Klatu verata niktu: Political

The Machine Gun of Capitalism

Tue, 22 Apr 2008 07:07:54 GMT

Published on Wednesday, February 6, 2008 by the San Francisco Chronicle

The Machine Gun of Capitalism
Dead soldiers, peak oil and mind-boggling profits; praise Jesus, the machine’s still working

by Mark Morford

The Machine Gun of Capitalism: Dead soldiers, peak oil and mind-boggling profits; praise Jesus, the machine's still working

Somber reflections

Sat, 20 Jan 2007 20:44:32 GMT

This picture depicts one of the small gifts that US foreign aid, arms, and munitions to Israel bought for some Lebanese families living in one of Beirut's southern suburbs in the summer of '06. There were many more such gifts throughout the city and other towns and villages.

Many people mistakenly think that the Lebanese were the victims of this conflict. But intelligent people know it was really poor Israel who was the real victim here. I mean, they were *forced* to use the UN-banned Phosphorous, Enriched Uranium, and Cluster Bombs on civilian populations. What other possible recourse was there for them but to bomb the living crap out of their whole neighbouring country in retaliation for the heinous kidnapping of two of their military personel dangled conveniently along a region of a border known to be swarming with unsanctioned, Iranian-backed militants who have a beef with the way Israel has been treating Palestinians for the last 50 years?

So what if the smashed, charred, phosphorous-covered bodies of Lebanese babies being pulled out of hospital rubble a hundred miles away spontaneously re-ignite and combust with exposure to the oxygen-rich air. War is ugly; no one denies that. But the terrorists got what they deserved. Israel should have finished the job and levelled the whole country, maybe even the entire middle-east region. After all, it's the Arabs that won't let them have this little piece of land that they earned a right to take away as payment for their suffering under German hands. That makes sense when you consider the alternative: who would really want a piece of Prussia or Germany anyway? There's no beachfront there.

Show them terrorists what it really means to reject peace! Arbitrary and unjust as it may be.

The destruction in Dahieh, a southern suburb of Beirut, as a result of the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict. (Andrew Stern/Redux Pictures)

Israel and US: ye reaps what ye sows

Tue, 21 Nov 2006 07:36:23 GMT

Hamas logo. [Source: Hamas] Hamas is a Palestinian group known both for charitable works benefiting the Palestinian population and suicide attacks against Israeli targets. Hamas was formed in 1987, after a Palestinian uprising began the year before. Some claim that Israel indirectly supported and perhaps even directly funded Hamas in its early years in order to divide the Palestinians politically. For instance, a former senior CIA official will later claim that Israel’s support for Hamas “was a direct attempt to divide and dilute support for a strong, secular PLO [Palestinian Liberation Organization] by using a competing religious alternative.” Hamas begins attacks on Israeli military and civilan targets in 1989 and will begin suicide attacks on these targets in April 1994. The US will not officially declare Hamas a terrorist organization until 1995 (see January 1995). This means that funding Hamas is not a crime in the US before that year, but knowingly participating in or supporting a violent act overseas outside of the rules of war such as a suicide bombing could still potentially result in criminal charges in the US. [United Press International, 6/18/2002; Associated Press, 3/22/2004]

Source: Cooperative Research's Complete 9/11 Timeline

What was the Administration's role in the WTC attacks?

Tue, 21 Nov 2006 06:16:32 GMT

Still think Bush had nothing to do with 9/11? Maybe this will help change your mind. Families of victims dig deep and ask some pretty tough questions.

In 9/11 Press for Truth, five of the most prominent members of the Family Steering Committee tell their story for the first time, providing the most powerful argument yet for why 9/11 still needs to be investigated. The documentary is based in part on Paul Thompson's Complete 9/11 Timeline.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5589099104255077250&q=911+press

1 hour 24 minutes. Well worth the time.

Bush vs. Saddam; Game Goes Into Overtime But Outcome Hopeful for Bush

Mon, 06 Nov 2006 03:48:46 GMT

"BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraq's High Tribunal on Sunday found Saddam Hussein guilty of crimes against humanity and sentenced him to hang for the 1982 killing of 148 Shiites in the city of Dujail" says an MSNBC article located here. Try as I did and get past the obviously partisan rhetoric and tone.

Despite the obviously partisan reporting in the above article, I wanted to reference it to put into perspective the fate Saddam appears to be facing at the moment, and why.

Clearly, no one in their right mind would go out of their way to defend Saddam Hussein as a nice guy. At least I hope not. And it is probably pretty certain that Saddam was responsible for a lot more than 148 deaths during his 30 year reign as Iraqi president. There are no reliable estimates for the numbers of casualties attributable to Saddam during this time period, however, given the couple of wars that he took his country into (using American-supplied arms and munitions), and the victims of the occasional quashed uprising and various failed assassination attempts (stirred up no less by America, who was subsequently not there to help see these actions to fruitful outcomes, but instead led them to massacre), let us be generous and estimate that the number of deaths attributable to Saddam during his reign to be around 655,000 people.

Coincidentally, this turns out to be the same number as the "excess Iraqi deaths" estimated to have occurred as a result of American inteference in the region. ie. Since Bush I and Bush II took over dictatorship of Iraq. (according to a report published by The Lancet). So, together, the shrubs... er... Bushes have so far cost Iraq an ADDITIONAL 655,000 deaths over and above what would have occured during peacetime.

So, if we are generous and credit Saddam with as many Iraqi deaths as America has caused so far with its combined acts of aggression and economic sactions/embargo, it becomes pretty clear that the Liberator has turned out to be at least as bad as the Oppressor. The only difference between the two is that Saddam took nearly 30 years to do the job while the Bushes managed to do it in only a combined 10 years!! But don't worry, Bush II has another two years to get high score.

One question remains: given that one of its past tormentors is now facing the gallows for crimes against humanity, will Iraq ever get retribution or justice for the crimes of its present tormentor?

Why is this stuff never reported in mainstream media?

Sat, 28 Oct 2006 17:14:57 GMT

This summer Israel viciously attacked Lebanon killing 1300+ civilians and leaving thousands more wounded, dying and homeless in what Israel claims was retaliation against a reported cross-border raid in which Hezbollah guerilla fighters took two Israeli soldiers hostage and killed three others. Israel, using the dubious defence that Lebanon as a country knows about, harbours, aids, and abets Hezbollah, claimed that it had a right in attacking Lebanon in what it labelled as its "efforts in the war against terrorism". What a load of crap. How could America and Britain sit back and be so smug against such devastation and willful disregard of human rights?

There is no doubt in my mind that terrorism exists and is alive and thriving, but I think if the whole truth were to ever come out about where terrorism truly resides, we should not be surprised to find it in the most unexpected of places. In my secret hopes and fantasies, one day we will wake up and all be more enlightened.

Robert Fisk: Mystery of Israel's secret uranium bomb

Alarm over radioactive legacy left by attack on Lebanon

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article1935945.ece

Israel Admits Using Phosphorus Bombs

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/777549.html

(courtesy: Dale's blog)

The New Iraq never had a chance

Sun, 17 Sep 2006 15:46:53 GMT

From a recent article by MSNBC:

"Many of those chosen by O'Beirne's office to work for the Coalition Provisional Authority, which ran Iraq's government from April 2003 to June 2004, lacked vital skills and experience. A 24-year-old who had never worked in finance -- but had applied for a White House job -- was sent to reopen Baghdad's stock exchange. The daughter of a prominent neoconservative commentator and a recent graduate from an evangelical university for home-schooled children were tapped to manage Iraq's $13 billion budget, even though they didn't have a background in accounting."

Instead of being picked based on their knowledge, experience, and skill... candidates for the provisional government running Iraq after Saddam was toppled were picked based on their loyalty and affiliation to the President and the Republican Party. Some were even asked how they voted in the 2000 elections and what their views were on Roe vs. Wade.

If sheer negligence and irresponsibility at this scale cannot be construed as war crimes commited against the entirety of the Iraqi people, then I would very much like to understand by what value system and ethical framework the US administration is operating. By no stretch of the imagination can these acts be in the spirit of the values and principles extoled in the US Constitution nor in the President's beloved Bible.

The scale and speed with which such widespread corruption has taken hold since this Administration has taken power just makes me sick.

Israel accused over 'war crimes'

Thu, 24 Aug 2006 04:08:57 GMT

Amnesty criticises attacks on fuel supplies [Image: AI]

Amnesty International has accused Israel of committing war crimes by deliberately targeting civilian infrastructure in Lebanon.

The human rights group says attacks on homes, bridges, roads and water and fuel plants were an "integral part" of Israel's strategy in the recent war.

Full story here.

Jewish Outrage (updated)

Fri, 28 Jul 2006 06:59:08 GMT

Jews in Norway (and around the world) are outraged at the newspaper Dagbladet's depiction of Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert as a Nazi.

Excerpt from article

Invoking a scene from the film Schindler's List, one of Norway's largest newspapers recently published a political cartoon comparing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to the infamous commander of a Nazi death camp who indiscriminately murdered Jews by firing at them at random from his balcony.
The caricature by political cartoonist Finn Graff appeared on July 10 in the Oslo daily Dagbladet. It has prompted outrage among the country's small Jewish community and led the Simon Weisenthal Center to submit a protest to the Norwegian government.
Follow link for full article:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1153291996650&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

My commentary

They're crying over a cartoon caricature of a man who so far has bombed the living shit out of an entire country leaving over 300 civilians dead, 5000 injured, 750,000 (at last count) homeless. Fuck him.

I've also been seeing all over the news coverage of Jewish outrage at the world's condemnation of Israel's heavy-handed response to the original Hezbollah capture of two soldiers. What?!! Do Jews really think that there's a fair fight going on here? Why are they outraged at the world's understandly negative reaction? Lebanon is not at war with Israel, and doesn't want to be. This is merely a one sided campaign of murder and destruction wrought by a military superpower using their armed forces to crush an entire country in the pursuit of a gang of thugs that it feels justified to pursue at any cost... any cost to the Lebanese people that is. I guess nationalistic Jews around the world feel it's okay to completely obliterate a country when they feel threatened by a few rogue individuals, and the typically oversensitive and overly-dramatic Jewish reaction is now, like countless times in the past, a disproportionate response to a mild insult. Once again we see how a simple cartoon that mocks their leader is evoking a world-wide, extreme, and coordinated response of outrage with claims of anti-semitism flying at high mast by the various Jewish defense organizations -- and there are a great many of such organizations under all manners of guises to be sure, in every conceivable part of the Western world. Perhaps Jewish people have forgotten how to take a joke... but only when it comes at their expense of course. Poor babies... an unflattering political cartoon... boo hoo. Weren't these the same twats who were laughing their asses off when a Holland newspaper published cartoons depicting Mohammed as a terrorist wearing a bomb as a turban? -- the hypocritical asswipes.

Seems to me the Jewish are incapable of contentedness unless they are clearly on top and pulling the strings but yet still perceived to be the underdog in the eyes of every onlooker. After all, it's the power of their "victim" persona that they want most to preserve. Yes, there's great reward for playing the victim and post-holocaust Jews have honed this to a fine art. Jews have gotten a great deal of mileage by milking this collective victim mentality over the past 40 years, dipping deep into the pool of sympathy and guilt left behind in the heart of the post-holocaust Christian world; guilt for what the Jews say Christians allowed Hitler to do. Things that Jews today are asking Christians worldwide to allow be done to the Palestinian and Lebanese people. Jews are now asking us -- no, commanding us -- to step aside and sit idly by while they go for another deep dip of Western guilt and trample the shit out of Lebanon. Their hope is of course that we in the West will allow this to happen; that we will not sympathize with the plight of a country and of a people that seem on the surface so foreign to us. After all how many Lebanese filmmakers and television producers are there in Hollywood constantly putting out images and imagery in their films and other intellectual products to foster a mythos in Western mind of the "gentle Lebanese" like the Jews have done for the image of the "gentle Jew; the persecuted Jew"?

Pay heed folks, these images are powerful tools; powerful concepts; powerful marketing. The ability of nationalistic Jewish filmmakers to foster and promulgate the image of the gentle Jew along with its corresponding sympathy psychology in the minds of Western consumers has been nothing short of a boon for worldwide Jewish politics. In almost every product that comes out of Hollywood, we see reinforced this friendly-Jew-next-door mythos. It has had huge ramifications and benefits to the Jewish community at large, both when it comes to where our sympathies automatically default to when Jews are concerned, as well as giving them a huge trump card in their ability to lobby, gain political power, and influence the domestic and foreign policy of Western nations. Evidence of this can be clearly seen today in the US, Canadian, British, and Australian complicit support of Israel's heavy, illegal and unwarranted bombardment of Lebanon.

I once asked a 3rd-generation Canadian friend (British family origins)... a good friend; a close friend of many years who seems to have taken on more conservative and Christian fundementalist leanings over the past few years... "T____, what is it about the Jew that makes them so much better than the Arab?" "Because I perceive them to be more like me", he replied. "Really?" I said, "And what makes you think they are more like you?" "It's just what I see", he replied.

Yes, of course, it is precisely this acclimatization that I am talking about... this nurturing of sympathy through imagery of "likeness" and "shared values". It's what WE ALL SEE. DAILY. Who would ever think that Ross and Monica Geller from "Friends" are anything but "like us"? In every TV show, sitcom, feel-good Hollywood story. There's an over-representation of the Jewish minority in our films and television shows. Too much so to account for the actual percentage of Jews that make up the US population. Why is that? True, there are some rather comical representations of Jewish characters, such as the nagging Jewish mother, or the whole concept of "Jewish guilt", etc., but for the most part stereotypes of the Jew in hollywood products are almost always benign, comical, or often downright enviable. But they are always likeable. Can't really say the same for Arabs now can we? If fact, we can't really say that for MOST other minorities including blacks, hispanics, etc. which represent a far greater percentage of the US population than do Jews. Why is this I wonder? Could this cultural bias in the products reveal the representational bias in the Hollywood Studios' seats of power? Can we really expect and trust that those who fund, produce, direct, and write content for the most effective communication tool yet discovered by man (films and television) to really be objective and not use that medium to promote their own cultural biases? Is the Jewish overrepresentation in Hollywood products simply a reflection of who's making these shows and movies, and their corresponding political and cultural affiliations and leanings? Nahhh, surely that kind of thing only happens in the movies.

For those who don't know, Lebanon is a cultural melting pot. For the last 5000 years of civilization, Lebanon has been at the crossroads of trade and commerce (Byblos in Northern Lebanon is the only living city in the world today that can claim continuous human habitation for that entire period of time). Lebanon resides in a part of the world that was once covered by the Pheonician, Babylonian, Carthagenian, Roman, and Persian empires. It has seen and lived through it all. The Lebanese people are a highly mixed, hybrid people. They have been conquered and occupied, and have played host to a great many powers throughout history. And we have survived, and our culture is all the richer for it. We have taken on elements of these past civilizations and cultures, and have made them our own. We have interbred with these foreign invaders and have taken on their attributes and temperaments. Yes, we are a nation of head-strong and hot-blooded people, but we are also a very kind, loving, and generous people. We are not terrorists. That is a simplistic and stupid term used when applying a US-style Cowboys-'n-Indians, white-hat/black-hat mentality to world politics. On that point, in the current world of radical Cowboy politics, what other term beside "terrorist" have the Bushites left us to describe the actions of any people who choose to fight radical oppression and injustice by radical means?

The Lebanese people are not a uniform mass of humanity with a single all-consuming passion and vision to build an empire based on an elitist religious belief, nor are we obsessed with gaining the power to bully our neighbours and dominate our part of the world. No, we are a pluralistic society: a nation of Christians, Muslims, Armenians, Druze, and yes even Lebanese Jews, united by strong social bonds and shared mutual respect. We are black, white, brown, blonde and brunette... all living together and getting along nicely without the need for anyone's ideological bullshit. My dear friend T, ...my dear friend of 14 years, I say to you we are not unlike Canada. In fact we are so much more like Canada than our Zionist neighbours to the South. We have not built a nation atop an ideology that preaches hatred and expansion, persecution and injustice. We do not believe we are "God's chosen people" and by implication that all others must thus be inferior. Our mentality is not "our way or the highway". All we want is to live in peace... all we ever wanted was to be left the fuck alone. Let this madness stop, and let us rebuild and make a semblance of a life for our people who have already suffered a horrifying civil war brought on by outside powers, an ideological war fought on our ground and over our bodies. Let us not allow this to happen yet again thanks to the zeal of Zion. Lebanon's soils are already saturated with Lebanese blood and tears from past attrocities. Let's not let it happen again. Enough!

Let us also not forget that in this latest debacle; this Israeli incursion (this invasion) that Lebanon has yet to invoke a military response. That's right, NO MILITARY RESPONSE by Lebanon towards Israel despite the ruthless and wanton destruction of Israeli attacks. Any sane person can clearly see that there is no war here; just a one-sided pounding. The only response to date has been from Hezbollah... rocket attacks back to small towns in northern Israel for what they perceive as retaliation for Israeli strikes against Lebanese civilian targets. These are not attacks sanctioned by the Lebanese government or the Lebanese people mind you, but you know what? I can tell you of at least 750,000 homeless Lebanese right now who wish Lebanon did have the military and resources to fight back and are in some way glad that someone, even if that someone is Hezbollah is fighting back. That someone is avenging the death and dismemberment of their children and destruction of their homes. And let's not mention the outrage of the Lebanese diaspora abroad that are incensed by this butchery as they watch with worry every night for word or news of their loved ones back home.

Lastly, a personal message for those Jewish leaders -- nay, twats -- that I'm seeing nightly on television preaching from their pulpits and podiums their vile, filthy brand of moral superiority and their concerted lobbies for the wholehearted support for Israel's decimation of Lebanon in response to the actions taken by another group of rogue twats who don't even represent my country or countrymen: a hearty SCREW YOU. You should be ashamed of yourselves for your unconscienable words and actions; for the message of hate you spread. Have the Jewish people learned nothing about justice, compassion, or mercy from their supposed/alleged systemic persecution throughout the ages? In my mind they are now simply showing their true racist, fascist, expansionist, emperialist colours.

To Al-Qaeda and Al-Zawahiri: Leave our country out of your goddam holy war you low-life maggots. Lebanon does not need your "show of support". Fuck off the whole lot of you and leave Lebanon and the Lebanese people out of your ideological shitfest.

To Condoleeza Rice and George Bush: Go fuck yourselves.

For all of the above minge-eating coprophiliacs, as far as I'm concerned they're all blood-soaked criminals who should be strung up at the first available gallows.

Some recent scenes from Beirut

Wed, 19 Jul 2006 23:06:51 GMT

Thanks to everyone for their kindness and words of support. And for those who have asked, I have finally received word from family in Northern Lebanon. They are okay for the time being, but many others are not. Tripoli was heavily bombarded as I had predicted it would be in my last post.

The civilian death toll is rising dramatically. Not only from the immediate result of the bombing but from the humanitarian disaster that has been caused from the destruction of critical infrastructure. Ambulances, fire trucks, and other rescue services cannot even get to some of the affected areas due to the rubble of collapsed buildings. It is hard to transport needed food, water, and medicine supplies to affected areas, and due to the air, land, and sea blockade there is expected to be further civilian losses over the next few weeks and months.

A website has gone up presenting some of the aftermath from the recent Israeli bombing in Beirut. WARNING: Some of these images are VERY graphic in nature.

http://fromisraeltolebanon.info/

Where are the US condemnations of this barbaric onslaught and UN security council resolutions now?

I wonder if misters Bush and Blair realize how much resentment their tacit and complicit backing and support for Israel's unjust bombardment of Lebanon is sowing in the hearts of millions of otherwise West-friendly young Arabs at this very moment? You better wake up boys... you are about to teach a whole new generation of committed young middle-easterners to see your system of justice for what it is... hypocrisy and treachery. How many of these do you think you will convince to resist the call to arms?

And doubtless there will be retalation from the Arab world community for this indifference and injustice. And of course we all know THOSE actions will receive widespread condemnation. You can bet on it. That's the nature of hypocrisy and racism.

Who will defend the defenseless?

Tue, 18 Jul 2006 00:04:01 GMT

In an old part of the "the good book" there is a story. A story of struggle of the weak but determined little guy against a brutish and merciless giant.

1 Samuel 17:45-50

Then said David to the Philistine, Thou comest to me with a sword, and with a spear, and with a shield: but I come to thee in the name of the LORD of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast defied.

This day will the LORD deliver thee into mine hand; and I will smite thee, and take thine head from thee; and I will give the carcases of the host of the Philistines this day unto the fowls of the air, and to the wild beasts of the earth; that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel.

And all this assembly shall know that the LORD saveth not with sword and spear: for the battle is the LORD's, and he will give you into our hands.

And it came to pass, when the Philistine arose, and came, and drew nigh to meet David, that David hastened, and ran toward the army to meet the Philistine.

And David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slang it, and smote the Philistine in his forehead, that the stone sunk into his forehead; and he fell upon his face to the earth.

So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and smote the Philistine, and slew him;

Now I say unto you, oh children of Israel how far you have come with your stone and sling to wield power far beyond any Philistine, and the tables have turned so that now you are the ones who have lost the judgment to discern the difference between provocateur and bystander, between murder and self-defense. You now wield the mighty sword, spear, and sledgehammer of injustice hardened by the blind eye and unwavering support of the West. With these tools you crush the pitiful Lebanon which stands before you; the creature that you have declared "opponent" simply because it is infested with the very tick that bit you and caused you harm. Must a dog be beaten for the crimes of its fleas?

300 innocent civilian lives already lost and counting, costly infrastructure of a struggling economy destroyed. Does Hezbollah represent Lebanon? Do they represent the Lebanese people? The Lebanese government? Should all of Washington have been levelled when Timothy McVeigh declared himself a true American? Should an entire populace be punished without impunity for the acts of a group whom the government of the country is powerless to control?

When will Lebanon cease to be the pawn of international politics and the arena of ideological battles fought by third parties on its ground? It is an unfortunate victim of geography to have been placed so unfortuitously twixt equally determined, inane, and conscienceless enemies.

------ updated below -------

I have family in Lebanon (Thanks Wehlia for asking. Very thoughful of you.)

In Beirut I have an uncle (on my dad's side) with his wife and three children. On my mom's side, I have two uncles and their respective families who reside in Northern Lebanon near the port city of Tripoli. So far, we have only heard from my uncle in Beirut. He is well and has evacuated his wife and children to Syria for relative safety. He remains at work at his post in the UN in Beirut. He is one of the fortunate ones because he has the means and methods to move his family out of harm's way. Many other Lebanese are not so fortunate.

As for my other two uncles near Tripoli I have sent out e-mail to their children, my cousins, asking for some news or an update on their situation but have heard nothing back yet. I wouldn't doubt if they have been cut off as the bombing has destroyed key infrastructure such as roads, electricity, and communications networks, among many other critical assets. Much of the country's supply chain is now seriously disrupted after the Israeli bombardment. We hope with all our hearts that they are alright and doing well under the circumstances.

Tripoli is a port town and this makes it a prime target for Israel's current campaign of destruction of critical infrastructure and ensuing blockade. All this in the supposed attempt to quell the resupply of hezbollah with new money and arms and to prevent the smuggling of the two soldier hostages out of Lebanon. Rubbish. Utter bull. If you were Hezbollah, would you really be using mainstream airlines, shipping channels, or soft targets like border roads to transport such assets? Hello! Helicopters anyone? Or how about marching through mountain trails on foot over the border? What chance would Israel really have in stopping such clandestine missions carried out in secrecy if such means were employed? Very little. Did the US manage to catch Osama once he was in the Afghan hills? Lebanon borders both Syria and Jordan and there are many routes by which to take a prisoner across or to transport money and munitions undetected. Main roads and shipping ports would not be the prime choices for an enemy who knows they are strategically outgunned. So I pose that this campaign of cutting Lebanon's lifeline to the world, to food, resources, services, and needed critical supplies has less to do with preventing hostage smuggling than it does with further crippling an already weak opponent: a neighbour that has barely managed to get back on its feet after nearly 30 years of civil war have ravaged its soul. "But why do this" you say? A cynic might posit that perhaps certain right-wing elements in the current Israeli body politic regret Israel's pullout of occupied Lebanese lands a few years ago. Perhaps there is some regret at the potential loss of lands that could have been used to feed the expansion and settlement by new Jewish settlers. Perhaps there is regret over these lost lands that could have replaced those which Israel has failed to annex from the Palestinians in Gaza and West Bank due to mounting world pressure and increasingly poor optics.

The solution? Why not stage the grounds for a conflict that would give you justification to roll in and take what you want, all under the guise of self-defense and counter-terrorism? What's a few military lives dangled as carrots in front of a small rogue enemy to ignite a situation that can be used as a pretext for war against an entire country? How hard is it now after we have such a fine template for such acts of treachery demonstrated and perfected by the neocon cabal in Washington for other ruthless expansionist dictatorships in the world to emulate? When you want something bad enough, you simply stage an elaborate excuse, market it with the right spin, and move in to muscle your weak target and provide a justification for invasion and occupation. A near flawless formula.

Israel needs more land for its growing settlements, and of course for a buffer or security zone to keep it at arms length from the dangers of the enmity it has sown with its neighbouring nations. Also, let's not forget that they'll need room for that new poolhouse and backyard trampoline. Can't outright steal Gaza or West Bank? Hey, there's some good real estate in that little country to the North. Who's going to defy you when you're Israel? Particularly when your justification is the fight against terrorism? Who's going to bat an eyelash when your tanks roll over the bodies of those you colour with the brush of terrorism? The US? Haaa, yeah right, they invented the game. And who on the block dares stand up to the neighbourhood bully when his best friend is the crooked cop?

This is not about rescuing two solders taken hostage. I think this may be the beginning of a wider justification for Israeli occupation and eventual annexation of Lebanese lands to replace those they could not steal from the Palestinians.

George Bush says Israel has a right to defend herself. And thanks to American supplied armaments, fighter jets, bombs, and raw financial aid to the tune of 6 billion dollars (US) per year, she can do just that... and she can trample and stomp all over its defenseless neighbour and kill and mame its innocent civilians who have nothing to do with the hezbollah or any of this. So, does Lebanon have a right to defend herself? Likely not in the Zion-friendly worldview of Mr. Bush and his fundamentalist cronies. And even if it tried, what would she defend herself with? Slingshots and the crumbling stones of the great Roman ruins of Baalbek?

Angry with the Anti-Science Movement

Tue, 13 Dec 2005 04:51:27 GMT

MSNBC INTERACTIVE

Interactive timeline of Earth's Geological history and Biological diversification.

There is a revival of religious fundamentalism sweeping America (and to a lesser extent Canada, as we are its closest neighbors in terms of vicinity and cultural outlook). The catalyst of course for this wave of change were the events of 9/11. Events which sowed the seeds of hate and vengence in the hearts of many on both sides of the ideological divide. Hatred and vengence which have since escalated and blossomed into maturity by the rhetoric and teachings of the current Monkey In Charge (and his Christian fundie supporters) in his "war against terror'". The fundamentalist low-lifes (and I'm referring to all of the Judeo-Islamo-Christian fundamentalists out there), who have no respect for humanity or human life are now emboldened to use this current resurgence in people's religious faith to usurp more power, inject themselves into all facets of government and education, and throw us back into the stone age. A threat that concerns me and well should concern you is the War on Science currently being waged by American Repugnicans and the Religious Right (aka "the Religious Wrong"). It would seem that there is a very vocal and powerful movement afoot that is attempting to systematically dismantle the very core of our teaching system -- by trying to take out the science and replacing it with superstition and supernatural mumbo-jumbo -- and at the same time instill further hatred in the hearts and minds of our citizens for reason and rationality. These forces want to silence the voices of reason and want to raise our children to be the future wave of irrational, incapable conformist drones. This campaign is being waged through the use of FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt). They've certainly succeeded in instilling fear, the uncertainty is being sown through the fabrication and dissemination of hateful propaganda and lies. As for the doubt... well, religion feeds on doubt doesn't it? Doubt about the afterlife, doubts about our role and purpose in this life, etc... and this movement has used all that along with the inflamed passions of good Americans following Sept. 11 to foster this new grass-roots movement of ignorance, moving us inexorably toward the darkness and away from the light of science. There is a lot of misinformation out there, so let me just clear the air a little...

Some folks out there just don't understand what Science is all about. Many claim that they do, but often a few well pointed questions reveals the true source of this "knowledge"... and often the source turns out to be a pious evangelist on a mission to discredit science. For widespread adoption of Science's teachings is the danger that threatens the organized religions of the world. The knowlege it imparts is the catalyst needed to once-and-for-all snuff out the plague of ignorance from mankind, and ignorance and superstition is the cornerstone of all religion, for it is the pre-condition required for zealots to plant the seeds of enslavement and to turn willing men into sheep so as to be more easily herded. So it is then that few people seem to have been exposed to any real science or definition thereof, be it in school, church (ha ha), or the home (where most ignorance is bred). Perhaps their schools did try to teach this, but perhaps these folks were absent or skipped Science class that day? Perhaps they were too busy in their pubescent hormonal trances to be receptive to the message of "the logical pursuit of truth"? ie. the Scientific Method.

Assuming this is so, I will then take it upon myself to give a crash course in science and help dispel some of the more ridiculous misconceptions about it that seem to abound out there.

Let me now take this opportunity now to clarify the process by which science is done and introduce some words and definition that one will come across when looking at the scientific field.

The Scientific Method (Simplified)

When conducting science, there is always a set of steps that are followed in the pursuit knowledge:

First, we observe a phenomenon in nature. Nature here being anything present in our physical reality.

Second, we wish to know how this phenomenon occurs, or takes place, or, the mechanism by which it operates. So, we pose a question: "How does this phenomena of X work?"

Next, we try and gather as much facts about X as we can, making careful notes and observations. If X is measurable in imperical ways (ie. using numbers and other hard measures), all the better.

Once we have gathered enough data (observations of all kinds), then we must formulate a Hypothesis (see definition below). The hypothesis is our best guess at what we think is the mechanism underlying or responsible for the phenomena. This guess must be based on (and supported by) the facts that we have observed about the phenomena. A good scientist will always try and formulate as many initial working hypotheses as the available evidence will support... because further systematic study of the phenomena will reveal shortcomings of some and will thus whittle the list down to a small list of likely candidates. Such shortlisting weeds out the improbable explanations, leaving only the plausible, so one needs to start with a good set of working hypotheses to begin with.

The next step is to design experiments to draw out more facts and evidence that will either support (or possibly reject) the hypothesis. If carefully constructed experiments yield good, confirmational evidence, then the hypothesis has shown merit and warrants even further investigation and repetition of experimental results by independent parties.

At this point, the Hypothesis is still only conjecture. However, if a hypothesis can be repeatedly and experimentally validated at will, and is well supported by all observed evidence, and can be shown to be able to make accurate predictions of future events of said phenomenon, then it is elevated to a status of Theory. This is not to say that theories are last word on the subject. Theories are always provisional and subject to review and change *IF* (a that's a big IF) any contradictory evidence comes to light at any point, at any time, and that these contradictory facts are themselves reproducible and observable by anyone, at will. This last bit is very important, so I'll repeat. Theories can be overturned or may require modification should new evidence come to light that contradicts the theory or the previous facts. And, these contradictory facts must be readily observable and repeatable. THAT is the beauty of science. The theories are always getting better and moving us closer to the ultimate truth. Science puts an emphasis on observations being accessible and repeatable by anyone, because one of the greatest strengths of science is in its requirement that one does not need to possess any special "transcendental" or "revealed" power or knowledge to participate in its process. Anyone, and I mean ANYONE, who is interested and willing is given the opportunity (and indeed is required to be able) to study and observe the same events whenever and wherever they like. This is the magnificence of Science... it is accessible to anyone, and all one needs to practice it is natural curiousity.

A good theory will explain all the data that is available. A good theory will be able to predict future outcomes, or outcomes in a different time and place. It transcends time and place. It applies just as well here as it does in China, as it does on the Moon, as it does in the farthest galaxy or nebula that we can observe. It applies just as well now as it did yesterday, and as it will tomorrow.

No scientific theory is accepted lightly. Its results must be proven and independently validated many times and by many people throughout the world before it is allowed to be published and eventually accepted. It must withstand the most extreme scrutiny by some of the world's brightest people. This process might take years to accomplish, sometimes decades! "Theory" status does not come lightly, and it is taken to be quite a serious business in Scientific circles.

A bad theory however can't explain shit. A bad theory is not supported by any evidence, or is supported by the flimsiest of evidence. Bad theories are just as common as there are crackpots in the world. Bad theories are like assholes... everybody's got one. The "Creation" myth is one such theory, which attempts to explain the origins of all life on Earth and descent of mankind from an incestuous First Couple and their murderous son (who apparently did marry, but it's not clear whom he married since there was only 1 female in the world at the time... his mom!)

Just think about how liberating the Scientific method is... just how egalitarian it is. Just think about how this differs from doctrine of "divine revelation" or from the common parlor tricks that "psychic" charlatans employ.

Remember... if someone makes a claim, you always have a right to call bullshit and ask them to prove it! And, if they can't or won't offer any plausible account or supporting hard evidence, then either there's nothing material about their theory, or they are trying to snow you. Either way, it's cause for you to move on and past such crackpots and charlatans.

Some useful Definitions of Science-related Terms

hypothesis: A tentative explanation of one or more phenomena in nature that can be tested by observations, experiments, or both. In order to be considered scientific, a hypothesis must be falsifiable, which means that it can be proven to be incorrect.

[A side note: Some statements or claims are not verifiable, and thus not provable. In other words, there is no possible experiment that you can devise or observations that you can make to determine whether the statement or claim is true or false. These statements are statements of faith and thus science does not concern itself with them. Science is only concerned with verifiable truths, not "revealed" truths.]

experiment: A test under controlled conditions that is made to demonstrate a known truth, examine the validity of a hypothesis, or determine the efficacy of something previously untried.

observation: The act of making and recording a measurement; The act of observing; Fact learned by observing; The act of noticing or paying attention.

fact: A natural phenomenon repeatedly confirmed by observation; a truth.

theory: A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that typically incorporates many confirmed obserations, laws, and successfully verified hypothesis.

law: A description of how a natural phenomenon will occur under certain circumstances.

What Science Is

Science is the systematic study of the physical universe and all phenomena therein
Science is concerned with the material and physical world. ie. All that which can be observed
Science is concerned with questions and statements that are testable and verifiable
Scientific theories are the best explanations of how we think something works, and they are based on facts and evidence. One can't have a theory unless one has facts and evidence, and the evidence must lend very strong support to the original hypothesis, and these results must be repeatably borne out in experiment.

What Science Is Not

Science is not swayed by appeals to authority. Every claim must be proven and not just taken on faith
Science is not concerned with supernatural, paranormal or mystical realms
Science is not acquired through divine revelation
Science is not concerned with what its practitioners believe
Science is not a "majority opinion rules" proposition. Truth is truth, no matter how many people beg to differ.
Science is not concerned with how many people believe its conclusions
Science is not static and unchanging. It gets better with age.
Science is not dogma (believing in absolutes because you are told to)
Science is not religion

A person who tries to discredit a scientific idea by simply stating it is a "theory" (using those stupid air quotes) is a person completely ignorant of the scientific process and has likely been duped and led by the nose to buy into a false and precarious worldview. These adherents are simply spouting off what they've heard and taken with hook, line, and sinker whatever garbage, pseudoscience, and bunk that is currently being spouted from the propaganda mills of religious evangelicals and their right-wing ignorance movement. With such displays of ignorance, they show they have no credibility to lend to their arguments and thus should be summarily dismissed from any debate involving science. This is particularly true when they begin quoting scripture. Such a person has no mind left at all.

Who is attacking Science you may ask? There are two main camps, but both are linked. First, there are the Republicans, guided and supported by orthodox religious doctorine and junk/pseudoscience, and second, the Creation "Scientists" including proponents of Intelligent Design, supported and funded by the Discovery Institute and who wish to use their platform to overthrow science and (re)install religious teachings in place of it. The Discovery Institute's other aim is to promote the the perception that western Christianity is the dominant religion of the world (See the Discovery Institute's accidentally leaked Wedge Document, which incidentally is no longer available for public download from their site; only their rebuttals to criticism about the Wedge Document are available for download. Do you think they've got something to hide?) Anyway, how ironic, or rather moronic, for these camps to try and use a special, doctored and twisted version of science to disprove science? Does anyone reading this think this tactic by the Religious Right makes any sense? What side are they on? For science, or against it?

So, who are these Creation "Scientists" anyway?

(Lenny Flank summed it up pretty good in his essay WHO ARE THE CREATION "SCIENTISTS"?)
There are a large variety of people who claim the mantle "creation scientists". Almost all of them come from the fundamentalist Protestant wing of Christianity, although a few belong to such denominations as the Roman Catholic Church. One thing they all share in common is a belief in an inerrant Bible, one that is literally correct in all its original writings on all subjects, including its description of the Creation, Adam and Eve, and Noah's Flood.
As in any political and religious movement, there are several schools of creationist thought, separated by doctrinal differences in their interpretations of the Bible. (According to one source, there were in 1984 no less than 22 national creationist organizations in the United States, and at least 54 state and local organizations.)
The "day-age" faction of creationism argues that the "days" referred to in Genesis are really symbolic of enormous stretches of time, and not 24-hour days. Perhaps the best-known of the "day- age" groups today are the Jehovah's Witnesses. Another school of thought is that of the "gap" theorists, who argue that there is an unmentioned lapse of time between the first and second verses of Genesis, and that the six-day creation event did not happen until after a long period of time had already passed. Many of the televangelists are "gap" theorists. Finally, there are the "strict" creationists, who assert that creation happened as described in Genesis, and that the universe and all life was created within six days, several thousand years ago. The first two schools, the "day- age" and the "gap", accept the geological evidence of a very ancient earth (but not the evidence of evolution), and are usually referred to collectively as the "old earth creationists". The strict creationists, however, assert that the entire universe is just 6,000 to 10,000 years old, and they are referred to as "young-earth creationists".
There is also another trend of thought, the "theistic evolutionists", who argue that evolution is simply the method which God used to create life, and that there is no conflict between science and the Bible. Nearly all mainstream religious denominations are supporters of theistic evolution. Although they could be considered "creationist", since they do assert that the universe was made by God, theistic evolutionists are viewed by the fundamentalists as "the enemy" who is doing the work of Satan. It would be more proper to view the fundamentalist creationists as "anti-evolutionists", since the one thing that unites them all is the belief that evolutionary theory is contrary to the tenets of Christianity. Since, on this matter, the theistic evolutionists are on the "wrong" side, they are not accepted as "creationists" by the fundamentalists.
Rest of the essay here.

For those who are still with me, you will now be rewarded with a rant... STRONG LANGUAGE advisory in effect:

(P.S. If you are a religious nut on a crusade and leave me the usual sampling of stupid comments that I see such people post on other folks' sites, I am going to delete your ass faster than you can blink. I am not beyond using the the same vile censorship that you folks always use in you war against sense and reason. Time for our side to step up and play your game. Believe it. Count on it.)

Dear reader... if you have not been able to deduce by now, such people make me very angry and I just want to choke the living shit out of them, though as I am a kind and gentle person, I usually refrain from such outward aggression. I leave ignorance, killing, maming, raping and pilaging to the neo-cons, the religious fundamentalists (on all sides) and the likes of Mr. Bush and company.

Despite what the Religious Right would have you believe, no good scientist ever claimed that a theory is an indisputable fact. Rather, real scientists are careful not to use such language of "absolutes". Rather, scientists remain pragmatic, knowing full well that any theory is simply the best available explanation we have at this time, given the available and supporting evidence. Scientists are careful when making claims about the physical world for they know that any such claim will be held to the scrutiny of the evidence and all other scientists and non-scientists in the world. In other words, if the claims are bullshit, then they will be easily revealed and disproved simply by someone else trying to repeat the results or findings. Science is precise, and as such scientists tend to be more precise in their use of language when explaining physical phenomena and tend to shy away from making absolute or non-sensical statements, for any good scientist knows that we do not yet know everything there is to know and our theories are always provisional and open to review and revision as new facts and evidence are ascertained. Believers of the supernatural and metaphysical make all kinds of wild claims all the time and no one is allowed (or even able) to repeat them or validate them because... well, because all such claims are a bunch of hooey, horse pucky, cow cookies, and bull biscuits. Because of this inability to measure, observe, verify, test, or validate the supernatural/metaphysical/spiritual realm, scientists don't even bother with it. What good is it when your findings can never be objective... in other words, when the "revealed" outcome cannot be used by everyone alike and is subjective to each person. In that world, no piece of knowledged gained could ever be useful to mankind. It can only serve the egotistical and narcissistic purposes of the "knowledge" seeker and the exploitative/profiteering purposes of the "knowledge" giver.

I would gladly forfeit my life right this instant to prove my certainty in this... the knowledge that there exists no spiritual or metaphysical realms. And to demonstrate this, then I pose this wager: If there be any truth to the notion of the existence of a spiritual world, then I now challenge any being or entity that may inhabit such world to SMITE ME OR STRIKE ME DEAD RIGHT NOW WHERE I SIT. I mean it, RIGHT NOW. Crucify me if you will in order that my blood will wash away the sins of just one of my fellow beings. If Jesus did this for all mankind, then why not take me and cleanse the soul of just one other person. (as a side note, I don't understand the logic in how a blood sacrifice could ever save souls, but that's another issue altogether and best saved for discussion at another time.) Do soldiers that "die for me" or mothers/fathers that "die for their children" also have the same soul salvational powers? Why should Jesus' death be any different? Can I ask Jesus not to die for me? I have no choice in the matter, do I?

Right, it would appear that no metaphysical entity has taken my challenge and smote me for my blasphemy or used me for my willingness to die to save the "soul" of another person. I'm sure I'll live a long, healthy, happy life... or at least long enough to disprove that my death had anything to do with this bald-faced challenge.

As for now, it looks like I'm still alive and still typing... and evidently, you're still reading. Good, I'm very glad to still have you with me my valued friend.

Now, these evangelical creationists are on the bandwagon big-time trying to raise doubts and poke holes in the theory of Evolution. They have yet to succeed, and the truth is that the concept is now universally accepted among scientists. And I'm not talking about those religious evangelists in "scientists clothing". I don't care how many young devout Christians the Discovery Institute sends through college to get their Biology degrees, simply so they can have an army of obedient little thought slaves that they can use to speak out against science as "insiders". The reality is all the Discovery Institute has done is programmed a bunch of drones to go out, waste 8 years of their life on rote memorization and superficial passing of exams without really trying to understand the material and believing in what they are studying, ONLY SO THAT the Christian Right have a dissenting voice from "the inside"; so they can claim "see, not all scientists agree with Evolution", etc.. For those of you getting your Biology (or any science) degrees in this way, I feel very sorry for the tragic waste of your life on such a dishonest group and such an unworthy cause.

Now, all Creation "Science" evangelists -- and I cannot begin to explain just how much I hate them for using the word "science" in that way -- can do is look to see where there are gaps in the theories of science and mount a big FUD campaign. They look for any weakness or any part in which our understanding is not complete, to the extent that they ignore the 99% of the evidence that does exist and does support the theory. Of course they would not focus on the evidence and how the theories of science ARE supported, who could blame them? They are in a death struggle against reason. But rather where there is any tiny opening for them to thrust their toe of doubt and pry the doors of reason open to the harsh and cold darkness of ignorance and superstition, they will do so, and without apology. What's worse is that they don't make any case for their own "theories", but are only there to (unsuccessfully) try to poke holes in science-based theories. They are a pathetic desperate lot, these very small people, hoping against all odds to hold on to their quaint, ill-conceived and unsupported little notions about the world and the origins and nature of life. They cannot stand being an insignificant little descendant of an ape on an insignificant little blue planet orbiting an unremarkable little star, stranded 40 thousand light years from the center of an ordinary, typical galaxy in a vast universe comprised of billions of galaxies that are more remarkable.

Diagram of the spiral arms of our

Milky Way Galaxy.

(click on pictures to view a larger version)

Artist's rendition of The Milky Way Galaxy

We don't have cameras far enough away from here to take an actual photo, however, here is an actual photo of the Andromeda Galaxy (M 31) is the closest large spiral to us (at only 2 million light years) and is visible to the naked eye in the constellation Andromeda. It is 1.5-2 times more massive than the Milky Way

They truly cannot comprehend their insignificance and the insignificance to an all-knowing, all-seeing power to want to send his *only* son to save humanity from its own foibles. We shall discover other worlds and other life one day, and then will the concept of "salvation through the blood of the son" apply to them? Much like the non-middle-Eastern peoples of the world circa 33 AD, "He" did not even go and minister to them, did he? Could the inhabitants of the island nations of Japan or Australia that were around at that time possibly hope for salvation through the blood of the Christ? They who had not -- could not -- hear the "good word"? How then can they possibly be saved if they never heard the message, and could never form a personal relationship with the man? Those who claim to have this personal relationship with Christ today cannot claim so. What they have is a relationship with words and text written about a man, and written by strangers after his death at that. Authors who were removed in time and sometimes by several decades and who had to rely on faulty memories and passed on accounts of the life and times of the man. Authors who as flawed human beings (like you and me) were entrusted to record the (supposed) most important message sent by the almighty to mankind. To believe all this in light of the knowledge and the facts that we have acquired in the short time that we been freed from shackles of the persecution of religious fundamentalism of the dark ages is to buy into the patently ridiculous; a pipe dream for fools who are too feeble to regulate their own moral behaviour without the looming threat of divine retribution from a wrathful, vengeful God or the loving graces of His son, a divine saviour; and to believe that both of these characters -- the good Cop and bad Cop can exist together along with a third in a holy trinity -- is to attribute divinity to what we might in an ordinary person today call Schizophrenia.

How do religions deal with new challenges and evidence to the contrary of their dogma and beliefs? That's right, they tow the line. They kick and scream and lash out irrationally, and only when they've had their 100 year tantrum and can no longer deny the fact, they pass a decree and change the religion to adopt the new knowledge and claim that it was always their own. I saw evidence of this just recently on Dr. Dino's site (Kent Hovind, a Creationist poorly disguised as a scientific-thinking scholar who is espousing Intelligent Design). This unscrupulous, bastard, lying son-of-a-***** actually said that science made the original claim that the Sun revolved around the Earth and that heavy objects fall faster than lighter ones; both of which are church doctrines proven to be false by science.)

Mr. Hovind (I can't call you "Doctor" sir, because I don't recognize PhDs that are awarded for $100 over the Internet), if you are reading this... FUCK YOU!! It was Galileo who taught you that all objects fall at the same rate, and the religious nuts of his day almost had him executed for it. They might as well have executed him, because he died a lonely, punished man under house arrest because his views were so heretical to the religious establishment of the time. You should be ashamed you fucking charlatan for trying to claim otherwise. I spit upon the sperm and egg that gave you life you GOD DAMN moron.

And, as for the Sun revolving around the Earth, it was Copernicus who with his scientific facts and observations came and upset the Ptolemean world of a Helio-centric "universe" which the religious establishment of the day held high and proud, against ALL REASON AND EVIDENCE to the contrary. It took a scientist (even before there was such a term in any language) to come along and break the world out of the grip of ignorance.

It took Columbus, who did not believe the Earth was flat as the religious establishment of the day had convinced everyone of (and some still do to this day... unbelievable), in an attempt to find a shorter crossing to the Indies that the America (to which you add your foul poison Mr. Hovind) was discovered and proved to the then ignorant Europeans just coming out of their religion-induced mental incarceration that the Earth was indeed NOT FLAT. And if it wasn't for all those book burnings during the Dark Ages (called Dark because of the complete persecution imposed by the religious establishment of that time to anyone who questioned or sought to think independently or acquire knowledge not manifest in the Catholic doctrine of the day), we would have known that the Earth was not flat as this was knowledge that was given to us by the Greek scholars over a millenia before through their understanding of Geometry... a field of mathematics that we had nearly lost I might add thanks to fools like you and your religious ilk, Mr. Hovind.

And, I am certain Mr. Hovind, if it were up to you, we would still be burning books, wouldn't we? Those heretical books on Astronomy, and Geology, and Evolution, right Mr. Hovind? Those books full of those theories about Evolution that you hate so much, and we'd replace them with what, an airy-fairy account of creation and unsupported quotations from your religious scriptures? Puhleeeeez, spare me. Such claims of dogma ADD NOTHING to our understanding of the world and how it works. Thanks for contributing to the spread of the public's ignorance towards science and science education, you ignorant bastard.

If you want to criticize, denigrate and disprove a theory Mr. Hovind, you better be able to replace it with a plausible and hopefully better alternative. Or at least one that is just as good. An explanation that accounts for and fits the evidence. You have not done so. You can't simply misinterpret the scientific facts at your whim and point out a flaw (or rather, incompleteness) that you've fabricated, and then proceed to say that for these reasons we should disbelieve in the scientific theory and buy into yours instead. This is a straw man argument. What evidence and support do you have for yours? Creationism, or whatever it is, you better be able to support it and subject it to the same standard of scrutiny. But you can't, can you Mr. Hovind? Because it doesn't stand up even to a 5 year-old's questioning, can it now? No, instead you like to attack science, particularly Evolution, and continue the fallacious line of reasoning about "gaps" in the fossil record. Sure there are gaps, but we've seen enough evidence that cannot be discounted, no? Anyway, I am certain that if scientists in future were to dig up my bones and say that I am descended from my father, you would be in vociferous opposition to this claim with the reasoning that there is a "gap" in the fossil record and note the missing transitional form between the skeleton of my father and that of me. By this argument, if it were solely up to you Creationists, then none of us human beings could actually exist since no transitional forms could be found from one generation to the next. Our fossil record would simply be a trick of the devil, a temptation away from God's word. Idiots.

I have been to your site Mr. Hovind, and I have watched your video seminars. I have seen your dishonest tactics; I have seen your misquotes, your misrepresentations, your complete and utter lack of respect for others' intelligence, your lies, deceptions, and fabrications, your oversimplifications, your personal attacks, your underhanded and dishonest manipulation and twisting of the facts; I have seen your putting of words into other people's mouths and quoting them dishonestly, incompletely, and out of context. I have verified your claims and facts and have determined you are a complete fraud. If only the members of your audience would do the same. I wish to expose you Mr. Hovind, for the evil, pernicious phoney that you are. You are practicing every foul, dishonest and underhanded deed and trick in the book that you claim (with your religious moral founding) is evil. In closing Mr. Hovind, I'd like to tell you that you are a despicable human being, if we can even call you that. So, FUCK YOU Kent Hovind, FUCK YOU. And the same goes for your colleagues and contemporaries Misters Barnes, Baugh, and Bliss, and the rest of you Creation Science morons; kiss my ass, all of you... and that goes for your mindless followers too.

A final word

My sincere regrets to any friends whom this post might offend. But like others who are passionate and protective of the people they love and ideals that they cherish, so too am I with respect to Science. I truly believe knowledge, education, and learning are Man's only hope for salvation and deliverance from his own ignorance and evil. Knowledge is the light. The only light. And it is the path to righteousness. Dogma and ignorance are the antithesis to this and so you must forgive me my friends for running to the aid of my precious, beautiful science when faced by attacks from those whom seek to enslave the mind and body of mankind.

Most sincerely,

Simon

A Test of Discrimination

Mon, 05 Dec 2005 07:27:28 GMT

dis·crim·i·na·tion P Pronunciation Key (d-skrm-nshn)
n.

The act of discriminating.
The ability or power to see or make fine distinctions; discernment.
Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice: racial discrimination; discrimination against foreigners.

This post is concerned with definition #2 above.

One of the following two links is host to a set of complete nut jobs; lunatics who have absolutely no concept of reality or discerning of fact from fiction; those living in complete fantasy. The other contains accounts of plausible theory based on verifiable facts. I will not give away the answer. I will let you, the reader, decide.

Link #1

People commited to fostering peace between planet Earth and our extraterrestrial visitors:

http://www.peaceinspace.net/ (note, the link may not work when you try. if it does not, try again later)

A quote from the site:

“I urge you to approve the Canadian Exopolitics Initiative, whereby the Government of Canada will undertake a 10 year process of formal, funded process of public education, scientific research, educational curricula development and implementation, strategic planning, community activity, and public outreach concerning our terrestrial society’s full cultural, political, social, legal, and governmental communication and public interest diplomacy with advanced, ethical Off-Planet cultures now visiting Earth.”

Link #2

A 2.5 hour video about the slow fashioning of America into a police state:

http://www.revradio.org/movies/ml.wmv

(yeah, you heard me right... 2.5 hours! Don't give up on it because of the poor video quality or the slow half-hour in the middle. If you can, try and watch all the way through. I'm sure if one were so inclined, one could find a higher quality rendition of this movie somewhere on the BitTorrent network.)

Question for the reader

Can you discriminate between the groups behind these two links and be able to tell which of them is clearly and certifiably nuts?

Science is the Light

Sat, 05 Nov 2005 08:22:22 GMT

Good people of the world, I implore you, "Come to the light!" Science is the light.

(and none of that hokus-pokus pseudoscience being pandered by proselytizing religious apologists, either!)

In support of Science and Evolution, particulary during this critical juncture when Reason is in a war against Absurdity in the courts of Pennsylvania over the issue of whether "Intelligent Design" (creationism) should be taught in SCIENCE CLASS as an alternative theory to Evolution in explaining the origins of life on Earth. Given the overwhelming evidence in support of Evolution and the inability of Intelligent Design to explain an iota other than just to wave it's hands and say "it is so by the will of the designer", it is patently ridiculous to allow the latter to be taught in a class next to real science. It simply does not belong there... nor anywhere else for that matter.

If there truly exists a God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect, why would he wish for us to forgo their use?

EVOLUTION: BUSH ASKS FOR $7B TO FIGHT EVOLVING BIRD-FLU VIRUS.
This is the final week of the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Board trial in a Harrisburg, PA federal court.
Back in August, before the trial was underway, President Bush came down on the side of intelligent design, much to the delight of the religious right.
On Tuesday, however, he announced that he would ask Congress for $7.1 billion to prepare the nation for a worldwide outbreak of flu. It's a hedge against evolution. Although a virulent strain of bird flu has killed at least 62 people in Asia, there have been no confirmed cases of human-to-human transmission. The fear is that the H5N1 virus will mutate (evolve) making that possible.
Does this mean that Mr. Bush has changed his mind on evolution?
(or does this reveal yet another astounding piece of evidence for the logical inconsistency in Bush's beliefs, and indeed in any worldview where Evolution is dismissed in favour of God's designing hand, but where those same believers must curiously hedge their bets against evolving strains of viri and bacteria? Irony is so sweet.)

Some Interesting Quotes

The notion that science does not concern itself with first causes -- that it leaves the field to theology or metaphysics, and confines itself to mere effects -- this notion has no support in the plain facts. If it could, science would explain the origin of life on earth at once-and there is every reason to believe that it will do so on some not too remote tomorrow. To argue that gaps in knowledge which will confront the seeker must be filled, not by patient inquiry, but by intuition or revelation, is simply to give ignorance a gratuitous and preposterous dignity.

H. L. Mencken, 1930

The truth is that Christian theology, like every other theology, is not only opposed to the scientific spirit; it is also opposed to all other attempts at rational thinking. Not by accident does Genesis 3 make the father of knowledge a serpent- slimy, sneaking and abominable. Since the earliest days the church as an organization has thrown itself violently against every effort to liberate the body and mind of man. It has been, at all times and everywhere, the habitual and incorrigible defender of bad governments, bad laws, bad social theories, bad institutions. It was, for centuries, an apologist for slavery, as it was the apologist for the divine right of kings.

H. L. Mencken

Talking about Katrina Being Good for Business

Sat, 29 Oct 2005 09:24:44 GMT

This blog entry is inspired by this post on Daleelama's site. I thought I'd repost here since the running theme of my blog this week (inadvertently) turned out to be mainly about money and wealth.

To start, let me get this straight... the price of oil, a business that the Bush family is cock-deep into, has been rising steadily pretty much ever since Bush decided to go to war with any country that pissed the wrong way. Curiously, the only countries to be hit so far though are ones that are key to oil production or transmission. The evidence suggests that having the U.S. now in control of these countries has enigmatically FAILED to result in a stabilizing effect on their oil production and supply. Rather, crude oil prices have been on a steady rise since the republican troglodyte took presidential office. We are being told that the rise in the price of crude is resultant from increases in world demand, which is placing upward pressure on crude oil prices. BULLSHIT! How much of an increase in demand can we reasonably expect in such a short period of time? The price of crude has more than doubled in just the last 3 years. There is no way the population of the Earth has grown by THAT much in the last 3 years, nor is there any evidence of a mass shift to industrialization of the world's poorer nations and their developing economies. 100% increases in such a short period of time suggests that the problem does not lie with Demand (which changes slowly and over long periods of time), but rather with Supply (which can be controlled almost overnight, if control over strategic production and reserves is practiced)

Micro-economics teaches us that there are two primary factors that determine the Price of any given commodity. The factors: Supply, and Demand.

So, since we do not expect demand to increase suddenly and unexplainedly, something else must account for such dramatic increases in price. Can anyone guess what that might be? That's right... supply. A significant share of the world's oil production has fallen under direct U.S. control since the "acquisition" of two previously independent Arab nations: Afghanistan and Iraq. The U.S. now possesses control of some major arab oil taps, and adjustments of the oil flow through these taps (or even the threat of adjustment) has a huge economic ripple effect in the energy and commodities markets, as well as on the policies and behaviours of the neighbouring OPEC oil countries.

What possible purpose would there be for the government to control the supply of this commodity? Hmmmm... let's consider a hypothetical situation; a thought experiment of sorts...

If you were president, and you (and all your family and friends) were in the widget business and you knew widgets could be sold for a much higher price if only they became a more rare commodity, and you had the support of all your widget-investment buddies "encouraging" you to do something about the flood of widgets in the market, would you not be tempted to use your influence and powers of office to close down a few widget factories that you don't own so that the factories you do own have more of the market and fetch a higher price for each widget due to the decrease in availability of said widget in the marketplace?

Recently, Hurricane Katrina was reported to have wiped out a huge quantity of refined petroleum as well as damaging the refining and storage infrastructure. We are told that these are the chief reasons for the price of gasoline skyrocketing after the hurricane. Well, some people who were labelled as cynics, actually rejected this claim and accused the oil companies of price gouging -- which in my mind is a despicable act of greed in the first place but coupled with the circumstances of tragedy and human loss, such practices are nothing short of a heinous defilement of principle and virtue. Perhaps it is time to consider replacing the popular image of terrorist as turban-wearing Arab zealot with that of corporate oil executive in expensive Armani suit laughing at the doltish, spend-happy sheep that represent joe public.

In the news item reported below, we see that despite the story we have been given about the loss of large reserves and diminished production capacity as a result of the recent hurricanes, the oil companies nonetheless managed to reap record revenues and profits during the same quarter. And they want us to believe there is no price gouging at play. Yeah, sure, whatever.

It seems to me that in the new global economy and the rise of the mega-corporation with its cold, dehumanized view of business and its market (we/us), there is no longer any social responsibility; only profits and losses (with nary a chance for the latter). Despite this, they have been able to convince us that they are actually benevolent "good corporate citizens". When you are a megacorp and wield that much economic and political power, you too could be a good corporate citizen... as long as you use enough public relations (ie. lying) to produce enough spin on the facts or sow enough doubt on interpretation of the facts. If you are an especially rich megacorp, you could always pay to have the very definition of that annoying word "good" changed. Everything has a price.

It seems to me that as long as their scandalous practices are not discovered and as long as their leadership can avoid utter and gross mismanagement of the company, large corporations will always find ways to turn a profit and do it "in spades" whenever death and human misery are involved. Just ask Halliburton; they seem to be moving to specialize in that very area.

The article below (borrowed from Daleelama) provides context for my rant.

An entry from the blog of Daleelama...

Katrina Good for Business

Oil firms reap huge profits after storms

'Exxon Mobil Corp.'s profits surged 75 percent to a record $9.92 billion in the third quarter, fueled by high crude oil and natural gas prices, the world's largest publicly traded oil company reported yesterday.
    Revenue for the Irving, Texas, oil giant neared $101 billion in the quarter -- the first time a U.S. company has broken the $100 billion mark in a three-month period.
    Marathon Oil Corp., the fourth-biggest U.S. oil company, and Royal Dutch Shell, Europe's second-biggest oil company, also reported record profits for the third quarter.
    Houston-based Marathon's net income rose to $770 million from $222 million a year earlier. The Hague-based Shell said net income rose 68 percent to $9 billion.'

http://www.washtimes.com/business/20051028-122758-2582r.htm

Talking about Open post

Wed, 26 Oct 2005 06:52:15 GMT

I'd like to highlight that this too is not my post. I got it from here. However, I would like you to think about what kind of lifestyle and so-called "democratic ideals" those young American men and women in military service in Iraq are defending and dying for...

It's truly sad when the top 1% of the population control one-third of the country's wealth... the top 5% of the population control 59%; the top 10% control 72%; and the top 20% control 85%.

How was the Soviet Union, even under the strictest communist rule, ever considered more inequitable than this?

Remind me once again, what is the "American Dream"? For very large part of the population, it is nightmare of subsistence living or abject poverty.

-Simon

Open post

I am not up to writing too much tonight, so I will leave this post open for everyone to just say what they like.

Here are some graphs to ponder over: