Paul Krugman's latest column The Search for P.M.D.'s asks about the suicide bombers in Iraq. He notes several aspects that I have wondered about, too -- who are these young men who are so willing, so eager to die? What are they doing it for? Who are they doing it for? And what do they hope to accomplish? Nobody seems to know. There's no apparent organization to which they belong, no one seeks credit for their acts, there seems to be no apparent knowledge of who they are or what their families think of what they have done. Krugman writes ". . . these people are utter nihilists . . . The people running the suicide operations in Iraq, whether they are working independently or are just one organization, don't even claim credit, let alone make any demands." Krugman concludes " They just want to ensure that America fails to produce anything decent in Iraq and they are ready to sacrifice all Iraqis for that end."
But I am not so sure their goals are that strategic or comprehensible. The only thing I can compare it to is the monks who set themselves on fire in south Vietnam and the kamicaze pilots during WWII. In both these cases, their goal was primarily religious, a demonstration to their God of the purity of their faith contrasted with the corruptness of the earthly regime they were fighting.
Such intensity of religious feeling makes these tactics impossible to stop by "secular" means. Now the FBI is warning that suicide bombers might attack in the United States. Its such a useless warning -- police are supposed to keep an eye out for "people wearing bulky overcoats in the heat of summer, people with electric wires sticking out of their clothing, or people smelling of chemicals" but what are Americans supposed to do if such a person is spotted -- run screaming for the exits?
It would be better to talk to Muslim religious leaders, at a high and sustained level, about how this kind of fanaticism can be dealt with -- though considering the track record of the FBI (Waco, Ruby Ridge) and the Bush administration (some of whom seem to be actually trying to turn this into a religious war of Judaeo-Christians against Islam) this may not be a very realistic suggestion.
UPDATE -- maybe they really do want a religious war - read this article by Sydney Blumenthal about General Boykin.
Sunday, May 23, 2004
Friday, May 21, 2004
Chalabi, master spy?
Agency: Chalabi group was front for Iran
" . . . one of the most sophisticated and successful intelligence operations in history . . . " Well, I should say. In 70 years of trying, did the KGB ever in its wildest dreams think it could trick the United States into going to war against another country, at a cost of 500 killed, 10,000 wounded, $200 billion?
If this is true, if the Bush and Blair administrations really were played for such fools by the Iranians, then Bush, Cheney and Blair will likely have no choice except to resign. I think that means the Secretary of State (Powell?) would become president, but I'm not sure.
" . . . one of the most sophisticated and successful intelligence operations in history . . . " Well, I should say. In 70 years of trying, did the KGB ever in its wildest dreams think it could trick the United States into going to war against another country, at a cost of 500 killed, 10,000 wounded, $200 billion?
If this is true, if the Bush and Blair administrations really were played for such fools by the Iranians, then Bush, Cheney and Blair will likely have no choice except to resign. I think that means the Secretary of State (Powell?) would become president, but I'm not sure.
Thursday, May 20, 2004
The List
Oh, those goofy Americans, always kidding around! AP reports on the newest security toy U.S. database contractor gave authorities names of 120,000 'likely terrorists' There's this new database, see, that can easily and cheaply pick out a terrorist at a hundred paces, just by filling in a few facts - age, gender, ethnicity, credit history, complaints from the neighbours, places you go and people you see, and all that, and hey presto, you get The List of everyone who's likely a terrorist.
But of course, they're not actually USING The List, they say, so there isn't anything to worry about here -- and if, by chance, they ever did actually use The List, well, it would only be used by trained, professional investigators, so really there's no problem -- they're just having a little fun with it, so don't worry, be happy. Its not as though anyone would ABUSE such The List, after all, like by filling in any false data, any data that hadn't been checked rigorously by a trained professional, so there's no need for alarm.
And of course any truly innocent person would easily be able to prove their innocence in spite of how suspicious it would be if their name did came up on The List . . . of course, if their name kept on coming up on The List again and again, well, that might be a little more suspicious, even if they do SAY its just someone else with the same name . . . or if they maybe LOOK a little shifty-eyed or if their neighbours THINK they act funny, like maybe if they're not friendly enough, or maybe too friendly, well, that's suspicious . . . or if they CAN'T prove they are innocent and that it's all a big mistake, well, that's REALLY suspicious . . . so maybe then we should arrest them anyway, and send all of them to this big camp, where they can do all sorts of useful work and they only have to stay there until they can prove how innocent they are, just to make sure the rest of us will always be safe. . .
But of course, they're not actually USING The List, they say, so there isn't anything to worry about here -- and if, by chance, they ever did actually use The List, well, it would only be used by trained, professional investigators, so really there's no problem -- they're just having a little fun with it, so don't worry, be happy. Its not as though anyone would ABUSE such The List, after all, like by filling in any false data, any data that hadn't been checked rigorously by a trained professional, so there's no need for alarm.
And of course any truly innocent person would easily be able to prove their innocence in spite of how suspicious it would be if their name did came up on The List . . . of course, if their name kept on coming up on The List again and again, well, that might be a little more suspicious, even if they do SAY its just someone else with the same name . . . or if they maybe LOOK a little shifty-eyed or if their neighbours THINK they act funny, like maybe if they're not friendly enough, or maybe too friendly, well, that's suspicious . . . or if they CAN'T prove they are innocent and that it's all a big mistake, well, that's REALLY suspicious . . . so maybe then we should arrest them anyway, and send all of them to this big camp, where they can do all sorts of useful work and they only have to stay there until they can prove how innocent they are, just to make sure the rest of us will always be safe. . .
Call for resignations
Wow -- I have never seen such an article before -- Salon.com | A call to conscience
Former diplomat Roger Morris says American foreign service officers should resign rather than serve the Bush administration any longer.
You serve the worst foreign policy regime by far in the history of the republic. The havoc you feel inside government has inflicted unprecedented damage on national interests and security. As never before since the United States stepped onto the world stage, we have flouted treaties and alliances, alienated friends, multiplied enemies, lost respect and credibility on every continent. You see this every day. And again, whatever your politics, those of you who have served other presidents know this is an unparalleled bipartisan disaster. In its militant hubris and folly, the Bush administration has undone the statesmanship of every government before it, and broken faith with every presidency, Democratic and Republican (even that of Bush I), over the past half century. In Afghanistan, where we once held the promise of a new ideal, we have resumed our old alliance with warlords and drug dealers, waging punitive expeditions and propping up puppets in yet another seamy chapter of the 'Great Game,' presuming to conquer the unconquerable. In Iraq . . . we are living a foreign policy nightmare, locked in a cycle of violence and seething, spreading hatred continued at incalculable cost, escaped only with hazardous humiliation abroad and bitter divisions at home. Debacle is complete.
I have worked off and on in the civil service for the last 30 years, for both NDP and Social Credit governments. Having worked for Social Credit, I know how soul-destroying it is to work for people who do not respect the work done by the civil service -- ultimately, this attitude disrespects the public on whose behalf you are working.
Former diplomat Roger Morris says American foreign service officers should resign rather than serve the Bush administration any longer.
You serve the worst foreign policy regime by far in the history of the republic. The havoc you feel inside government has inflicted unprecedented damage on national interests and security. As never before since the United States stepped onto the world stage, we have flouted treaties and alliances, alienated friends, multiplied enemies, lost respect and credibility on every continent. You see this every day. And again, whatever your politics, those of you who have served other presidents know this is an unparalleled bipartisan disaster. In its militant hubris and folly, the Bush administration has undone the statesmanship of every government before it, and broken faith with every presidency, Democratic and Republican (even that of Bush I), over the past half century. In Afghanistan, where we once held the promise of a new ideal, we have resumed our old alliance with warlords and drug dealers, waging punitive expeditions and propping up puppets in yet another seamy chapter of the 'Great Game,' presuming to conquer the unconquerable. In Iraq . . . we are living a foreign policy nightmare, locked in a cycle of violence and seething, spreading hatred continued at incalculable cost, escaped only with hazardous humiliation abroad and bitter divisions at home. Debacle is complete.
I have worked off and on in the civil service for the last 30 years, for both NDP and Social Credit governments. Having worked for Social Credit, I know how soul-destroying it is to work for people who do not respect the work done by the civil service -- ultimately, this attitude disrespects the public on whose behalf you are working.
More awful photos from the Shank
Videos Amplify Picture of Violence (washingtonpost.com)
I wonder if the subtext for "Camp Redemption" is actually "The Shawshank Redemption" (Stephen King's novella about a totally corrupt and brutal prison nicknamed The Shank.)>
I wonder if the subtext for "Camp Redemption" is actually "The Shawshank Redemption" (Stephen King's novella about a totally corrupt and brutal prison nicknamed The Shank.)>
Wednesday, May 19, 2004
I see gay people
When you see those great Boston photos of the incredible couples, with their proud parents and laughing children, it will make everyone realize that gay people are just people, like everyone else only happier.
One point made by PFLAG is that knowing someone who is gay is a critical component to changing prejudiced attitudes. Now with the Boston photos, like with the San Fransisco photos before this, millions of people are seeing openly gay people at their best, and maybe for the first time. And realizing they are not weird, odd, or the least bit dangerous -- in fact, Martha, they look just like us! In fact, maybe they're even happier than we were when we got married! I think these happy photos will make a difference.
Liberal Oasis's article Don't Worry, Get Married sums up the political impact of some of the anti-gay ballot initiatives this fall, which may not be what the anti-gay politicians anticipated -- ". . . just because the Bushies may be behind these under-the-radar moves, doesn't mean they are going to work. LO previously noted that Ohio's GOP Gov. -- who probably has a better feel for his state than Rove -- signaled that he didn't think the issue was politically beneficial, when jobs are of paramount concern. Now, Sunday's NY Times reported that even the Christian Right leadership is dumbfounded at the giant yawn they're getting 'from the pews'. 'Our side is basically asleep right now,' Matt Daniels, founder of the Alliance for Marriage, which helped draft the proposed amendment, said in an interview last week. The Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, said 'I don't see any traction. The calls aren't coming in and I am not sure why.' Let's review: emphasizing opposition to gay marriage alienates the swing, and bores the base. So relax and bask in the glory of this week's historic marriages, free of fear of a November backlash."
If anything, maybe the backlash will come the other way, when people start to question why anti-gay politicians are trying to demonize such nice, normal gay people.
One point made by PFLAG is that knowing someone who is gay is a critical component to changing prejudiced attitudes. Now with the Boston photos, like with the San Fransisco photos before this, millions of people are seeing openly gay people at their best, and maybe for the first time. And realizing they are not weird, odd, or the least bit dangerous -- in fact, Martha, they look just like us! In fact, maybe they're even happier than we were when we got married! I think these happy photos will make a difference.
Liberal Oasis's article Don't Worry, Get Married sums up the political impact of some of the anti-gay ballot initiatives this fall, which may not be what the anti-gay politicians anticipated -- ". . . just because the Bushies may be behind these under-the-radar moves, doesn't mean they are going to work. LO previously noted that Ohio's GOP Gov. -- who probably has a better feel for his state than Rove -- signaled that he didn't think the issue was politically beneficial, when jobs are of paramount concern. Now, Sunday's NY Times reported that even the Christian Right leadership is dumbfounded at the giant yawn they're getting 'from the pews'. 'Our side is basically asleep right now,' Matt Daniels, founder of the Alliance for Marriage, which helped draft the proposed amendment, said in an interview last week. The Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, said 'I don't see any traction. The calls aren't coming in and I am not sure why.' Let's review: emphasizing opposition to gay marriage alienates the swing, and bores the base. So relax and bask in the glory of this week's historic marriages, free of fear of a November backlash."
If anything, maybe the backlash will come the other way, when people start to question why anti-gay politicians are trying to demonize such nice, normal gay people.
He's ba-a-a-ak!
Yahoo! News - Johnson Tosses Perfect Game Vs. Braves
Great to see Randy Johnson back in his old form again. Sometimes I wonder at how lucky I have been in the last ten years to have seen the greatest athletes who ever played in their sport -- people like Tiger Woods, Wayne Gretzky, Randy Johnson -- its a great time to be a fan.
Great to see Randy Johnson back in his old form again. Sometimes I wonder at how lucky I have been in the last ten years to have seen the greatest athletes who ever played in their sport -- people like Tiger Woods, Wayne Gretzky, Randy Johnson -- its a great time to be a fan.
Tuesday, May 18, 2004
Pulling back from the heart of darkness
Great story about what really happened in Fallouja -- Deadly April Battle Became a Turning Point for Fallouja This LA Times story tells how the Marines saved Fallouja, and themselves, from disaster. Key paragraph "With a potential bloodbath looming, Marine leaders adopted a mantra: "We don't want to turn Fallouja into Dresden" . . . Three days after that April 26 firefight, the remarkable deal was cut: The Marine leadership made a pact with the ex-generals. The Marines pulled out, violence ceased, further carnage was averted, and both sides declared victory."
Monday, May 17, 2004
Why I am against the Iraq war
Just wanted to clarify something raised in some recent comments.
Personally, I am more concerned about what the Iraq War is doing to Americans and the west, than to Iraqis.
Its great for Iraq and, I think, somewhat beneficial for that region of the world, that Saddam and his awful sons are gone. Israel may be a little safer now that Saddam's malign influence over Hamas and Hezbolla has been removed, so that there is no longer someone of his stature legitimizing suicide bombers. And some kind of change in the Iraq situation was likely inevitable at some point anyway -- the sanctions and the no-fly zones were getting more difficult to maintain every year, yet if they had been removed Saddam would geared up his weapons programs again. And given Saddam's history, there was likely no way to get rid of him without a lot of violence and disruption for the Iraqi people (though perhaps even he could have changed his spots -- look at Quadafi). And maybe now Iraq can establish some kind of society based on rule of law rather than another dictatorship.
But all of that, whether good or bad, isn't my main concern. No, what I care about is maintaining the strength of America as a moral, economic and social force. This has been endangered by the Bush neocons and their Iraq adventure, and I really don't think the relatively marginal benefit to Israel of ending Saddam's regime is going to be worth the damage that Bush and this war is doing to America's economy, to its military, to its social structure, and basically to its willingness to act as a world leader.
It took America more than a decade to get over Vietnam -- it was the mid-80s before America was willing to step forth again to exert influence in the world, and over the next 15 years,until 1999, it had tremendous impact in political, social, environmental, humanitarian and economic areas. This happened particularly under Clinton (saving Kosovo, sorting out Ireland, North Korea containment, environmental issues, NAFTA, economy, etc) but also under Reagan (the end of the Soviet Union) and under Bush 41 (creating the alliance for the Gulf War).
In the unhappy happenstance of history, Bush 43 was president on 9.11 -- it remains to be seen whether his ideological stupidity and the incompetence of his government contributed to that event, but it certainly contributed to the abandonment of basic American values which followed, exemplified but not restricted to Gitmo. Now America is mired in Iraq. Because of the Iraq war, and its terrible cost in terms of soldiers, money and international reputation compared to its relatively insignificant regional benefits, I am afraid that America will lose not only its willingness to provide leadership to the world but also its capacity to do so, and its credibility to establish the kind of peaceful political and economic alliances that the world needs. And Bush has taken Blair down with him, knocking out Britain as a world leader, too.
In a nutshell, this is why I care more about America than I do about Iraq.
Let us be lovers we'll marry our fortunes together
I've got some real estate here in my bag
So we bought a pack of cigarettes and Mrs. Wagner's pies
And we walked off to look for America
Cathy I said as we boarded a Greyhound in Pittsburgh
Michigan seems like a dream to me now
It took me four days to hitchhike from Saginaw
I've gone to look for America
Laughing on the bus playing games with the faces
She said the man in the gabardine suit was a spy
I said be careful his bowtie is really a camera
Toss me a cigaret I think there's one in the raincoat
We smoked the last one an hour ago
So I looked at the scenary she read her magazine
And the moon rose over an open field
Cathy I'm lost I said though I knew she was sleeping
I'm empty and aching and I don't know why
Counting the cars on the New Jersey Turnpike
They've all come to look for America
All come to look for America
Personally, I am more concerned about what the Iraq War is doing to Americans and the west, than to Iraqis.
Its great for Iraq and, I think, somewhat beneficial for that region of the world, that Saddam and his awful sons are gone. Israel may be a little safer now that Saddam's malign influence over Hamas and Hezbolla has been removed, so that there is no longer someone of his stature legitimizing suicide bombers. And some kind of change in the Iraq situation was likely inevitable at some point anyway -- the sanctions and the no-fly zones were getting more difficult to maintain every year, yet if they had been removed Saddam would geared up his weapons programs again. And given Saddam's history, there was likely no way to get rid of him without a lot of violence and disruption for the Iraqi people (though perhaps even he could have changed his spots -- look at Quadafi). And maybe now Iraq can establish some kind of society based on rule of law rather than another dictatorship.
But all of that, whether good or bad, isn't my main concern. No, what I care about is maintaining the strength of America as a moral, economic and social force. This has been endangered by the Bush neocons and their Iraq adventure, and I really don't think the relatively marginal benefit to Israel of ending Saddam's regime is going to be worth the damage that Bush and this war is doing to America's economy, to its military, to its social structure, and basically to its willingness to act as a world leader.
It took America more than a decade to get over Vietnam -- it was the mid-80s before America was willing to step forth again to exert influence in the world, and over the next 15 years,until 1999, it had tremendous impact in political, social, environmental, humanitarian and economic areas. This happened particularly under Clinton (saving Kosovo, sorting out Ireland, North Korea containment, environmental issues, NAFTA, economy, etc) but also under Reagan (the end of the Soviet Union) and under Bush 41 (creating the alliance for the Gulf War).
In the unhappy happenstance of history, Bush 43 was president on 9.11 -- it remains to be seen whether his ideological stupidity and the incompetence of his government contributed to that event, but it certainly contributed to the abandonment of basic American values which followed, exemplified but not restricted to Gitmo. Now America is mired in Iraq. Because of the Iraq war, and its terrible cost in terms of soldiers, money and international reputation compared to its relatively insignificant regional benefits, I am afraid that America will lose not only its willingness to provide leadership to the world but also its capacity to do so, and its credibility to establish the kind of peaceful political and economic alliances that the world needs. And Bush has taken Blair down with him, knocking out Britain as a world leader, too.
In a nutshell, this is why I care more about America than I do about Iraq.
Let us be lovers we'll marry our fortunes together
I've got some real estate here in my bag
So we bought a pack of cigarettes and Mrs. Wagner's pies
And we walked off to look for America
Cathy I said as we boarded a Greyhound in Pittsburgh
Michigan seems like a dream to me now
It took me four days to hitchhike from Saginaw
I've gone to look for America
Laughing on the bus playing games with the faces
She said the man in the gabardine suit was a spy
I said be careful his bowtie is really a camera
Toss me a cigaret I think there's one in the raincoat
We smoked the last one an hour ago
So I looked at the scenary she read her magazine
And the moon rose over an open field
Cathy I'm lost I said though I knew she was sleeping
I'm empty and aching and I don't know why
Counting the cars on the New Jersey Turnpike
They've all come to look for America
All come to look for America
Sunday, May 16, 2004
More than we can bear
On 9.ll, New York mayor Rudy Guiliani was asked repeatedly how many people had died at the World Trade Centre. At the time, everyone thought it would be in the tens of thousands. But Rudy refused to speculate on numbers and all the irrelevant arguments that would have arisen around any figure he could have given. Instead, he said simply and respectfully "It will be more than we can bear".
I was reminded of this line when I read Seymour Hersh's new article The Gray Zone. There will be "numbers" arguments coming to refute what Hersh has said here, boiling down to the argument that only a relatively few Americans have been involved and that only a relatively few at Gitmo and in Iraq have been tortured, and that it was all for a good cause anyway. This misses the point -- no matter how few or how many have been tortured, its still not only a morally wrong policy but also morally bankrupt. By not following the Geneva Conventions themselves, they have also put their own soldiers in harms way in the future. They have also shamed America and made it question its own moral purpose in the world. This is truly a sad, sad result.
I was reminded of this line when I read Seymour Hersh's new article The Gray Zone. There will be "numbers" arguments coming to refute what Hersh has said here, boiling down to the argument that only a relatively few Americans have been involved and that only a relatively few at Gitmo and in Iraq have been tortured, and that it was all for a good cause anyway. This misses the point -- no matter how few or how many have been tortured, its still not only a morally wrong policy but also morally bankrupt. By not following the Geneva Conventions themselves, they have also put their own soldiers in harms way in the future. They have also shamed America and made it question its own moral purpose in the world. This is truly a sad, sad result.
Saturday, May 15, 2004
Declaring victory and leaving
Bloggers like Kevin Drum are wondering what Powell means when he says the US will leave Iraq if the new government asks them to.
Here's what it means:
June 30 -- tranfer to a new government
July 1 - new government establishes its credibility by asking US to leave "as soon as possible, though we still need your help to clean up the security situation"
July 2 - US announces it will pull its armies out of Iraq "as quickly as possible, given the present security situation" and promises that just about everyone will be home by Christmas (except, of course, for those who will be manning the Pentagon's four new permanent bases in Iraq which are needed for continuing "clean-up operations")
July 3 - US newspapers all cheer wildly, public heaves a sigh of relief
July 4 - Bush gives major Independence Day speech at southern army base or maybe even at Centcom, announcing that a grateful nation loves its troops and welcoming their return as quickly as possible, except for "cleanup operations". Behind him we see a new banner "Democracy Accomplished"
July 5 - Bush approval ratings spike back up to 60 per cent.
July 6 - Media outlets pull most of their correspondents out of Iraq.
July 7 and on - Whether the soldiers actually come home or not, the "loss" in Iraq is off of everyone's news radar. Continuing US military activity in Iraq will be described relentlessly as "clean-up operations".
Here's what it means:
June 30 -- tranfer to a new government
July 1 - new government establishes its credibility by asking US to leave "as soon as possible, though we still need your help to clean up the security situation"
July 2 - US announces it will pull its armies out of Iraq "as quickly as possible, given the present security situation" and promises that just about everyone will be home by Christmas (except, of course, for those who will be manning the Pentagon's four new permanent bases in Iraq which are needed for continuing "clean-up operations")
July 3 - US newspapers all cheer wildly, public heaves a sigh of relief
July 4 - Bush gives major Independence Day speech at southern army base or maybe even at Centcom, announcing that a grateful nation loves its troops and welcoming their return as quickly as possible, except for "cleanup operations". Behind him we see a new banner "Democracy Accomplished"
July 5 - Bush approval ratings spike back up to 60 per cent.
July 6 - Media outlets pull most of their correspondents out of Iraq.
July 7 and on - Whether the soldiers actually come home or not, the "loss" in Iraq is off of everyone's news radar. Continuing US military activity in Iraq will be described relentlessly as "clean-up operations".
Better news
Well, there is at least one positive development from 9.11 -- generally, the western media are doing a much better job covering the political, economic and social situation in the rest of the world now. Look at the coverage of the India election, an event which, three years ago, would have rated a footnote in many US and Canadian newspapers with the story emphasis only on what this would mean for western interests. Now, these elections are covered for their own sake, recognizing that so many Indian expatriates around the world these days are vitally interested. It's progress.
Does anyone have a battlefield map?
US troops kill two Sadr fighters U.S. forces have clashed with fighters loyal to Iraq's rebel Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, killing at least two insurgents and wounding seven others, witnesses say. It was the latest round in more than a month of fighting that has turned the Shi'ite shrine cities of Iraq into battlefields, with U.S. forces trying to crush an uprising by Sadr's forces across southern Iraq and in the capital Baghdad.
While everyone was talking about prisoner abuse and the beheading, I get the impression that the fighting is spreading beyond Najaf and Sady City in Bagdad, but I'm not sure. But I cannot get a sense of which places are in trouble and which places are quiet. So does anyone know where there might be a map? When I google for it, I get a lot of old links to battlefield maps from last year and from 1991, but I'm looking for something from this week.
And has anyone else noticed the recent emphasis on body counts for the Iraqis? Until recently, it seemed that the US didn't announce how many Iraqis killed or wounded in firefights, but now they are. Or maybe my impression is wrong.
While everyone was talking about prisoner abuse and the beheading, I get the impression that the fighting is spreading beyond Najaf and Sady City in Bagdad, but I'm not sure. But I cannot get a sense of which places are in trouble and which places are quiet. So does anyone know where there might be a map? When I google for it, I get a lot of old links to battlefield maps from last year and from 1991, but I'm looking for something from this week.
And has anyone else noticed the recent emphasis on body counts for the Iraqis? Until recently, it seemed that the US didn't announce how many Iraqis killed or wounded in firefights, but now they are. Or maybe my impression is wrong.
Friday, May 14, 2004
"Camp Redemption"? Don't make me laugh
The Wrong Direction
This NYT editorial makes lots of good points:
The proper way for Mr. Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld to show support for the troops is not to use them as a screen from the heat over the mismanagement of the military prisons. It is to fix the problem, now. The solution is real changes, not cosmetic ones like yesterday's announcement that Abu Ghraib's inmates would be moved within the prison grounds to new temporary quarters, which have been dubbed Camp Redemption . . . Each passing day has made it more clear that the routine treatment of prisoners in military prisons violates international law, the Geneva Conventions and American values of due process and humane behavior. This is a terrible burden for the fine men and women serving in Iraq to bear, as they live their lives among an ever more hostile populace.. . . Mr. Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld should also stop trying to dump the blame on the shoulders of America's enlisted men and women . . . Mr. Bush and his Republican allies in Congress should stop trying to evade responsibility by accusing those who want to ask tough questions of being disloyal to the troops and the war effort.
One point that made me chuckle, though, was the "Camp Redemption" name -- are they channelling Cotton Mather and the Quakers?
And just what is now being redeemed in this prison -- the reputation of the army, perhaps, or the immortal souls of all those so-called terrorists at Abu Gharib? Or maybe just some Canadian Tire dollars?
This NYT editorial makes lots of good points:
The proper way for Mr. Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld to show support for the troops is not to use them as a screen from the heat over the mismanagement of the military prisons. It is to fix the problem, now. The solution is real changes, not cosmetic ones like yesterday's announcement that Abu Ghraib's inmates would be moved within the prison grounds to new temporary quarters, which have been dubbed Camp Redemption . . . Each passing day has made it more clear that the routine treatment of prisoners in military prisons violates international law, the Geneva Conventions and American values of due process and humane behavior. This is a terrible burden for the fine men and women serving in Iraq to bear, as they live their lives among an ever more hostile populace.. . . Mr. Bush and Mr. Rumsfeld should also stop trying to dump the blame on the shoulders of America's enlisted men and women . . . Mr. Bush and his Republican allies in Congress should stop trying to evade responsibility by accusing those who want to ask tough questions of being disloyal to the troops and the war effort.
One point that made me chuckle, though, was the "Camp Redemption" name -- are they channelling Cotton Mather and the Quakers?
And just what is now being redeemed in this prison -- the reputation of the army, perhaps, or the immortal souls of all those so-called terrorists at Abu Gharib? Or maybe just some Canadian Tire dollars?
Just one more thing for working mothers to feel guilty about
Bottle-fed babies 'face higher risk of heart death' Is it just me, or is medical research getting more and more farfetched with some of their conclusions? The article flings around figures like 30,000 lives a year could be saved -- then we find out the study consists of 216 premature babies, who are now in their early 20s, none of whom actually have heart disease yet, apparently, but some of ones who were bottlefed now have 14 per cent higher colesterol levels.
I guess my only point is, there's a lot that goes on in a person's life that affects their overall health and their propensity for heart disease, including parental health and lifestyle, being male or female, genes, diet, exercise, smoking, drinking, socio-economic level, other illnesses like diabetes, and the older you get the more factors enter into it. So it seems like a stretch to blame heart disease on baby formula.
Personally, its pretty useless information for me, really, since I haven't been bottle fed for about 54 years now, and my kids, being in their 20s, are about finished with baby formula too.
I guess my only point is, there's a lot that goes on in a person's life that affects their overall health and their propensity for heart disease, including parental health and lifestyle, being male or female, genes, diet, exercise, smoking, drinking, socio-economic level, other illnesses like diabetes, and the older you get the more factors enter into it. So it seems like a stretch to blame heart disease on baby formula.
Personally, its pretty useless information for me, really, since I haven't been bottle fed for about 54 years now, and my kids, being in their 20s, are about finished with baby formula too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)