Gilead-watch

Air Force Cadets See Religious Harassment If Americans want to see what it will be like for them once the theocrats take over the country, here's what is happening in the Air Force Academy (via Atrios)

There have been 55 complaints of religious discrimination at the academy in the past four years, including cases in which a Jewish cadet was told the Holocaust was revenge for the death of Jesus and another was called a Christ killer by a fellow cadet. . . "It is inextricably intertwined in every aspect of the academy,'' said Mikey Weinstein of Albuquerque, N.M., a 1977 graduate who has sent two sons to the school. He said the younger, Curtis, has been called a ''filthy Jew'' many times . . . The board chairman, former Virginia Gov. James Gilmore, warned Rosa that changing things could prove complicated. He said evangelical Christians ''do not check their religion at the door.'' . . . Two of the nation's most influential evangelical Christian groups, Focus on the Family and New Life Church, are headquartered in nearby Colorado Springs. Tom Minnery, an official at Focus on the Family, disputed claims that evangelical Christians are pushing an agenda at the academy, and complained that ''there is an anti-Christian bigotry developing'' at the school.

So they're had more than one complaint about discrimination every month for four years. And now people are being told how hard it will be to stop this, and being accused of anti-Christian bigotry for even trying.
Sounds like another example of Mafia-style bullying -- 'Nice little air force you've got here. It would be a shame if something were to happen to it.'

Living by the sword

Harper says ploy will doom Liberals
Well, maybe.
But its hard to see how.
Basically, Martin's flim flam with the so-called "opposition days" scheduling means that the Conservatives won't get a chance to move a non-confidence motion until June, resulting in a midsummer election which the whole country would hate. And we would blame the Conservatives.
Or they could vote non-confidence against the budget, but this would mean the budget everybody liked wouldn't come into effect. And we would blame the Conservatives.
According to the polls last week, a majority of Canadians don't want a spring vote anyway, so it doesn't seem like we're going to be unhappy with the liberals for delaying it. In fact, the longer it is delayed, the more chances for Martin to slip up.
And once again this news story shows Conservatives thinking they can just clap their hands to make unpleasant reality disappear: ". . . the Tories have taken the position that the Queen should not have to cancel her trip to the Prairies next month, even if the country is in the middle of a federal election." Well, Stevie, you can assume the position all you like, but your position won't cut any ice with the royals. And so we would miss having the Queen come to Saskatchewan's Centennial. Thanks a bunch!

Dream team

I just read a blog on the Right Wing side of the Daou Report which described what the blogger called a "nightmare scenario" -- that the Republicans would lose in '08 because John McCain would run as an independent and therefore split the right-wing vote. Hey, it couldn't happen to a nicer guy!
This blog described McCain's decision not to support ending the filubuster as a signal that he had decided to "break with the party" and also said he has given up thinking he could get the GOP nomination in 2008. Now, I lost all respect for McCain when he slobbered all over Bush in Florida during the campaign. But I really do hope this scenario comes true, and I hope Colin Powell comes out of retirement to run as his VP candidate. Either that, orI hope the Christian right goes completely batsh*t crazy during the republican primaries and gets Judge Roy "Ten Commandments" Moore nominated as the GOP candidate for president instead of Jeb Bush. And then he picks Scalia as his VP . . .

Check out the Iraq Occupation Watch site

Today in Iraq linked to this site: Iraq Occupation Watch which I intend to add to my news lists. The site gathers and posts articles from various sources about what is happening in Iraq.
And the news isn't very good. Check out Washington's Iraq Panic Attack :

Rumsfeld’s concern suggests much greater apprehension in US military circles over the state of Iraqi security than is apparent in the current “official” line emanating from Washington. There are five aspects of this apprehension . . . First, attacks on Iraqi security forces and on US bases are continuing with unabated ferocity . . . Second, more members of the occupying coalition are now withdrawing from Iraq . . . Third, the Pentagon is privately worried by the huge costs of the damage to equipment used in Iraq . . . up to $18 billion in replacement costs . . . Fourth, the re-emergence of Muqtada al-Sadr’s militia (often termed the Mahdi army) is a concern to American strategists. Its units have reasserted their power in many urban areas across southern Iraq . . .
Fifth, Iranian “interference” in Iraqi politics is returning to the forefront of US minds . . . Iran could, if it wished, cause major problems for the United States in Iraq . . . the United States perceives a problem in Iran’s purchase of a wide range of military equipment, much of it suited to guerrilla warfare. The US’s difficulty is that Iran can claim an internal security use for such equipment because Iran has long been engaged in a bitter war with drug smugglers on its border with Afghanistan . . . Most European countries view the bulk of Iran’s arms stockpiling as legal, and some of them also informally support Iran’s drug war on its eastern border. The United States, however, sees Iran’s efforts as raising the nightmare possibility of an Iraqi insurgency acquiring (for example) a combination of sniper rifles and night-vision equipment under Iranian tutelage – even in the absence of evidence of such an intention at present . . .

And there is this article by Jim McGovern, What I didn't see in Iraq :

If things in Iraq are so much better, why are we not decreasing the number of US forces there? Why is the insurgency showing no signs of waning? Why are we being told that in a few months the Administration will again ask Congress for billions of dollars more to fight the war? Why, according to the World Food Program, is hunger among the Iraqi people getting worse? It's time for some candor, but candor is hard to come by in Iraq.

The latest from Iraq is pretty bad

In this Independent article 150 hostages and 19 deaths leave US claims of Iraqi 'peace' in tatters, Patrick Cockburn reporting from Mosul provides a survey of recent Iraq news (pretty bad) and provides a convenient capsule summary of the situation in Iraq now:

Despite the elections on 30 January, the US problem in Iraq remains unchanged. It has not been defeated by the Sunni Arab guerrillas but it has not defeated them either. The US army and Iraqi armed forces control islands of territory while much of Iraq is a dangerous no-man's land.
After overthrowing Saddam Hussein in 2003 the US tried direct rule, dissolving the Iraqi army and state. This provoked the Sunni rebellion. By early 2004 there was a danger that part of the Shia community would also rise up. Elections were promised. The victors at the polls in January were Shia parties, mostly militantly Islamic and often sympathetic to Iran. Donald Rumsfeld, the US Defence Secretary, visited Baghdad this week to stop Shia radicals taking over the Interior and Defence Ministries.
Iraq is now more sectarian. Sunnis boycotted the elections. The Kurds and Shias triumphed. The interim prime minister, Iyad Allawi, despite heavy US support, got only 14 per cent. If the Shia hostages taken on Friday are executed or Shias are forced to flee, then we are closer to a sectarian civil war.
The Sunni insurgency is not going to go away. US generals say there are only 12,000 to 20,000 guerrillas. But the real lesson of the past two years is that, though many of the groups in the resistance are fanatical or semi-criminal, they will still be sheltered by the Sunni community.
If the new Iraqi government succeeds in establishing itself it will be a largely Shia state with no more interest than the Sunnis in retaining a US presence. Iraqis say they sense that the US wants Iraq to be a weak state, and this they are bound to oppose.

Those who live by the sword. . .

die by the sword.
And it couldn't be happening to a more deserving guy. Reports Rock Support for U.N. Nominee

Good, bad, ugly

Good

Patrick Corrigan, Toronto Star

Bad

Chris Britt, The State Journal-Register, Springfield, Ill.

And ugly

Onward Christian Soldiers

Onward Christian soldiers,
marching as to war,
with the cross of Jesus
going on before!
Christ, the royal Master,
leads against the foe;
forward into battle,
see, his banners go.
At the sign of triumph
Satan's host doth flee;
on then, Christian soldiers,
on to victory!
Like a mighty army
moves the Church of God;
Brothers, we are treading
where the saints have trod;
What the saints established
that I hold for true.
what the saints believèd,
that I believe too.
Crown and thrones may perish,
kingdoms rise and wane,
but the Church of Jesus
constant will remain;
Onward, then, ye people,
join our happy throng;
blend with ours your voices
in the triumph song:
glory, laud, and honor,
unto Christ the King;
this through countless ages
men and angels sing.
Onward Christian Soldiers,
marching as to war,
with the cross of Jesus
going on before!

Another Fallujh in the making?

Al Quaim, near the Syrian border, is apparently under attack. In a NYT story entitled At Least 19 Killed in String of Suicide Attacks Across Iraq , which describes attacks all across Iraq, the 8th paragraph reports "In northwestern Iraq near the Syrian border, American military officials continued a virtual siege of the city of Qaim, where suicide bombers drove three cars packed with explosives into an American base on Monday. After the attacks, American armored vehicles backed by helicopters blocked access to the city and fought a major battle with insurgents, killing about two dozen on Tuesday and Wednesday, Iraqi security officials in Qaim said."
And here's how the news is being reported from the Iraqi perspective: Resistance fighters take over Al-Qaim and Resistance Throws Back Savage US Assaults on Al-Qaim
Oh, yes, turning the corner any day now . . . .

Associated Press - Wanker headline

Way to slant the important news, guys. Anti-Gay 'Day of Truth' Signs Up 1,150
Oh, and by the way, Pro-Gay 'Day of Silence' Signs Up 450,000.
Thanks to The Next Hurrah for the link.

Wankers of the day

I like the occasional feature used by Atrios, where he awards someone "wanker of the day" for a paticularly glaring or gratutious bit of lying.
So here's my candidate for today's wanker -- MPs accused of trying to humiliate former Martin aide Ah, yes -- once again, its the kind of stupid politicking for which our Loyal Opposition is so beloved across the land.
If the committee members don't even know what they want to ask these former government aides about, then it means they have no evidence or even any suspicion of any wrongdoing whatsoever.
They're just trying to generate a headline or two -- "Former Liberal aides questioned about contracts" or, more likely, "Liberal aides say they can't remember contract spending" -- and what is truly disgusting is that they don't care if they gratituously trash the reputations of government staff in the process.
Wankers!

How to turn police and prosecutors into thugs

Human Rights Watch issues a report which blows the lid off the pathetic "but they told us they wouldn't do it" excuse Still at Risk: Diplomatic Assurances No Safeguard Against Torture
Saying that 'diplomatic assurances' have been given that a prisoner would not be tortured has allowed many western governments to skirt their own laws against torture by shipping suspected terrorists and others off to Syria, Egypt, Uzbekistan, Yemen, Algeria, Moroko, Russia, Tunisia and Turkey.
The report looks at the United States, of course, but also reviews cases from Canada, Sweden, United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Austria and Turkey -- all countries where men and women, even families, have either actually been sent off to be tortured or where courts have stopped government officials from doing this.
Here are the key findings: "individual protection is consistently sacrificed to state interest, . . . even well-intentioned monitoring under diplomatic auspices is ineffectual, and . . . in the end, sending and receiving states have a common interest in pretending assurances are meaningful rather than verifying that they actually are." Their conclusion is that "the practice should stop."
I agree. But not only am I outraged on behalf of the people whose cases are listed in the report, but I also worry about how such practices will threaten the quality of the justice system for all of us.
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Using torture or the threat of torture to keep 'bad guys' locked up is so much easier and quicker, and certainly a lot cheaper, than using highly skilled police and prosecutors with good investigative techniques to develop cases which can be prosecuted in court.
Why bother investigating a case when you can get a confession or an allegation against someone else just by threatening a suspect with torture -- as long as you don't really care whether you got the truth or not. And why bother assembling admissable evidence and putting together a case good enough for court, when its so much easier to just ship suspects off somewhere else -- as long as you don't really care whether the person is actually guilty or not
And if you don't care about truth or justice, then our police and prosecutors no longer need to be intelligent, principled and skilled -- they can just be a gang of thugs. Like they are in Syria and Egypt and Uzbekistan and . . .

Deja vu all over again

CNEWS writes "Conservative Leader Stephen Harper was far more coy about his party's plans . . . " in Harper: No need to wait for report
The Globe writes "Mr. Harper pledged over the weekend that, if given a mandate, he would introduce federal legislation defining marriage as between one man and one woman . . . . [the party] believes the Supreme Court would agree that Parliament has the final say" in Tory same-sex motion rejected
This is what lost Harper the election last June -- a toxic combination of smugness about winning the election, and hypocrisy about running the country.
So here he goes again.
He's already acting "coy" about when he might bring down the government. Well, maybe this is funny for him, maybe all the Tories are laughing about how awful this is for the hated Liberals, but the electorate is not amused. We voted for these guys less than a year ago, because we thought they would do a good job running the country, and we don't want to see Conservatives laughing now about how stupid we all were.
And the Conservatives are STILL outright LYING about how they will manage the same sex marriage issue. They lied all last June, and now they're doing it again.
Restricting marriage to one man/one woman is unconstitutional unless Parliament uses the notwithstanding clause. Hugo Cyr, constitutional law professor at the Université du Québec à Montréal says “Taking away civil marriage rights without using the notwithstanding clause will only guarantee that same sex marriage ends up back before the courts for years to come.” Why are the Conservatives pretending they don't understand this? It doesn't matter how much they wish this wasn't so, the country cannot base its policies and legislation on wishful thinking. And if they lie so easily about this, what else are they going to lie about?

"Is this supposed to be good?"

Over at Pandagon they're having a discussion about The New Culture War. They seem to be focusing on whether government should censor offensive stuff or not -- a discussion which seems pretty pointless to me, because what governments would censor would be swearing and nudity. This would cancel brilliant and thoughtful shows like The Sopranos, and truncate Desperate Housewives -- when what is truly offensive about TV are the junk cultural values expressed by voyeuristic "reality" shows like Growing Up Gotti and The Bachelor, and shows featuring pop-star Lolita wannabes who dress like hookers -- leading to shows like this -- gag me with a spoon.
As I commented at Pandagon, I remember how annoying it was when I was a teenager and my dad would walk in as we were watching TV, look at it for a minute or so, then say with a sarcastic tone in his voice "Is this supposed to be good?"
And then, of course, I did exactly the same thing to my own kids. Because the value of such a skeptical attitude was that it forced me and my sister and brother to decide whether what we were watching actually was any good or not. And if not, then why were we watching it?
Its the reason, today, that there is a lengthy list of shows my husband and I don't bother watching, and neither do my adult children.
So remember those words -- "Is this supposed to be good?" -- and use them.

And check this out too

As well as his "clusterfuck" site described below, James Kunstler also does am "Eyesore of the Month" posting of architectural blunders. Here's one I enjoyed reading:

This June 2003 posting, which Kunstler describes thusly:

The Tang Museum, Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs, New York. Architect, Antoine Pradock. This remarkable monstrosity has six backs and no front. The elevation above is what you see from the "street" -- or more precisely the ring road that runs around Skidmore's pod-like campus. Thus, the public "face" of the Tang is its loading dock (with accessory dumpster). Notice the excellent opportunities for skateboard suicide. Predock's own website describes the building as follows: "A stone ramp rises from geologic origins of water shed and limestone caves and culminates in 'one ivory tower,' engaging earth and sky, beginning the journey of encounter. . . " Right, and every Monday at three p.m. winged monkeys fly out of his butt.