agents could not be present while coercive tactics were being used. You know, the FBI is a law enforcement agent. Their goal and their training is to bring people to trial using interrogation methods that are permissible at a trial, which don't include any of these coercive techniques. Of course, you couldn't bring anybody to trial saying that you had extracted a confession using these methods. And so, the result of the fight within the safe house between the FBI and the CIA was to give the CIA, which had much less experience with interrogations, control. And that’s how America's interrogation policies unfolded.
Or, as one of my fave authors phrased it in The Tommyknockers:
The FBI was on scene at 6:00 P.M., the CIA a 7:15 P.M. By 8:00, they were yelling about jurisdiction. At 9:15 P.M., a frightened, infuriated CIA agent named Speklin shot an FBI agent named Richardson. The incident was hushed up, but Bobbi and Gard would have understood perfectly--the Dallas Police were on the scene and in complete control of the situation.
All of this vengeful craziness seems to stem from the first few days after 9/11 and the soul searching that went on in the intelligence community about what wasn't done and why (so called 'human' intel and the types of contacts that needed to be initiated and fostered to gain such intel (with government money--who smells another Iran Contra scandal?)) and what needed to be done and whether or not we as a nation wanted to take a trip down that path (infiltrating the human networks and interpreting the intel gleaned from them). Based on the path that the administration has chosen, two conscious choices seem to have been made:
Infiltrating the human networks was going to be too slow and possibly not fruitful if the infiltration was detected and false intel was fed to the agents/assets, so members of the human networks needed to be seized whenever possible and intel was to be extracted from them.
This extraction was to be done in a shroud of secrecy, both due to its total illegality under U.S. and International law and also its total affrontery to human moral decency (when has that ever stopped anyone, though) and the potential fallout from the general population in the event of its diclosure as official policy (which we are witnessing currently, though not nearly on the scale we should be).
A portion of the inertia to enact these policies as well as large portions of the Patriot Act and the Authorization for the Use of Military Force came out of the all to Human emotion of fight when faced with a threat that has already inflicted damage and has the potential to inflict additional damage and flight is not a viable option. Flight to where? We were hit at home, in one of the most damaging episodes since the above mentioned WWII. However, we as a nation have also shown the ability to exercise restraint during the most advantageous of circumstances:
George Will:
Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson's opening statement, delivered in a city reeking from the decomposition of 30,000 bodies still buried in the rubble, said: "That four great nations, flushed with victory and stung with injury, stay the hand of vengeance and voluntarily submit their captive enemies to the judgment of the law is one of the most significant tributes that Power has ever paid to Reason."
Nuremberg, says Dodd, was "the place where America's moral authority in the second half of the 20th century was born." That perishable resource has, he thinks, been squandered by Bush administration decisions inimical to the Constitution and international law.
Whether we will ever get it back in the eyes of the world remains to be seen.
BTW, the Astros managed to pull it out in the end after all...
FISA'd
A developing situation in my small world has precluded my posting frequecy lately, but in light of recent happenings I would feel remiss if I don't jump into the pool for a dip. Besides, Arthur has snapped off an impressive number of lengthy, thought provoking and enraging (if you're not enraged after reading some of the most recent posts you need to check your pulse, priorities, and possibly status as a human being) entries after a lengthy period of recuperative silence.
Cenk Uygur:
Here we go again. I was going to write a nice, fun piece about Matt Damon on a lovely Sunday afternoon when the Democrats went and ruined everything, as usual.
Well, I'll go ahead and comment on the latest installation of the Bourne franchise. I saw it Saturday night. The theater was packed to the gills, and we had to grab the remaining two adjacent seats in the front row slightly off to the left. I'm going to have to go back and see it again from further back in the auditorium, but the experience was still a good one. The film is great fun visually from start to finish, with very few (brief) opportunities given the audience to catch their breath. Damon and the supporting cast do a great job with the script. It's pretty good, once one accepts the convention (continuing a trend which established in the first two films) that the only similarities between the films and the Ludlum novels. The detail featured in these films that strikes me as poignant is the highlighting of the typical use of technology and practice which are precisely at the heart of the surveillance and wiretapping programs that has been in place for years now under the NSA and which Congress signed into law on Saturday, ruining the weekend for anyone who is a fan of the Fourth Amendment, may it rest in peace.
These insidious ways of flagging and tracking people are employed during all three of the major sequences in Ultimatum, to varying degrees of success, since, of course, our intrepid amnesiatic hero can never be a step behind his pursuers... Data Mining and Satellite Tracking play a huge role in the action and forward movement of the plot of the film.
In actuality, the film Enemy of the State touched on these precise issues several years ago, albeit with less critical and popular acclaim and success. In the interest of full disclosure, the story left quite a bit to be desired. Smith and Hackman did as much as they could with their roles and the story, but it seemed kinda rough around the edges, possibly because it was 15 pounds of story crammed into a ten pound box.
However, in all four films, a network of surveillance exists to filter certain key pieces of information that, once detected, place in motion a machine of incalculable swiftness, inhuman mercilessness, and single minded purpose, even when it doesn't know what it will do with the goal once it has attained it, be it a piece of information or an individual. Scary stuff, that exists this very moment, to be sure.
So, while Matty and his crew might have gotten FISA'd, they were doing a little FISAing themselves for anyone who was paying attention and likes to talk about what they just saw beyond the terms of how cool the NYC chase was or how there's no way he could have survived that 10 story swan dive in to East River. Apologies to anyone who hasn't seen it yet, but take heart: All you know is the there's a chase sequence in downtown Manhattan, and Damon goes for a dip in the River. You'll have to pony up for the rest of the goodies...
"Remember, no matter where you go, there you are."
-Pigkiller, Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome
Cenk Uygur:
Here we go again. I was going to write a nice, fun piece about Matt Damon on a lovely Sunday afternoon when the Democrats went and ruined everything, as usual.
Well, I'll go ahead and comment on the latest installation of the Bourne franchise. I saw it Saturday night. The theater was packed to the gills, and we had to grab the remaining two adjacent seats in the front row slightly off to the left. I'm going to have to go back and see it again from further back in the auditorium, but the experience was still a good one. The film is great fun visually from start to finish, with very few (brief) opportunities given the audience to catch their breath. Damon and the supporting cast do a great job with the script. It's pretty good, once one accepts the convention (continuing a trend which established in the first two films) that the only similarities between the films and the Ludlum novels. The detail featured in these films that strikes me as poignant is the highlighting of the typical use of technology and practice which are precisely at the heart of the surveillance and wiretapping programs that has been in place for years now under the NSA and which Congress signed into law on Saturday, ruining the weekend for anyone who is a fan of the Fourth Amendment, may it rest in peace.
These insidious ways of flagging and tracking people are employed during all three of the major sequences in Ultimatum, to varying degrees of success, since, of course, our intrepid amnesiatic hero can never be a step behind his pursuers... Data Mining and Satellite Tracking play a huge role in the action and forward movement of the plot of the film.
In actuality, the film Enemy of the State touched on these precise issues several years ago, albeit with less critical and popular acclaim and success. In the interest of full disclosure, the story left quite a bit to be desired. Smith and Hackman did as much as they could with their roles and the story, but it seemed kinda rough around the edges, possibly because it was 15 pounds of story crammed into a ten pound box.
However, in all four films, a network of surveillance exists to filter certain key pieces of information that, once detected, place in motion a machine of incalculable swiftness, inhuman mercilessness, and single minded purpose, even when it doesn't know what it will do with the goal once it has attained it, be it a piece of information or an individual. Scary stuff, that exists this very moment, to be sure.
So, while Matty and his crew might have gotten FISA'd, they were doing a little FISAing themselves for anyone who was paying attention and likes to talk about what they just saw beyond the terms of how cool the NYC chase was or how there's no way he could have survived that 10 story swan dive in to East River. Apologies to anyone who hasn't seen it yet, but take heart: All you know is the there's a chase sequence in downtown Manhattan, and Damon goes for a dip in the River. You'll have to pony up for the rest of the goodies...
"Remember, no matter where you go, there you are."
-Pigkiller, Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)