Sunday, August 23, 2009

The main difference between what happened after the U.S. invaded Iraq and what would happen if the U.S and Israel decide to destroy nuclear facilities in Iran is the distinct capability of the Iranian military to respond in a relatively organized and decisive fashion to what it would surely view as hostile actions made by enemy forces.

Read the article linked here: Iran Test Fires Long and Medium Range Missiles for more information.

Of course there is also the question of whether it would be more dangerous to allow Iran to keep working on the development of nuclear weapons (if that is, in fact, what the Iranian government is up to) than to suffer through whatever consequences would come of trying to forcibly halt those development efforts now.

I for one hope that diplomatic talks are successful, and that no military action has to be taken. The decision to bomb targets inside Iran would take us into a whole new world of conflict, upheaval, and unpredictability that I don't even want to consider at the moment.

That said, I don't want to live in a world where Iran is aiming nuclear weapons at its neighbors.

I wish that we weren't aiming nukes at ours.

Friday, August 31, 2007

An American ‘martyr’ is being hailed in the Sunni Triangle for restoring peace to a town where soldiers now fight only water leaks

Here is an important story in today's edition of The Times of London, about how one American soldier's efforts in Iraq have paid off.

Travis Patriquin was killed in Iraq in December, but his legacy lives on in Ramadi.

This article may influence your view of what is possible throughout Iraq with the right guidance.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article2358061.ece

You can also hear commentary on this article on today's episode of "The World" from PRI at:

http://www.theworld.org/wma.php?id=083107full

Sunday, August 19, 2007

911 Revisted Movie

Please check out this site and watch the video. Consider the evidence for yourself.

Try to keep an open mind. I welcome comments on this topic.

http://www.911revisited.com/video.html

Tuesday, August 07, 2007

The Black Sites - Jane Mayer - The New Yorker

Here is a link to a must-read article written by Jane Mayer in this week's New Yorker Magazine.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/08/13/070813fa_fact_mayer

Sunday, July 22, 2007

Honor the Fallen

See the faces and read the stories of those killed during the last several years since the beginning of Operations IRAQI FREEDOM and ENDURING FREEDOM.

http://www.militarycity.com/valor/honor.html

Website with War Statistics

http://www.militarytimes.com/projects/flash/4000/

The grim statistics.

Sunday, February 18, 2007

Jailed 2 Years, Iraqi Tells of Abuse by Americans

From an article in the New York Times
By MICHAEL MOSS and SOUAD MEKHENNET

...

"But as the morning light grew, the American guards moved Mr. Ani, a 31-year-old father of two young children, methodically toward freedom. They swapped his yellow prison suit for street clothes, he said. They snipped off his white plastic identification bracelet. They scanned his irises into their database.

Then, shortly before 9 a.m., Mr. Ani said, he was brought to a table for one last step. He was handed a form and asked to place a check mark next to the sentence that best described how he had been treated:

“I didn’t go through any abuse during detention,” read the first option, in Arabic.

“I have gone through abuse during detention,” read the second.

In the room, he said, stood three American guards carrying the type of electric stun devices that Mr. Ani and other detainees said had been used on them for infractions as minor as speaking out of turn.

“Even the translator told me to sign the first answer,” said Mr. Ani, who gave a copy of his form to The New York Times. “I asked him what happens if I sign the second one, and he raised his hands,” as if to say, Who knows?

“I thought if I don’t sign the first one I am not going to get out of this place.”"

...

The Full Article

Saturday, February 03, 2007

Analysis Is Bleak on Iraq’s Future

From The New York Times:

February 3, 2007

Analysis Is Bleak on Iraq’s Future

By MARK MAZZETTI

WASHINGTON, Feb. 2 — The release on Friday of portions of a bleak new National Intelligence Estimate about Iraq’s future left the White House and its opponents vying over whether its findings buttressed their vastly different views about how to arrest the worsening sectarian chaos there.

The assessment, by American intelligence agencies, expressed deep doubts about the abilities of Iraqi politicians to hold together an increasingly balkanized country, and about whether Iraqi troops might be able to confront powerful militias over the next 18 months and assume more responsibility for security.

The analysis, the first such estimate on Iraq in more than two years, described in sober language a rapidly unraveling country in which security has worsened despite four years of efforts by the administration.

President Bush acknowledged last month that his strategy had failed so far.

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Bush Iraq Plan Is Condemned by Senate Panel

By JEFF ZELENY

Published: January 25, 2007

Smuggler’s Plot Highlights Fear Over Uranium

By LAWRENCE SCOTT SHEETS and WILLIAM J. BROAD

Published: January 25, 2007

Saturday, January 20, 2007

Stability, not democracy...

Rice Speaks Softly in Egypt, Avoiding Democracy Push

By MICHAEL SLACKMAN

Published: January 16, 2007

Some quotes from the article linked above:

Cellphone videos posted on the Internet showed the police sodomizing a bus driver with a broomstick. Another showed the police hanging a woman by her knees and wrists from a pole for questioning. A company partly owned by a member of the governing party distributed tens of thousands of bags of contaminated blood to hospitals around the country. And just 24 hours before Ms. Rice arrived, the authorities arrested a television reporter on charges of harming national interests by making a film about police torture. The reporter was released, but the authorities kept the tapes.

Ms. Rice, who once lectured Egyptians on the need to respect the rule of law, did not address those domestic concerns. Instead, with Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit by her side, she talked about her appreciation for Egypt’s support in the region.

It was clear that the United States — facing chaos in Iraq, rising Iranian influence and the destabilizing Israeli-Palestinian conflict — had decided that stability, not democracy, was its priority, Egyptian political commentators, political aides and human rights advocates said.

5 Years in Limbo...

Some at Guantanamo Mark 5 Years in Limbo
Big Questions About Low-Profile Inmates

By Carol D. Leonnig and Julie Tate

Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, January 16, 2007; Page A01

Quotes from the article linked above:

"I never had a war against the United States, and I am surprised I'm here," Ruhani told his captors during his first chance to hear the military's reasons for holding him, three years after he arrived at Guantanamo. "I tried to cooperate with Americans. I am no enemy of yours."

Now prison and prisoner are forever linked, joined by hasty decisions made in war and trapped by that fateful beginning.

Insurgent TV channel

Iraq's newest cult hit

Michael Howard in Baghdad
Monday January 15, 2007
The Guardian

Thursday, January 18, 2007

Today's Headlines

Sometimes reading the headlines can really give you a wake-up call...

From CNN.com

U.S. official:
Chinese test missile obliterates satellite

From NPR.org:

...senators also wanted to know if there's anything to growing talk of a possible U.S. attack on Iran. Former U.S. Centcom commander Gen. Joseph Hoar would not dismiss that possibility. "I don't know why you have two carrier battle groups in the Gulf," Hoar said, "when fixed-wing air — while an essential part of any campaign — doesn't require a lot of airplanes on a day-to-day basis; and why you would have an admiral in charge of Centcom when you have two essentially ground combat operations going in two separate campaigns."

Hoar said those discrepancies "would all indicate to me that there's something moving right now towards Iran."

Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair Sen. Joseph Biden said he plans to redraft the use-of-force legislation to make clear it does not authorize an attack on Iran.

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Court to Oversee Wiretap Program - USA Today

The following is from today's USA Today website:

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration said Wednesday that it will allow an independent court to oversee its controversial surveillance program in which the National Security Agency has electronically eavesdropped on Americans and others without obtaining court warrants.

It's about time...

Over 34,000 Civilians Died in Iraq Last Year

The following information comes from an article in this morning's New York Times by SABRINA TAVERNISE.

Iraqi Death Toll Exceeded 34,000 in '06, U.N. Says.

According to a UN report released yesterday, more than 34,000 Iraqi civilians were killed in violence last year, that is an average of 94 Iraqis died every day. About half the deaths occurred in the capital. A majority died from gunshot wounds, execution-style, killings that are a common method for both Sunni and Shiite death squads.

Most of the deaths are due to violence between Sunnis and Shiites, which was virtually unheard of in the early years of the war. Military commanders have acknowledged that they underestimated the seriousness of the sectarian killings, which took off after the bombing of a Shiite shrine in Samarra last year drew Shiites into the war. Up until then, Sunni militants had done most of the killing. Now, the capital is mired in violence, as the two groups fight over territory.

In the shootings, bodies surface days later in sewers and garbage dumps. The report said that most unidentified bodies were found in six neighborhoods of Baghdad, three Sunni — Dora, Rashidiya and Adhamiya — and three Shiite — Sadr City, New Baghdad and the hardscrabble slum of Shuala.

One result, described by the report, is a society in collapse. At least 470,094 Iraqis have fled their homes since February. The number of displaced Iraqis was the highest in the embattled Sunni province of Anbar, where 10,105 families fled, followed by Karbala in the south, Baghdad, and Dohuk in the north.

Iraqi government forces also suffered painful losses. The report cited an Interior Ministry figure of 12,000 Iraqi security forces killed, both the Army and the police, since 2003.The report provided details on the outcomes of a number of mass kidnappings throughout the fall. The attacks seem to be a signature of Shiite militias. Around 70 Iraqis, almost all Sunnis, are still missing after being kidnapped in November from the Ministry of Higher Education in downtown Baghdad. The attack took place on a day when teachers from the Sunni areas of Anbar, Salahuddin and Mosul were visiting.

The kidnappings have completely redrawn the composition of neighborhoods. Sinek, a wholesale market in the heart of Baghdad, once thoroughly mixed, is slowly emptying of Sunnis. Men in uniforms seized around 50 merchants on Dec. 2. About 29 were later released. All were Shiite.

Sunday, January 14, 2007

Military Is Expanding Its Intelligence Role in U.S.

Military Is Expanding Its Intelligence Role in U.S.

Just an article that reports some information that I believe everyone ought to be aware of.

A quote from this article in the New York Times:

"Some national security experts and civil liberties advocates are troubled by the C.I.A. and military taking on domestic intelligence activities, particularly in light of recent disclosures that the Counterintelligence Field Activity office had maintained files on Iraq war protesters in the United States in violation of the military’s own guidelines. Some experts say the Pentagon has adopted an overly expansive view of its domestic role under the guise of “force protection,” or efforts to guard military installations.

“There’s a strong tradition of not using our military for domestic law enforcement,” said Elizabeth Rindskopf Parker, a former general counsel at both the National Security Agency and the C.I.A. who is the dean at the McGeorge School of Law at the University of the Pacific. “They’re moving into territory where historically they have not been authorized or presumed to be operating.”"

From the reporting, it seems that this information is only being sought and utilized in a limited number of cases. That is, I suppose, somewhat comforting.

And, another article worth reading might be this one:
Deletions in Army Manual Raise Wiretapping Concerns

Saturday, January 13, 2007

Pentagon Disavows Comment on Detainees

I can't even believe that the comments that are being disavowed were ever made by a government official in THIS country in the first place! Wait a minute... yes I can.

Pentagon Disavows Comment on Detainees

Here is a link to the audio of the interview:
http://www.federalnewsradio.com/emedia/59677.wma

If this doesn't leave you incredulous or make you angry... I don't know if anything about what is going on in our world today will. At least the Pentagon is disavowing his comments.

Here are some quotes from what Cully Stimson, deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs had to say in this interview:

"Actually you know I think the news story that you're really going to start seeing in the next couple of weeks is this: As a result of a FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] request through a major news organization, somebody asked, 'Who are the lawyers around this country representing detainees down there,' and you know what, it's shocking,"

He then names off a list of firms who are representing the Guantanamo detainees.

Afterwards he says:

"I think, quite honestly, when corporate CEOs see that those firms are representing the very terrorists who hit their bottom line back in 2001, those CEOs are going to make those law firms choose between representing terrorists or representing reputable firms, and I think that is going to have major play in the next few weeks. And we want to watch that play out."

When asked where the lawyers were getting their funding he responded:

"It's not clear, is it? Some will maintain that they are doing it out of the goodness of their heart, that they're doing it pro bono, and I suspect they are; others are receiving monies from who knows where, and I'd be curious to have them explain that."

About Guantanamo he described it as: "certainly, probably the most transparent and open location in the world"

When commenting on protests regarding Guantanamo, he described the "small little protests around the world" that were "orchestrated by a small group of folks, and they're really quite minor - the media play is much more the actual protests" "my understanding is that it is being drummed up by Amnesty International, and they're trying to get their loyal ardent followers to show up at various locations around the country, my understanding is that these are, you know, a couple dozen here, a couple dozen folks there, but, you know, this is not a popular subject and so the, certainly the left-leaning press will make it look like the Million-Man March."

Listen to the interview here.

Thursday, November 30, 2006

Parents Against Peace Symbols

I'm re-posting here a response that I left earlier today on a blog created by a wonderful friend of mine. She had posted the link to the news article (below),
and I wrote what follows in response to that article.

Here is the link to the article:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15912456/

My comments:

To the parents of children serving in Iraq who have
been angered by the display of the peace symbol: 

We owe our thanks to the many sons and daughters
throughout the history the United States of America
who have died defending our freedoms, which all too
often are taken for granted. As a member of the United
States Armed Forces, it is my hope that I defend the
right of both those who are in support of our
government's policies and those who stand in opposition
against its policies to voice their opinions and to be
heard in a peaceful manner befitting a free and just
society. Being for peace is truly the highest form of
being "pro-soldier" that I can think of, since being
pro-war always involves sending soldiers into harm's way,
whether the cause for any particular war is justified or
not.

Sunday, November 26, 2006

New York Times: U.S. Finds Iraq Insurgency Has Funds to Sustain Itself

A sad article in today's New York Times:

U.S. Finds Iraq Insurgency Has Funds to Sustain Itself

Saturday, July 23, 2005

Reaction to Rush Limbaugh's "Club G'itmo"

I remember getting angry shortly after 9/11 when I read news articles dealing with toys being sold overseas and in the states which depicted scenes of the destruction of the twin towers. I was saddened that there were people in the world who would sink to such a low level to make a profit.

I did a Google search today and discovered that many of the pictures of those toys that I saw a few years ago are gone now or are only posted on websites promoting politically extreme viewpoints. If there is a slant to any of the websites I am linking here, I ask you to please ignore that and pay attention to the pictures of the toys depicted. Consider what your reaction would have been to these toys during the initial weeks and months following 9/11.

A toy called "Laden vs. USA" (language warning).

Bin Laden and the twin towers toy
(and by the way I'm pretty sure that when I saw pictures of this toy on a legitimate news website, it was reportedly being sold in the Far East and not the Middle East)

9/11 Toy that was sold with candy in the U.S.

A report with pictures of the package that toy was found in.

If you are an American you probably would have felt some amount of anger or irritation when these toys first came out. I think that anger is justified in this instance because these toys are profitting from the suffering of thousands of innocent people and trivializing that tragic day by depicting those awful events in the form of a child's toy. I would hope that many of our fellow citizens of the world would share in our feelings of disappointment when viewing these pictures.

If you are not Muslim, and you are not living in the Middle East, I ask you to imagine for a few moments that you are. You know that there are many fellow Muslims from your part of the world being held indefinitely, without any specific charges against them, (many of whom are probably innocent of any crime) in Guantanamo Bay. You don't know who they all are because the names of all the "detainees" have not been released. You have heard the stories of mistreatment which have been reported around the world and you have no way of knowing what the true story is regarding these prisoners and their treatment. You do not know when, if ever, these prisoners will be charged or released. Imagine yourself thinking about Guantanamo Bay in this way and then check out the following links.

Rush Limbaugh has been doing this bit on his show for a month or two about "Club G'itmo" where he advertises a "Resort for Terrorists" complete with all the amenities... you have to see the website to get an idea of what I'm talking about if you haven't heard the show.

Rush's description of the imaginary "Club G'itmo"

Here are some quotes from the initial show in which the "Club G'itmo" idea was presented:

Limbaugh touted "Club G'itmo, the Muslim resort"

Apparently this "G'itmo Gear" is all the rage on his website now:
(read the phrases on the t-shirts for sale in the left hand column)

"G'itmo Gear" at the Rush Limbaugh Store

An example of the type of thing I wouldn't be surprised to hear on Rush's show:

A transcript allegedly taken from the Rush Limbaugh Show
(I didn't hear this one so I don't know for sure).

Here is another t-shirt that I found while doing a search for "Club G'itmo" on the web. I can't tell from the website whether this t-shirt is in any way affiliated with the bit being done on the Rush Limbaugh Show.

T-Shirt for "Club G'itmo" advertising the following on their shirt: Playing Cards - Flushable Toilets - Arrows Pointing to Mecca - Books - Soft Towels - Dandruff Shampoo - Hot Food - Prayer Rugs - Soccer Balls - Clean Sheets - Fruit Baskets - Warm Showers & a Koran

A close-up picture of that shirt

Earlier I asked you to imagine that you were a Muslim from the Middle East while you were viewing these web pages. I ask you now to react as the real you. Are you angered that these products are being advertised and promoted by one of the most popular radio talk show hosts in the United States? (Rush would probably stop me here and correct me saying that he is THE most popular talk show host in the world.) Do we need to pretend that we're in somebody else's shoes in order to be angered when we hear the flippant way that this topic is being dealt with by someone who is so popular in our country? The thing that angers me is that this is being sold as if Guantanamo were a humorous topic, and it is not.

These items seem to be trying to sell the idea that the real question around Guantanamo Bay is how we are treating known terrorists while they are in confinement... and that (as the good Americans that we all know we are) we are treating them better than they probably deserve to be treated. There is so much more going on with Guantanamo Bay that it is infuriating to me to see that issue trivialized in this way.

My concern is that the Guantanamo Bay issue is not anywhere near that cut and dry. The people being held there are not necessarily all terrorists. As fellow citizens of this planet we should all be concerned that any government anywhere can detain us for more than 3 years without charges and without releasing our personal information to the world because that government has decided that it considers us to be a threat.

I make no apologies for the real terrorists. Terrorism should be defeated and terrorists should be captured, charged, and imprisoned. I am not against the killing of a suspected terrorist in cases where officials are clearly acting in self defense when there is extraordinary evidence that the suspect is planning to commit a terrorist act. Of course I would only support such an action as a last resort after a suspect has reacted with violence while officials are conducting a legal search or attempting to apprehend that individual, or in cases where officials are attempting to save innocent lives by stopping an individual who is in the act of committing a terrorist act. With all of that said there has to be a way to deal with officials who make the wrong decisions about when to take a life while trying to protect others. (This brings up the issue of how to deal with potential "trigger-happy" officials who shoot first and ask questions later, and how to prevent terrible mistakes such as the mistake that seems to have occured yesterday in London where an apparently innocent man was shot 5 times in the head and torso... but those issues will have to be dealt with in another article.)

The last three weeks have shown that terrorists operating all over the world, in major cities where suspects are being closely monitored, are trying to make a statement to the people of the world that they are immune to our efforts to eradicate the threat that they represent to the all of us. It is not a question of if, but when we will see the next attacks in the United States. We are fighting a war against terrorists and in many ways the future of the entire world depends on how we chose to deal with this reality.

In a war that we only call a war when it is convenient for us to do so... we should be concerned that it is possible for any government to say that it is not fighting a real war, therefore it doesn't have to afford those detainees all of the rights guaranteed to Prisoners of War.

At a time when the world is struggling to remember that this war does not have to be about religion against religion or civilization against civilization, but rather that it could be a joint effort against all terrorists worldwide who target innocent people wherever they may be... can we as a society afford to be so disrespectful to members of another culture when dealing with a topic that is such a serious cause for their concern?

Two days after some provisions of the Patriot Act were made permanent and others were extended for 10 years, I have to say that I am concerned as a U.S. citizen that my government is not doing enough to ensure that MY freedoms and privacy are protected. If I have to wonder about how our government's power is being used against ME and MY fellow citizens... how much more concern should I feel about those possibly innocent, uncharged foreign detainees that the government has no constitutional mandate to protect?

(see the following articles for more info.)

House Passes USA Patriot Act Extension

The Patriot Act: Alleged Abuses of the Law

I'm afraid to say what I'm thinking... so what I will say is that I sure hope that we get our act together and figure out who we are and what we really stand for as a people before we destroy ourselves and create more terrorists, while giving up the freedoms that we have taken for granted for too long.

Tuesday, July 19, 2005

Air Power Against Terrorists? A Reaction to Comments from Mike Savage.

Today I'm using T-Mobile from a bookstore for the first time. It is really something to be able to use a high-speed wireless connection to the internet in a bookstore any time of the day on this laptop that is so powerful and fast. When I think about what it was like to play video games and to write an insect identification key in basic on an Apple IIe in 1982... it's amazing to see how far things have come in 23 years. (Not to mention creating pictures with scan cards on the Commodore 64!)

I listen to a lot of talk radio while I'm driving around, and I make it a point to listen to people who have differing opinions because I like to keep an open mind and to be exposed to different perspectives. I was listening to Mike Savage last night on our local AM talk station and he was talking about the war on terrorism and the war in Iraq and what we as a nation are doing wrong.

Before I comment on one of his statements in particular, I need to say that I don't agree with very much of what Mike Savage has to say. In fact, I don't know if I've ever heard an opinion coming from him that I would feel comfortable supporting. If I thought that I had enough hours left in my lifetime to comment on everything that he has said that I strongly disagree with, I might consider trying. Thankfully, I don't have anywhere near enough time to seriously contemplate doing that - so I can stick to a few choice topics without guilt.

In yesterday's show, he mentioned that he thought that we should be using air power to bomb the enemy into submission in Iraq before sending our troops into harm's way. He said that air power was needed in order to blast these guys and weaken them before putting boots on the ground and effectively exposing our ground troops to unnecessary danger. He said that he couldn't understand why air power wasn't being used regularly to take these guys out.

Mr. Savage is either in denial about what the real situation on the ground is in the metropolitan cities of Iraq, or he is showing an amazing disrespect for the lives of the innocent Iraqis living on the same streets. He is also assuming that it would be acceptable for our military to bomb metropolitan civilian targets in a sovereign country with which we are not at war.

The War on Terrorism, sadly, is now synonymous with the War in Iraq. The true War on Terrorism, however, is also being fought by many nations all over the world on their home turf and outside their borders. We can't bomb the terrorists into submission when they're living in houses in crowded neighborhoods on city streets. Most of the time we can't even be absolutely sure who the terrorists are until the "boots on the ground" have had the opportunity to inspect a household and examine any evidence that might be found.

I wonder if Mr. Savage would support the military dropping bombs on houses in London where suspected terrorist activities were taking place. Would he support bombing terrorist suspects in any western country before sending in the police or the military? Would he be willing to allow this when the targets of these bombings would, quite possibly, be determined based on potentially faulty or incomplete intelligence information?

Unfortunately, the nature of this beast requires meeting it head on in its territory. We are facing an enemy that does not wear a uniform, does not respect international borders, and does not claim any one nationality. We must be careful as we set up a protocol for dealing with terrorists abroad, because in all likelihood they are already here in our country, and we will be dealing with them on our own streets and in our own neighborhoods next. I think that any means of dealing with terrorists abroad has to be handled in a way that we would find acceptable in dealing with suspected terrorists within our own borders. Why should the innocent civilians on the streets of Iraq be treated with any less regard than the innocent civilians in the "Homeland"?

I have seen some scary changes in our attitudes towards what is acceptable and what is not in the fight against terrorism since 9/11 which I would not have predicted. I certainly hope that we never get to a place where we are willing to treat the territory of another country, with which we are not at war, like a warzone when doing so means treating its civilians as if they were guilty until proven innocent, and predestined to become collateral damage by virtue of where they were born.

For a different slant on reality, you can find Michael Savage's website at:
www.michaelsavage.com

Tuesday, June 07, 2005

The 12 Days of Bush-mas

Here is a song by Dave Lippman (touted as "The world's only known singing CIA agent") who I had the pleasure of meeting after one of his performances in Aiken, SC last weekend. His performance was great - he played the part of a CIA agent to a tee. Afterwards he came out as Dave Lippman and the transformation was as complete as any that I have seen. The audience was laughing the entire time, despite the otherwise serious nature of his songs.

The 12 Days of Bush-mas

You can find more of his songs at:
http://davelippman.com/mp3s.html

And of course there's the main site at:
http://davelippman.com

posted by Ahab @ 6/07/2005 09:32:00 PM

Friday, June 03, 2005

Slouching Toward The Millennium

Here are the lyrics to another song on that Kris Kristofferson album "Moment of Forever" that I checked out from the library to see if I could find something that I liked...

Slouching Toward The Millennium

One thing can be said about Kris Kristofferson without a doubt... he knows how to write lyrics that will make you think.

posted by Ahab @ 6/03/2005 12:59:00 PM

Wednesday, June 01, 2005

Johnny Lobo

I have so many topics trickling through the spaces in my mind these days that I'm having trouble getting myself to sit down and write about any single one of them. I have decided that I'm going to let those ideas percolate and absorb all that is in there until they're so saturated that they just pour out without being forced.

I've been checking out music CD's from the library that I otherwise might not ever listen to. I've been playing these in the background while I'm doing whatever else I'm doing at home. The great thing about this is that there are absolutely no expectations and if I'm lucky I might find a song that speaks to me. This is one that caught my ear today. Johnny Lobo by Kris Kristofferson.

Johnny Lobo - by Kris Kristofferson

Thursday, May 26, 2005

War on Terror, Patriot Act, War in Iraq

I've added to what I wrote yesterday so some of today's post may be familiar. Most of what is expressed here is, obviously, just my opinion. It is based on my own personal interpretation of the news reports I've seen and books that I've read on the subject. I hesitate to post anything about these topics because my opinions are pretty strong - and they're also pretty mixed up. I'm finding that in order to say what I really want to say, I must accept that what I write is not always going to come out as a nice metaphorical story about wasps and hornets. I have decided to accept that. I hope that all of you can too.

The War on Terror

Please bear with me long enough to read a few quotes from others before I begin my post:

"Fighting terrorism is like being a goalkeeper. You can make a hundred brilliant saves but the only shot that people remember is the one that gets past you."
--Paul Wilkinson, British scholar

"How to defeat terrorism? Don't be terrorized. Don't let fear rule your life. Even if you are scared." --Salman Rushdie, "In Fear"

"The best way of avenging thyself is not to become like the wrong-doer."
-- Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, Roman Emperor, 161-180 AD

I feel strongly that governments should work to prevent terrorist acts before they occur. Government intelligence agencies working hand in hand with the military and the police should do all that they can to ensure that suspected terrorists are investigated, and that known terrorists are brought to justice. By "brought to justice" I mean that known terrorists should be arrested and tried if possible, or killed if necessary, before they are allowed to take more innocent lives. I would hope that we would treat suspected terrorists the way that we would treat suspects in any crime in the United States. Innocent until proven guilty should be the standard. In my opinion, it is human life that is sacred, not just the human lives of our fellow countrymen. Our government should treat the life of the citizens of the world with just as much respect as it affords to our own.

My heart does not bleed for anyone who would take an innocent human life in order to make a political statement. There are many grey lines in any fight against terrorism because the world is cloudy and connections are more often blurred and unclear than not. The problem when we start saying that it's ok to kill in extreme circumstances in order to protect human life is that a doorway has then been opened for the government machine to barge through without tact or caution; and unfortunately that machine often does not mind its manners. Our government, when it makes decisions that lead to the loss of innocent human life, is making a political statement of its own.

My fear is that the option to kill, if considered acceptable, will be used when it is the easier option, but not necessarily when it is the right option, or as the absolute last resort. I do not want to hinder the right of my government to protect me from somebody who truly would kill me randomly just because I'm an American. At the same time I do not support the right of my government to take another human life without just cause. I also think that every human life is just as precious as my own. Taking an innocent life because somebody, somewhere, in some office thought that that person may have been a terrorist, is inhumane and unjust. It should not be acceptable for innocent foreigners to die in our fight against terrorism.

The situation after 9-11 with suspected terrorists who had been rounded up by the U.S. military and other organizations, languishing in prisons around the globe with no charges against them and without public release of their names was a violation of basic human rights. If any other country were ever to try to do the same kind of thing in the United States to U.S. citizens - there would be an uproar and retaliation, and rightly so. No amount of added security or supposed intelligence value makes it acceptable to imprison hundreds of innocent people for years in order to find out who the bad ones are. If there is no other way - then it would be better to discover each terrorist one by one as they make themselves known through their actions. It is not right to violate basic human rights in order to protect ourselves.

The whole way in which we've dealt with suspected terrorist detainees as if they were not prisoners of war is, in my opinion, abominable. The laws regarding the treatment of prisoners of war were instituted in order to ensure that enemies deal with each other in a humane way. Is it ok for us to treat not only known terrorists, but also suspected terrorists in a manner that is inhumane in order to get information? You may say that the terrorists are not going to treat us humanely when they attack, and therefore extreme measures must be taken. I would argue that we lower ourselves to the terrorists' level when we do inhumane things to anyone, and we help to justify their actions in their minds as well.

I think that there needs to be a self imposed limit to what we can do to the enemy in order to gather intelligence. Maybe there should be a slightly different standard for what is acceptable treatment, depending on whether suspected or known terrorists are being interrogated; but I feel that observing and honoring basic human rights should be the enforced standard in every case. When innocent people end up beaten up, or are forced to pile themselves up nude in humiliating poses for a U.S. service member's camera, or are discovered dead without cause, basic human rights have been violated, and I think that a case can be made that war crimes have been committed.

The Patriot Act

" They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. " -- Benjamin Franklin, "Historical Review of Pennsylvania"

It scares me that recent polls seem to indicate that the American people are willing to give up some of their sacred freedoms in order to gain some security. The government should be allowed to monitor and surveil criminals and suspected terrorists; but they should not be able to track all of us and all of our activities just because that makes it easier to determine who the criminals and suspected terrorists are. Why should every last one of us be treated as if we were a suspect?

We are all responsible, to some degree, for the actions of our government, our military and those of the corporations that our government employs to do much of our dirty work for us abroad. In my mind ignorance of the facts is not an excuse. The United States of America is leading the war on terror throughout the world and if you are a citizen of the United States then you have a vested interest in finding out what is going on and whether or not you support what we're doing and how we're doing it. If you don't agree with what we're doing and how - then do something about it! If you don't, who will?

The War in Iraq

I would like to share one more quote with all of you. Many of you may know it, others may not. I will share who the quote is from at the end of this post.

" Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so, whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such a purpose -- and you allow him to make war at pleasure. If today, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada, to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, 'I see no probability of the British invading us' but he will say to you, 'Be silent; I see it, if you don't.'"

The war in Iraq is a war we chose to fight; but it is not a war that had to be fought. It has never been simply about winning the freedom of the Iraqi people, and it has never been simply about fighting terrorism or dealing with an immediate threat to our security. We went in saying that Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq was an immediate threat. Whatever Iraq is now, it is because we created it; not only did we ask for it, we demanded it.

The U.S. opened a Pandora's Box when we chose to fight a preemptive war. Now any nation that wants to fight a war at any time with another country need only say that it fears that the other country is a threat. That justification, (and the prerequisite possession of WMD), gives many other nations in the world all the justification that they would need to invade the United States (if they thought that they could do so successfully).

The next time that we have real, actionable intelligence about an actual threat to our security, we will have a difficult time backing up our claims with that intelligence because of the way that we went about trying to convince the U.N. to go to war in Iraq with what turned out to be faulty intelligence. We wasted an ace that we held in our hand in that round.

The war in Iraq did not become a part of the war on terrorism until after we had invaded and lured the terrorists in. Before that the war in Iraq and the war on terrorism should have been considered two separate things. Did we plan to lure the terrorists into Iraq so that we wouldn't have to fight them at home? How's that for helping the Iraqi people? More innocent Iraqis will die than needed to in Iraq because we brought the War on Terror to their doorstep.

A war that was just about freeing the Iraqis could have been better fought at a different time, without making up false justifications to go in. If the only way that our government could get the American public to support sending our military into Iraq was to allow it to believe that Saddam played a part in what happened on 9-11 and that his WMD stockpile posed an immediate threat to our society, then the war in Iraq should have never happened in the first place because neither of those justifications was true.

Despite what you may think of me or my position after reading all of this, I want all of you to understand that I really do hope for a decent outcome in Iraq - and freedom for all of the Iraqi people. I support our troops who are just following the orders of their elected government. We need to do all that we can to help the Iraqis secure their freedom, to help make Iraq a stable place, and to keep our soldiers who are there safe. Now that we're in Iraq - we can't leave it, and there are some things that we just can't avoid now due to the choices that we've already made.

Here's to a free, secure, democratic, self-governed Iraq. I'd love to see that reality someday. I hate that we've gone about achieving that goal in this way. I don't believe that the ends justify the means - but since we can't change the means, let's at least pray for a decent end.

Here is that quote again:

" Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so, whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such a purpose -- and you allow him to make war at pleasure. If today, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada, to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, 'I see no probability of the British invading us' but he will say to you, 'Be silent; I see it, if you don't.'" --Abraham Lincoln

Saturday, May 21, 2005

Guantanamo In The Eyes of the World

In light of my post yesterday... I thought it would be fitting to post a link to the following article from today's New York Times.

Guantanamo Comes to Define U.S. to Muslims
By SOMINI SENGUPTA and SALMAN MASOOD

Friday, May 20, 2005

Paper Wasps and Hornets, a Little Dose of Reality (Please click here to read linked article)

Before reading today's post - please click on this link or the title above to read an article from today's New York Times. The rest of what I have to say will make more sense if you read the article first. Thanks, and please forgive me for bringing this into your day if you haven't already seen this bit of news.

As I sit here watching these wasps after reading the linked article, I remember that they are only here because, in the first hour after their discovery, my girlfriend and I felt something tapping timidly on the shoulder of our combined consciousness asking us to show them mercy. The initial decision to allow the wasps to live was not the most obvious choice, but it has proved to be a rewarding one. Right now I'm very glad that we both listened to the little voice whispering in each of our minds... but if we had chosen to ignore it, I might not even remember today that it ever spoke to me about a group of wasps on the balcony.

The National Audubon Society Field Guide to Insects and Spiders has this to say about paper wasps: "Paper Wasps are much more tolerant of people and minor disturbances than are hornets and yellow jackets." This is a good thing. With this knowledge, a healthy bit of curiosity, and a lifelong fascination with insects whirling around in my head... the decision was made to let one group of the colonizing wasps continue building. The others would be sprayed with a water spray bottle, (for days!) until they decided to pick up camp and go off in search of a more hospitable location - (one in which a precisely aimed barrage of "Smart Squirts" wasn't constantly bombarding their construction projects).

My girlfriend and I made the decision to let those wasps live on the balcony. Strange as it may seem to some of you, I feel responsible now for their fate. That nest is what it is today because of a decision that we made together. Would anyone else care if I killed those wasps tomorrow with a brick? Some of you who have read this blog might... if I told you about it; but my neighbors probably wouldn't mind at all - in fact some of them might be wishing that they could do that right now. I think that the argument can be made that I would have been justified had I chosen to have these wasps exterminated the moment that they were discovered; but I think that there can also be an equally compelling argument made that it would be unethical for me to kill them now.

These wasps are not a true threat to me. I have stood on a chair less than a foot and a half away from their nest, and while they have taken a defensive alert stance looking me right in the eye, letting me know that they'll defend their nest if necessary, they have never attacked me. They look very much like hornets, they sound very much like hornets, they even have the ability to sting just like hornets if provoked - but the very important difference is that they are not hornets; and what may be more important to the moral issue here is... whatever they become, they become because of a choice that I made which allowed the vast majority of them to come into existence in the first place.

I am responsible for the conditions in which they now find themselves. I am responsible then, to some degree, for my treatment of them... no more and no less so than I was on the very first day that the first few wasp royals arrived. If I choose to kill 25 wasps today, I will have allowed 21 lives to come into existence, in order to satisfy my curiosity and to relieve my boredom, only to destroy it when it no longer suits my fancy. That option is simply unacceptable in my view. It may have been morally acceptable for me to exterminate the wasps when they first arrived, when they may have truly been perceived as an unavoidable hostile threat to be dealt with - but now I've made the decision to let this group live and thrive. They exist in their current location because I wanted to watch them and learn from them. I am responsible for allowing this society of wasps to form in this fashion under my supervision. Would it be right for me to destroy them when they're no longer of any use to me? Would it be any less unethical for me to allow this particular colony of wasps to die if I discovered that an exterminator would be spraying the entire apartment complex tomorrow, and did nothing to protect them?

If they become hazardous to me, I will put their nest in a gallon jar in the middle of some dark, cool night when they are docile and less likely to become agitated. I will transport them and their home to the swamp and try to set it carefully in some nook of a tree, where the wasps can decide what to do with their traumatically altered, but sustainable lives. I can say all of this with confidence because I know a lot about wasps; I guess you could say that I have an in-depth understanding of my potential adversary, with whom, for the moment, I happen to share a very unique, albeit tenuous, relationship. Because of this I am able to deal with them ethically and without fear, from a place of compassion and humanity, without endangering myself.

Could I go up to their nest and "shake it up a bit" just to see what they'll do? Of course I could! Would people laugh at me and shake their heads when the wasps go into a mad frenzy and swarm around me to defend their nest and their way of life, stinging this once tolerated, supposedly "superior" and more powerful observer into submission? Of course they would! These same people would also most likely eventually come to my aid and help to bandage me up, repeating over and over with a pitying look that I should have known better. They probably would say something like: "Didn't you know that you were playing with fire?"

Humans can do something that paper wasps can't: they can change their programmed response to a particular stimulus. If I were to decide to smash that wasp nest, and those wasps had the ability to transform themselves instantly into hornets, I believe that they would transform before my eyes into the most formidable horde of hornets ever seen. If you saw someone torturing someone you love, and you had the ability to become some sort of super hero with super-human abilities capable of bending steel and moving mountains... wouldn't you do it to protect that special person? I bet that most of us would; and I doubt that many of us would take time out to show the torturer any mercy. Even these paper wasps, who can only ever be the more docile, less aggressive members of their order, could teach me a lesson that I'd never forget if handled carelessly.

Our country has made a multitude of choices in the past that has helped create and mold the world in which we live today. We have created situations and tensions globally that are not completely unlike this relatively harmless wasp nest, with individuals alerted to our presence and watching our movements closely for signs of hostile activity. There are innocent people being tortured and killed in many different locations worldwide. There are unknown, and unidentified, "suspected terrorists" being held against their will and without charges in prisons around the globe. People suffer and die without much explanation and without enough publicity. Their families are force-fed questionable justifications and terse statements which resemble too closely the blanket clause of "collateral damage" that has been used to decree the end of life, posthumously, for countless fathers, mothers, sons, and daughters over the last 4 years.

The enemies of freedom and democracy are not the only ones committing moral and ethical crimes. The more we stir up the nests of those who, for the moment, mean us no harm... the more sworn enemies we are sure to find, transformed versions of the relatively peaceful, rightfully suspicious, co-inhabitants of this planet, (our communal "sacred space"), that we see today. Who will be at fault if they choose to fight back against what they see as an unjust attack on their basic human rights? Is it any use to ask these kinds of questions when you're being chased by a massive coalition of enraged enemies that you've brought to life? I think that it "wouldn't be prudent at this juncture" for us to wait to find out. I think that we would be well served to ask these questions now, while some of our potential enemies in this world are still merely adversaries poised in a defensive posture, watching to see what will happen next.

If the man described as the victim in this article was, in fact, innocent of any crime - I sincerely hope that whoever is responsible for his treatment is punished to the full extent allowed by law. I doubt that the maximum allowable punishment will be sufficient to suit the crimes allegedly committed here, but I do hope that whatever that penalty is, it will be imposed. Even if the man described in this article as the victim was a terrorist of some sort, I still think that it is unjust for us to be treating prisoners of war, (and that is what they should be considered), in this manner. I fear that it is entirely too possible that nothing in the way of justice will prevail in this case.

If it is now acceptable for us to do this kind of thing to other civilians who we suspect "might" be a part of the opposition, then what can we say in our defense when the real members of the opposition do the exact same types of things to our uniformed soldiers, who are without question their declared enemy? What message are we sending to the more docile, less aggressive element of other societies if we allow this kind of thing to go unpunished? Shouldn't we be doing all that we can do to ensure that this kind of thing doesn't happen in the first place? It is a moral question. Each one of us has to listen for our own answer. Inaction is an action. Is allowing this kind of thing to continue acceptable?

I wonder how many of us truly understand the facts of this "War on Terror" that we are fighting. How well do we really understand our enemy? Do we, as a society, truly know who are enemies are? Do we know well enough how to deal with those who may not want to share our way of life in every detail, but who nonetheless do have a desire to live peaceably, (or at least non-aggressively), with us on the same planet? We are playing with fire all over the world today. If there are other worlds out there, with inhabitants observing our actions from afar, they may be getting ready to enjoy a hearty laugh at our expense. Unfortunately I don't think they'll be running to our rescue when we feel the stinging begin, and there is nowhere for us to hide. posted by Ahab @ 5/20/2005 12:51:00 AM

Thursday, May 19, 2005

Paper Wasps Over My Doorway 19 May 2005

Here is a picture of my paper wasp nest.
If you're interested in learning the differences
between paper wasps and yellow jackets...
Please follow the links below:

Paper Wasps

Yellow Jackets

Persistence of the Wasps - Part 1

There are wasps living on my balcony.

They live their lives like any other ordinary paper wasps... but these are no ordinary hymenopterons. These wasps are special. This particular group chose the short overhang in the wall just above the sliding glass door that leads out onto my balcony. They are alive today because they made that decision; and I am richer for it.

It was a sunny day in April when the wasps invaded my apartment complex. The trees were already shedding the petaled lingerie of their lusty spring orgy; and the pollen which flowed over the asphalt in rivers of gold just days before was now concentrated in thin lines along the gutters of the streets and parking lots. Scorned lovers, Dear John letters from one blossoming tree to another were lying dishevelled in grubby clumps mixed with dirt, bearing witness to the inequity of life.

Walking groggily out into the warmth of the sunlight, I stretched and yawned, and revelled in the beautiful reds and greens that met my gaze... when suddenly, from out of nowhere, I was buzzed by an obviously disgruntled co-inhabitant of my sacred space. My first reaction was to hop backwards through the sliding glass door and slide it very quickly shut. Then I looked swiftly all around me to make sure that whatever it was hadn't come even further into the place that I consider to be mine for the moment. He... it... she... hadn't.

When I looked out the glass of the doorway - I saw a captivating sight. There were wasps working on their nests. Yes... nests. From the doorway I could see 2 distinct groups of wasps clinging to the roof of my balcony and clustering around central points that I knew would soon become the anchors for their new colonies. A bit more investigation proved that there was a third nest anchored just outside and just above my sliding glass door. This discovery was a bit alarming, but a tad exciting as well. It's not everyday that multiple groups of wasps decide to change the zoning of your balcony to prime residential real estate.

It is fascinating that these individuals, each a princess who had survived the winter in solitude, had chosen this day, this very hour, to join forces and strive together to build what nature was inspiring them to build. There were, at that moment, immediately outside my apartment alone, four separate groups of wasps working diligently, (the fourth group was discovered less than a half an hour later trying to create an anchor just under the eve of my front door). How many thousands of other wasps were doing exactly the same thing all over in at least the local area? Had some great trumpet call echoed throughout the trees all around me, resounding in a frequency range beyond the grasp of human ears, signalling to the wasps in each of their individual locations that the moment for action and social cooperation had arrived?

However it came about, it was obvious that the time for solitude was over. Whatever was to come next was completely new for these, the oldest surviving paper wasps of this species now living in this, their world. Did they wonder, as they arrived at this unknown location with an overwhelming urge to create something new together, whether conditions had been like this for their great-great-great grandmothers on that long ago forgotten spring day? Had their mothers told them fables, passed down through the generations, which told of their distant relatives and the challenges that they overcame a whole year ago?

Had these wasps ever seen each other before the moment that they arrived, literally at my doorstep, to start doing what the Universe asked of them? Did they all just come to what looked to be a safe harbor, drop anchor, and hoist some secret, unrevealed flags to let the others in the vicinity know of their intentions? How did they all get here? How did they decide who would work with who? Why was it that this has been happening every year, for eons, and I was just now getting to see it in action?

I wonder what life would be like if humans were able to discern every one of nature's trumpet calls that sound out every day with unfathomable regularity. I wonder how much differently we would chose to live our daily lives if we were actually able to understand, with clarity, what is really going on all around us. Why do they get to know, without a doubt, what they're supposed to do, and how they're supposed to live, while I'm left wondering about my purpose? Perhaps it's yet another sign of the inequity of life.

Monday, May 16, 2005

Ahab's Quest

Today I decide once again to speak out about those things that have meaning to me.

Today I attempt to face down my demons while allowing my spirit to soar.

Today I rejoice in the wonderful miracle of the Devine Universe, in a way that is meaningful and suitable for a reality which has given me the gifts of life, awareness, reason, and emotion.

Today I remind myself that I am just one tiny part of that gigantic Universe, and that I have within me the power to change all of history for the better or for the worse.

Today I will remember that there are others who would sacrifice much of what they have to experience all of the opportunities and luxuries that I take for granted.

Today I will remember that there are people being killed, and others killing in my name so that I can experience all of the opportunities and luxuries that I take for granted.

Today I seek a way to have an impact, to make a difference, to be a voice of sobriety in a world drunken on excess materialism, fascinated with our own amazing ability to create, and largely ignorant of our incredible legacy of destruction.

Today I will defend the poor and fight for the voiceless and the weak.

Today I speak for the life-giving earth, for the spirit of mankind and the true meaning of life which has been lost behind a smokescreen of greed and commercialism.

Today I will not cheapen who I am by succumbing to messages about who I should be, what I should wear, how I should act, or what I should say in order to "fit in".

Today I will remember who I am, find real meaning in the world, do things that are really important, and recognize those that are mere distractions.

Today I will willingly give love and will open my heart to receive it, unashamedly, and fully.

I choose this day to walk the walk of a man, and not that of a slave to the dictates of society, tradition, and expectations.

Today I have the power to change my future and that of the world in which I live.

Ahab

Cries Of War!