Category — Rants

… not really. I have CNN set on my TV as one of my morning alarms (it takes a lot to get me out of bed), and as I was getting in the shower the following story was on the air. At the time CNN was reporting the children’s ages as 1 year, 3 years, and 6 years. Apparently, more accurate information has been disclosed since.

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom told reporters at the waterfront where the crime occurred:

“These are senseless inexplicable things that are beyond the pale of imagination. It makes you, frankly, sick to your stomach to think you live in a society where things like this could have happened.”

Tru dat. What has happened to our society where women, who once cherished their children, are now so forced into their spousal relationships that they become depressed or mentally ill that they slaughter them? While I can’t comment on this individual situation, I can say that as a whole America has been on this road to a puritanical, fundamental, male dominated Utopia. A society in which Chrisitianity is deviating as far from the teachings of Christ as far as a reckless, drunk driver deviates from his lane.

If this is the par for the course of events to come, make sure to not invite me to join the country club.

Mother accused of dumping children in Calif. bay | Reuters.com

So the socially, environmentally-motivated European Union that scoffs at the United States for being so “backwards” and “unconcerned” about global warming goes and crashes a fucking satellite in to the ice cap which is already melting due to this “global warming.” Is this what we call “fighting fire with fire” or are they just “fanning the flames.” Big explosion? Lots of heat? Melting ice cap? I’d go for the “fanning the flames.”

Arctic Study Satellite Crashes Into Ocean - New York Times

After Google had to slow its plans to create a sort of book version of iTunes Music Store no sooner does Yahoo try and jump on the bandwagon. Just like Microsoft, and all the other initial first movers that shoved their ingenuity in the toilet, Yahoo doesn’t know how to come up with an original idea anymore. They have to conduct studies to stay relevant and competitive with Google and company, rather than already being on top of it. They lack the ability to present their content in an appealing manner. They lack the ability to be a viable corporate entity. Which is why their version of Google Print is going to blow monkey butt. Has Yahoo done anything good, yet? Anything better than Google? No. And it never will. Shame on publishers for not wanting to grasp this new digital marketplace.

This is what happens when you read the news at 3 in the morning after you’ve worked your ass off on the paper up until that point. You forget things.

The story has changed, also, since the Washington Post initially broke their angle on it. Here I was all excited because the religiously oppressive clause in the Pledge (a 1954 amendment, nonetheless) would be taken out and/or challenged.

Now Gonzales wants to overturn another activist judge who was trying to keep the US a fair and free country. Of course, his administration is trying to nominate their activist judge. It’s not alright if the left does it, but if the evangelical, socially-conservative right does it, it is Godly. Which is a term we need to remove from our political vernacular.

The pledge isn’t what’s wrong, it’s the endorsement of a monotheistic, Judeo-Christian god in a nationalistic chant. Something which our forefathers tried to prevent from happening. “Don’t get me wrong, we all need Jesus” but you can’t encourage a truly free market, and a society based on freedom of expression, when the State endorses a particular brand of expression as the norm. That is wrong. Yes, I know it happens in other countries. But theocracies, and formerly autocratic nation-states also are having difficulty transitioning into a market-, democratically-based economic and political system.

Let’s avoid being the next Saudi Arabia - a theocratic state crazed on protecting its oil - and become the utopian, free-market, democratically-based society that Jefferson, Madison, and our founding philosophers thought we could become.

Scanning the headlines on Google prompted me to check out the non-biased International Herald Tribune’s account of the story.

The Pentagon is preparing new guidelines governing the use of nuclear weapons that foresee possible pre-emptive strikes against terrorist groups or nations planning to use unconventional weapons against the United States.
…
The scenarios for a possible attack described in the draft include one in which an enemy is using “or intending to use” unconventional weapons against the United States, its allies or civilian populations.
Another scenario for a possible pre-emptive strike is in the event of an “imminent attack from adversary biological weapons that only effects from nuclear weapons can safely destroy.”

Ambiguity is a hallmark of this administration, that Secretary Rumsfeld seems particularly apt at using.
Apparently, Sagan’s (not Bob Saget) Nuclear Winter isn’t far off, if Secretary Rumsfeld and President G.W. Bush have anything to say. And Noam Chomsky, about whom I was just reading on Wikipedia, has this to say regarding terrorism:
[from the article]

He uses a definition of terrorism from a U.S. Army manual, which describes it as, “the calculated use of violence or the threat of violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.

…
[from the horse's mouth]

“One is the fact that terrorism works. It doesn’t fail. It works. Violence usually works. That’s world history. Secondly, it’s a very serious analytic error to say, as is commonly done, that terrorism is the weapon of the weak. Like other means of violence, it’s primarily a weapon of the strong, overwhelmingly, in fact. It is held to be a weapon of the weak because the strong also control the doctrinal systems and their terror doesn’t count as terror. Now that’s close to universal. I can’t think of a historical exception, even the worst mass murderers view the world that way. So take the Nazis. They weren’t carrying out terror in occupied Europe. They were protecting the local population from the terrorisms of the partisans. And like other resistance movements, there was terrorism. The Nazis were carrying out counter terror.”

For all those in Bozeman, the Procrastinator Theater on campus is to present a cinematic biography on Howard Zinn. Noam Chomsky is a featured commentator, and paying tribute to an inspiration for his “Good Will Hunting”, actor Matt Damon narrates the film.

Hearst (yes, it still exists) columnist Helen Thomas explores the recent “clearing” of upper-level military officers of any blame pertaining to torture-related human rights violations.

The human rights group also called for a bipartisan probe — similar to the 9/11 commission investigation — to look into the roles of Bush, Rumsfeld and former CIA director George Tenet.

“We believe that if the U.S. is going to wipe away the stain of Abu Ghraib, it needs to investigate those at the top who ordered or condoned abuse, and to come clean on what the president has authorized and repudiate once and for all the mistreatment of detainees in the war on terror,” said Reed Brody, Human Rights Watch special counsel.

He said the fact that you have the same kinds of abuses going on in three different theaters (Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo) suggests that the responsibility is higher up.

I say that perhaps, the torture stems from an age-old military tradition of dehumanizing the enemy. Usually, battles or military action need some sort of motive so senior military officials create either 1) a greater cause for which the soldiers/sailors/pilots are fighting (e.g. Civil War wasn’t about states’ rights, per se, but slavery) or 2) making the enemy a less-human individual than us. Being that we don’t really have a #1 type cause for this war, other than “spreading democracy and freedom,” armed forces members are forced to resort to dehumanizing the Iraqis, the al-Qaeda members (yes, they’re evil, and stand for what no one would stand for [except perhaps our own fundamental religious groups], but they don’t deserve torture), and “terrorists” (whether terrorists or not).

Commanders Responsible for Abu Ghraib: “Commanders Responsible for Abu Ghraib”

(Via Common Dreams.)

This smells of a former Anchorage municipal decision made years ago (”Photo Radar”) that didn’t fly with our citizenry. Why? Because all those that got caught speeding, protested. The sad thing is that the only place I ever saw or heard the white Chevy Blazers used specifically for Photo Radar was in a school zone. Safety is about miles per hour in a school zone. It’s too risky to zip through because your precious darling is going to be late for soccer practice. By making such a decision, you’ve just squashed some other soccer mom’s precious darling under your super-safe Firestones.

I’m sorry Britons, but, safety on the roads is greatly affected by how fast you drive. I know for certain that the decisions I make with the wheel of the car at 75 or 80 mph are much less safe than those made when I’m going 65 or 68 mph. Time to find a new motive.

BBC NEWS | England | Wiltshire | Drivers hold M4 speed camera demo

I think Bush is trying to create an atomosphere of fear and insecurity so that he can mold the US into his vision for it without any objection. Bush once said that being president would be a lot easier if it were an autocracy.

Call on your senators and congressional representatives to ensure that the present day USA PATRIOT does not get renewed. If you feel certain provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act are alright, but not some of the privacy invading provisions, ask your delegates to the U.S. Congress to push for the SAFE Act, which is a less tyrannical version of the Patriot Act.

The New York Times > Washington > Bush Renews Call to Extend Patriot Act: “the illusion of safety”

This and the previous post come from links which my relatively conservative, apathetic roommate (who, frankly, is awesome) sent me.

While I can appreciate this blogger’s logic (and the fact that he really doesn’t give a shit about anything [and that's alright]), there still is hard evidence linking Abu Ghraib tortures not just to Rumsfeld, but to White House policy justified by Attorney General/then White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales. Essentially what it came down to, is that because we’re the US of A, the Geneva (or Genever if you’re from the UK) Convention relating to POW treatment doesn’t apply. His justification gave the administration and all military higher-ups the ability to turn their heads and look the other way when intolerable injustices were ocurring at the hands of US’ troops.

Thanks must go to blogger Eric for giving me something to rant about.

C’mon Bloomberg, you don’t have to tow party line with everything. Just because Bush wants you to go along with his vision for a traditional, judeo-christian, gun totin’ world, doesn’t mean you have to. You’re a human with your own heart and instinct, and if you really did this out of personal persuasion, then you are as cold and inhumane as the rest of your party.

The New York Times > New York Region > Mayor Seeks Quick Appeal on Gay Ruling