The Flat-Earthers

From Do they really think the earth is flat? by Brendan O'Neill:

In the 21st Century, the term "flat-earther" is used to describe someone who is spectacularly - and seemingly wilfully - ignorant. But there is a group of people who claim they believe the planet really is flat. Are they really out there or is it all an elaborate prank?

Nasa is celebrating its 50th birthday with much fanfare and pictures of past glories. But in half a century of extraordinary images of space, one stands out.

On 24 December 1968, the crew of the Apollo 8 mission took a photo now known as Earthrise. To many, this beautiful blue sphere viewed from the moon's orbit is a perfect visual summary of why it is right to strive to go into space.

Not to everybody though. There are people who say they think this image is fake - part of a worldwide conspiracy by space agencies, governments and scientists.

Welcome to the world of the flat-earther.

Read the rest here.

Bible Verse For Sunday 08-03-08

And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:

And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn.

And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the Lord met him, and sought to kill him.

Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me.

So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision.

What the hell?

Some Sanity In Politics

From Argentine president calls for decriminalization of drug use:

President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner repeated her call this week to decriminalize personal drug use and crack down on traffickers and dealers.

"I don't like it when people easily condemn someone who has an addiction as if he were a criminal, as if he were a person who should be persecuted," she told a meeting of the National Investigation into the Consumption of Alcohol, Tobacco, Psychopharmaceuticals and Illegal Drugs.

The concept has gained followers in the United States, too, he said, citing statistics that show two-thirds of Americans support drug treatment instead of jail time for first-time drug offenders.

On Wednesday, Rep. Barney Frank announced a proposal to end federal penalties for Americans carrying fewer than 100 grams, or almost a quarter-pound, of marijuana.

"The vast amount of human activity ought to be none of the government's business," Frank said on Capitol Hill. "I don't think it is the government's business to tell you how to spend your leisure time."

Soldiers Charged With Murder In Iraq

From Two U.S. soldiers charged with murder in Iraq:

The coalition command in Iraq has charged two U.S. soldiers with the murder of an Iraqi detainee.

Staff Sgt. Hal M. Warner and 1st Lt. Michael C. Behenna were charged with premeditated murder, assault, making a false official statement and obstruction of justice, according to a statement Saturday from the Multi-National Division.

The charges stemmed from a criminal investigation into the death of Ali Mansur Mohamed, a detainee initially believed to have been released by coalition forces in May, the statement said, without elaborating on the case.

Read the rest here.

What Are You Doing Here?

What are you doing here? When you should be here:

In Cipro We Trust

And here:

Congratulations Rush!

And here:

Ho-Hum, Just Another Day In The Craziest Country On Earth

And here:

On a mission from God

Antiwar Republicans

Are there any antiwar Republicans? How many of us vote the party line without doing any research and thinking?

From Tribute to Seven Antiwar Republicans by couturma:

To celebrate the sixth year of the never-ending conflict in Mess-o-Potamia, this writer believes that the time has come to take a look back at the original Iraq War Resolution that Congress passed in 2002.

Specifically, I want to focus on seven courageous Republicans who bucked their party and voted “nay” on giving President George W. Bush a blank check to take the country to war against the regime of Saddam Hussein.

The greatest irony is that nearly half of these Republicans were voted out of office in the 2006 midterm elections, in part because of public dissatisfaction with the war they had opposed from the very beginning.

Because of the highly misleading Left/Right debate that rages in the mainstream media and talk radio, many Americans may not even be aware that ANY Republicans were against the Iraq War from the get-go. After all, everyone knows that Democrats are antiwar and Republicans are pro-war.

Although all of the members of Congress who voted “nay” on taking the U.S. into what has turned out to be an unnecessary and tragic conflict deserve kudos – regardless of party – it can be argued that those Republicans who did so paid a heavier price than their Democratic and Independent counterparts. To be a politician of any stripe and vote against the war resolution may not have been popular with many Americans at the time, but to be a Republican and vote against the will of your party – not to mention a president who happens to lead that party – was nothing short of heresy.

Here is the first comment to Tribute to Seven Antiwar Republicans by couturma:

rwahrens on July 29 2008 15:06:12
Besides not joining in on any "celebration" of the sixth year of any war, I also take umbrage on your characterization of the war as "unnecessary". "Tragic" fits any war, as that human activity is tragic by any description.

I am sure that most of the Iraqi population do not see the war as unnecessary, but rather as unmanaged or mismanaged, even as deliberately so. But I would say that most of them are glad to be rid of Saddam and his henchmen, especially that criminally insane son of his.

One can argue that it was badly timed, or that Bush was less than honest in his characterization for the immediacy of the need for it, as well as his excuses for doing it, but I will always assert that sooner or later, Saddam Hussein would have stepped over that line again and made it necessary. He was just that crazy.

I do not celebrate people being against war for the sake of being against it. One can oppose the idea of war itself, yet still realize the fact that it can be not only unavoidable, but at times better than the alternatives. Folks that oppose war, always, unequivocally, and without thinking, are doing so out of idealism, which is blind at best.

Of course, if these Republicans opposed that war out of an honest disagreement with Bush & Co. about the immediate timing of the war, or the need for it, as a mental exercise of opinion and not plain idealism, they do truly deserve kudos, for that is the hardest kind of thing to stick with of all.

I am singling out this comment because it is typical of much that I read and hear that basically leaves me shaking my head in wonder. Obviously the writer is no pacifist and seems to hold some animosity for those that are.

Why is he offended that the Iraq War was characterized as “unnecessary”? Obviously, he believes that it was necessary, but to be offended by someone who thinks the opposite seems like an overreaction and just plain weird. He then seems to imply that we must find the means to justify some wars as necessary, while at the same time acknowledging that all wars are tragic. Does this make sense? What sane person seeks tragedy? When does it become necessary to kill other people? Shouldn’t this be the last thing we consider doing?

The second paragraph is pure speculation without any facts at all to back it up. Yet, he is “sure that most of the Iraqi population do not see the war as unnecessary.” Anyone can win an argument if he is allowed to make up his own facts.

The third paragraph takes this non-use of facts to yet another level. Now he uses “facts” from the future. Saddam Hussein might do something bad in the future so let’s punish him for it now. Is this how justice is supposed to work? My neighbor might shoot me tomorrow so I better have the police arrest him today. The actual facts are that the United States broke international law by being the aggressor and actually invading, not one, but two countries.

As for the fourth paragraph, let’s just change one word.

I do not celebrate people being against murder for the sake of being against it. One can oppose the idea of murder itself, yet still realize the fact that it can be not only unavoidable, but at times better than the alternatives. Folks that oppose murder, always, unequivocally, and without thinking, are doing so out of idealism, which is blind at best.

Does this make any sense to you?

The last paragraph is simply more of the same. If you oppose war unequivocally then I suppose you are some sort of sap, and not worthy of the kudos of an illogical person who likes to make up his own facts, and also likes to justify killing people.

Why am I picking on this comment and the person that wrote it? Because I am tired of people pretending that what they say or write makes sense, when it actually makes no sense at all. If it were only this commenter doing this it would not matter to me very much. It becomes problematic when this kind of thinking is the same “logic” that is used by nearly every journalist, reporter, and politician in the United States. This “logic” (along with a strong dose of fear) was used by the Bush Administration to move the entire United States further away from the side of the righteous and just.

Self-defense is the only acceptable justification for murder. Self-defense is also the only acceptable justification for war.

Wal-Mart Does Not Want Workers To Unite

Wal-Mart also doesn’t want its workers to vote for Barack Obama.

From Wal-Mart warning managers of labor bill by Nicole Maestri and Ted Kerr:

Wal-Mart Stores Inc said on Friday it has held meetings with U.S. store managers warning them of issues that could arise if Democrats win power and pass a law that would make it easier for workers to unionize, but stressed it was not telling workers how to vote.

The Journal report said Wal-Mart human-resources managers who run the meetings do not specifically tell attendees how to vote in November's presidential election, but they make it clear that voting for Democratic presidential hopeful Senator Barack Obama would be tantamount to inviting unions in.

The Toxic Automobile

From Don't inhale that new car smell by Terry Galanoy:

Ah, that new car smell, that eau de car-logne; it does an ego good while it does a wallet bad. And now it turns out, it can do bad things to your health, too.

All these years, while we were being offered safety first, last and front, side and rear ways, hardly anyone in the vehicle industry had given much thought to what actually was in that perfume de profit, the new car smell that car buyers sought and bought.

As everyone knew, pollution related to vehicles originated from the exhaust pipe, not the shifter knob. It was spewed out the back of the rear, not the back of the rear view mirror. Well, what everyone thought they knew was wrong.

It turns out -- take a deep breath -- that most of that new car smell is not some carefully-compounded, luxury, feel-good incense to the Mammon gods. But the new car smell comes from toxic gases.

Read the rest here.

Not All Judges Are Wise

U.S. District Judge Larry Alan Burns is an idiot.

From Cross Purposes: Federal Court Says Christian Symbol Is Really ‘Patriotic’ by Sandhya Bathija:

Apparently, a cross, which is the preeminent symbol of Christianity, is now also a symbol of American patriotism.

At least according to a federal judge in California, who ruled yesterday that the Latin cross atop Mt. Soledad in San Diego is not considered a religious symbol and can be mounted on federal government land.

Read the rest here.

Henry Waxman And Blackwater

From Waxman’s Strategy for Undoing Blackwater by Matthew Schwarzfeld:

Blackwater Worldwide may have misrepresented its size to obtain small business contracts, the House oversight committee announced on Monday. The finding is the result of an investigation by the Small Business Administration (SBA), and it's just the first of three reviews of the controversial security contractor requested by Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA).

Unlike a number of investigations by the FBI and the committee itself that have focused on the conduct of Blackwater's guards in Iraq and Afghanistan -- for instance, the allegedly unprovoked shooting of Iraqi civilians -- Waxman appears to be taking a new tack: scrutinizing the contractor's employment practices to make it ineligible for future federal contracts.

Read the rest here.

The Robber Barrons Are Back

Let’s put two oil men in the White House for eight years and see what happens.

From Exxon posts new profit record by Steve Hargreaves:

Exxon Mobil once again reported the largest quarterly profit in U.S. history Thursday, posting net income of $11.68 billion on revenue of $138 billion in the second quarter.

That profit works out to $1,485.55 a second.

The company returned $10.1 billion to shareholders in the form of dividends and stock buybacks, 12% more than last year.

The big international oil companies have been criticized for plowing much of their profits back into stock buybacks and other programs to benefit shareholders, as opposed to exploring for more oil which could bring down the price of crude for everyone.

Critics charge the oil companies with deliberately restricting production in an attempt to keep prices high.

Be All You Can Be

This is how the army supports the troops.

From Soldier reported shocks before electrocution death:

An Army sergeant complained about faulty wiring in Iraq months before the fatal electrocution of another soldier in a shower in the same quarters, according to documents released Wednesday by a congressional committee.

Sgt. Justin Hummer filled out a work order in July 2007 that warned, “Pipes have voltage, get shocked in the shower.” Hummer told investigators from the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that at least once, he had to use a wooden stick to turn off the shower “because the electrical current was so strong.”

Army records show electricians from contractor Kellogg, Brown and Root found “several safety issues concerning the improper grounding of electrical devices” in February 2007. In January 2008, Staff Sgt. Ryan Maseth was electrocuted in a shower in the same quarters Hummer occupied the previous summer — and a follow-up investigation “found nearly all of the same problems and deficiencies that had been reported one year previously,” a committee report states.

Is There Some Way We Can Make Bush Pay For This?

Bush is responsible for this. Let’s make him pay.

From Report: U.S. 'wasted' $560 million on Iraq repairs by Joe Sterling and Adam Levine:

The United States has "wasted" more than half a billion dollars in Iraq repairing facilities that were damaged because of poor security, the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction says in a report released Wednesday.

Stuart Bowen's quarterly report arrived at a price tag of $560 million by tallying the results of more than 100 audits his office has conducted.

Further billions had to be diverted from reconstruction to security because the Bush administration did not adequately foresee how volatile Iraq would be when it began rebuilding the country, the report says.

"The U.S. government did not fully anticipate or plan for the unstable working environment that faced U.S. managers when reconstruction began in Iraq," it says.

Read the rest here.

Is It News?

Yes, it is news, but you wouldn’t know it if you watch ABC, CBS, or NBC.

From CBS, NBC evening news broadcasts ignored IG report finding illegal actions in Justice Department hiring practices; ABC devoted less than 30 seconds:

Despite the potential implications for U.S. counterterrorism efforts, all three networks ignored the finding that "an experienced career terrorism prosecutor" was denied a counterterrorism assignment while "a much more junior attorney who lacked any experience in counterterrorism issues and who officials believed was not qualified for the position" was hired instead.

It's A Start

Will “Mr. Bridge to Nowhere” finally get his comeuppance?

From Alaska senator caught off guard by indictment, colleague says:

Sen. Ted Stevens was caught by surprise Tuesday by his indictment on charges that he concealed hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of gifts and services from a company in his home state, Sen. Daniel Inouye told CNN.

"Apparently, the media knew about it before he did," Inouye said, adding he had just spoken to Stevens, a Republican from Alaska.

Stevens was meeting with Republican colleagues when the indictment was returned, and he was pulled out of the meeting, his colleague said.

"As far as he's concerned, he's not guilty. And I believe him," said Inouye, a Hawaii Democrat who is one of Stevens' closest friends in the Senate.

In the indictment, Stevens is charged with lying about receiving gifts worth more than $250,000 from Veco, an Alaska-based energy company on whose behalf he intervened in Washington.

Read the rest here.

Jane Mayer

From The Battle For A Country’s Soul by Jane Mayer:

Seven years after al-Qaeda’s attacks on America, as the Bush administration slips into history, it is clear that what began on September 11, 2001, as a battle for America’s security became, and continues to be, a battle for the country’s soul.

In looking back, one of the most remarkable features of this struggle is that almost from the start, and at almost every turn along the way, the Bush administration was warned that whatever the short-term benefits of its extralegal approach to fighting terrorism, it would have tragically destructive long-term consequences both for the rule of law and America’s interests in the world. These warnings came not just from political opponents, but also from experienced allies, including the British Intelligence Service, the experts in the traditionally conservative military and the FBI, and, perhaps most surprisingly, from a series of loyal Republican lawyers inside the administration itself. The number of patriotic critics inside the administration and out who threw themselves into trying to head off what they saw as a terrible departure from America’s ideals, often at an enormous price to their own careers, is both humbling and reassuring.

Instead of heeding this well-intentioned dissent, however, the Bush administration invoked the fear flowing from the attacks on September 11 to institute a policy of deliberate cruelty that would have been unthinkable on September 10.

Read the rest here.

Jane Mayer was recently featured on Bill Moyers Journal and is the author of The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How The War on Terror Turned into a War on American Ideals.

Two Ignorant College Professors Strut Their Stuff On Impeachment

From US Congressional Panel Hears Testimony on Case for Bush Impeachment by Dan Robinson:

Stephen Presser of Northwestern University School of Law, asserted there has been no proof that President Bush put his own interests over those of the nation. "For a president to be impeached, he must have committed some grave offense that is contrary to his oath to uphold the Constitution and laws of his country. He must put his interests above the Constitution and the laws," he said.

Jeremy Rabkin, Professor of Law at George Mason University, asserts that any impeachment effort would be unwise. "To put everything on to the somebody must pay for mistakes and impeachment is the way is to make the country ungovernable," he said.

Remind me again why Bill Clinton was impeached.

Hate

Sometimes I receive comments to something I have posted here at No Countries No Religion. Sometimes the comments make no sense to me. More often than not they are interesting. Even if I don’t agree, I appreciate the feedback. Sometimes, a comment may have a way of forcing me to think. These are the most interesting comments, even though they have a way of exhausting me.

Yesterday I asked the question Why All The Hate? This question was prompted by the recent terrorist bombings in India. The first comment I received to this post was:

Apparently, it's not just the US they hate... they hate India, they hate Israel, they hate Denmark, they hate Britain, they hate Australia...

What DON'T they hate?! I think THAT list is a lot smaller.

There is not a lot to that comment, but for some reason it is one of those ones that made me think. So I am responding to it here. It sparked some thoughts that I would like to share. Since the comment is short and I don’t want to make any assumptions I wish to make it clear that not all of what follows is a direct response to this comment.

The point made by the comment is valid, and it is a good one. The most radical of terrorists do seem to hate everyone. I’d still like to know why they do. In simple terms I’d like to see an end to all the hate and the violence that comes from it. How do we do that? By adding more violence to the mix, or by trying to find out where all the hate comes from? Logically, it seems that if we could find the cause of the hate, we could possibly stop the hate, and the violence. I know that some have said this before. I know that many consider this to be naive. In spite of that, I think that it bears repeating, and that it is the best way of trying to solve the problem.

I do not condone anger or hate. I believe that what the terrorists are doing is wrong. That doesn’t mean that I shouldn’t try to understand their motivations.

I’ll repeat the last quote from the CNN article that I previously posted:

Indian Mujahedeen claimed responsibility in May for near-simultaneous bomb attacks that killed 63 people in the northwest Indian city of Jaipur. In that claim, the group declared "open war" against India in retaliation for what it said were 60 years of Muslim persecution and the country's support of U.S. policies.

This is the reason that I asked: “Why do they hate the United States so much?” Also, the reference to “60 years of Muslim persecution” seems to be a direct reference to Israel. After all, they recently celebrated 60 years of their existence. The United States picked sides. The United States strongly supports Israel. The United States strongly supports violence, and has for a very long time.

Anger and hate can be misdirected. Frequently it is directed at whoever happens to be the closest. If you are a stay-at-home parent, it is likely that you have experienced misdirected anger toward your child, when you are actually angry with your spouse, or something or someone else. Your child just happens to be the closest person at the time.

India is closer than the United States. The Indian Mujahedeen, I assume, are in India. If the United States were geographically closer to them I would think that they would be bombing in United States cities as well, since they specifically mention dislike of U.S. policy.

It is extremely distressing to me as a U.S. citizen that my government is acting in ways that I view as immoral, unfair, and unlawful. So while I definitely do not deny that the terrorists seem to hate nearly everyone, as a U.S. citizen I can take part in U.S. politics in a way that may effect a change for the better.

The big question is how to stop all the violence, anger, and hate? Do we do it with more violence, anger, and hate?

In my personal life talking has proven to be the best way for me to solve problems and deal with anger. It seems to me that this would be the best way to deal with global problems of anger. Yet, the United States leadership currently opposes this, and denigrates those that propose it as a solution. Why can’t we negotiate with terrorists in this case? This is not a hostage situation. Even if talking is not the best solution why eliminate the use of it? Can’t we use all the help and resources we can find to solve the problem of global terrorism? Why must violence be the only choice?

In the United States my views on this subject are not given very much credence, in fact they are usually mocked and ridiculed. More violence has become the accepted solution. I don’t believe this is the right course of action. I believe that it will only make things worse. I don’t want things to become worse. The world is in terrible shape as it is.

The Bush Administration has elevated the status of the terrorists into something that they are not. By using the full force of the United States military and declaring war on them the Administration has given them the equivalent status of a country. Because of Bush they are bigger than they deserve to be. It is very likely, as well, that they are bigger in numbers than before Bush, but that is not what I mean here.

I believe that the reason that the United States invaded Afghanistan and Iraq was because the Bush Administration felt that it had to do something in response to 9/11, and they were too stupid to come up with any other ideas.

Of course, the reasons for the terrorist strikes around the world pre-date 9/11. 9/11 didn’t really change anything (only its magnitude was different), but the Bush Administration certainly did make unprecedented changes to U.S. foreign policy in how it responded to what happened on that terrible day. The United States invaded two countries that were not directly responsible. The Bush Administration wrongly took advantage of an awestruck nation and utilized the worst parts of a mob mentality. This is not a sign of strong leadership.

From an emotional viewpoint what the Bush Administration did following 9/11 may have given short-term satisfaction to some. Some of those people are now finding that satisfaction to be short-lived and not carrying over into the long-term. From a moral standpoint what the Bush Administration did was wrong. Also from an international law standpoint. From an intellectual standpoint what they did was simply stupid. They have effectively severed the use of alternative solutions to the problem of global terrorism. Violence is their solution. Torture is their solution. Eviscerating civil liberties is their solution. Secrecy is their solution. Lack of accountability is their solution. Turning the United States into a terrorist nation is their solution. These are solutions that I abhor. In fact they are not solutions at all. Not only are they morally wrong, they will simply make the problems we face worse.

The Bush Administration, and unfortunately also John McCain, are grasping at any reason they can to point to their “success.” Most of these reasons such as “the surge is working, violence in Iraq is down” are illogical and short term. For the short term violence from terrorists may be down in Iraq and the United States, but it is not in the rest of the world. I think that the United States is indirectly responsible for this violence because of its violent and oppressive foreign policies. Unfortunately citizens of countries such as India are suffering because of this.

Endless War

From Reject Endless War & Torture Cover-Up:

After years of litigation, the Supreme Court recently ruled in Boumediene v. Bush that detainees held at Guantánamo have a right to challenge their detention through habeas corpus -- the ancient freedom that protects people from being thrown in prison illegally, with no help, no end in sight and no due process.

Habeas proceedings could allow detainees to bring up the fact that the evidence that the government has against them came from hearsay, or even torture and abuse. Courts could also release people who are detained indefinitely without charge. Attorney General Michael Mukasey wants to make sure neither of these things happen.

Read the rest here.

Bible Verse For Sunday 07-27-08

And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,

Avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites: afterward shalt thou be gathered unto thy people.

And Moses spake unto the people, saying, Arm some of yourselves unto the war, and let them go against the Midianites, and avenge the Lord of Midian.

Of every tribe a thousand, throughout all the tribes of Israel, shall ye send to the war.

So there were delivered out of the thousands of Israel, a thousand of every tribe, twelve thousand armed for war.

And Moses sent them to the war, a thousand of every tribe, them and Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, to the war, with the holy instruments, and the trumpets to blow in his hand.

And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord commanded Moses; and they slew all the males.

And they slew the kings of Midian, beside the rest of them that were slain; namely, Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, five kings of Midian: Balaam also the son of Beor they slew with the sword.

And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods.

And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire.

And they took all the spoil, and all the prey, both of men and of beasts.

And they brought the captives, and the prey, and the spoil, unto Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and unto the congregation of the children of Israel, unto the camp at the plains of Moab, which are by Jordan near Jericho.

And Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and all the princes of the congregation, went forth to meet them without the camp.

And Moses was wroth with the officers of the host, with the captains over thousands, and captains over hundreds, which came from the battle.

And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?

Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the Lord.

Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

What the hell?