More Than Beads and Boobs

A testament to the stuff Americans are made of is our ability to come back and rebuild after a devastating event. From the Chicago fire that burnt that city to the ground in 1871, to Hurricane Andrew that practically blew down the cities of Miami and Homestead in 1992, to the Northridge earthquake in Los Angeles County in 1994, and of course the destruction of the Twin Towers in NY on 9/11; when the destruction ends, the rebuilding begins.

The latest example of how you can’t keep a good American city down is of course one of my favorite vacation spots, the city of New Orleans. Hurricane Katrina caused unheard of damage to that city such that many thought it should be condemned to the rubbish pile of history. But that is not our way. In the five months that have passed, conventional wisdom has moved from despondent to hopeful, as despite some of the horror stories printed in the mainstream media, there are plenty of good things happening in the Big Easy.

Here in Tampa, this passed weekend marked the 102nd Gasparilla celebration, our answer to Mardi Gras but with pirates. Watching the floats pass by filled with local citizens dressed as pirates, saloon girls, knights and cavalry, whom were throwing beads to scores of wild and mildly unruly Floridians and other out of state visitors, I began thinking about the real deal in New Orleans. Would the return of Mardi Gras provide the coup de grace in proving that not even a biblical flood can stop an American party?

Of course it would.

According to the Clarion Ledger, New Orleans is more than ready, willing and able to host a fresh continent of tourist on its most partyingest days of the year.

Is New Orleans ready for Mardi Gras tourists?

The city is not only ready, says Mary Herczog, author of Frommer's New Orleans and a part-time resident, this will be an amazing year to be there.

"This is a city that has gone through cataclysm, and its citizens are desperately ready to let off some steam," says Herczog, who expects a cathartic, once-in-a-lifetime experience for locals and visitors alike on this 150th anniversary of the event. "This is going to be a Mardi Gras for the ages."

The celebration, Feb. 18-28, just six months after Hurricane Katrina devastated a wide area of the city, will include just eight days of parades instead of the usual two weeks to keep costs down for the cash-strapped city. And parade routes have been shortened. But most of the parading krewes that have rolled in past years are returning.
And tourism leaders, who see the event as a sort of coming-out party for the city, say the tourist districts are ready.

"When you get downtown, it's almost like Katrina didn't touch it," says Marriott's Mark Sanders, who oversees the company's 14 hotels in the city.

"There's still a lot of misunderstanding, and (Mardi Gras) is a chance to really let people know that we're open," Sanders said.

Though the storm dealt areas such as the Lower Ninth Ward an apocalyptic blow, it largely spared the French Quarter and the Garden District, the city's key tourism areas.

And major attractions, such as the National D-Day Museum and Cafe du Monde, long ago reopened. Harrah's casino just announced it'll reopen Feb. 17, in time for Mardi Gras.

One of reasons NOLA is able to go through with their Mardi Gras event is that its whole organizational structure has changed to resemble that of Gasparilla. This year Gasparilla was hosted by Southwest Airlines, Red Baron Pizza, and Chevrolet and of course Captain Morgan Rum. Indeed I had more than a little Captain in me by the end of the evening. In contrast to Mardi Gras’ of years passed, this was a phenomenally organized event. It had plenty of security, sanitation and accommodations for both partying adults and celebrating families with small children.

As I stated, NOLA is looking to moderate Mardi Gras using the same plans and finances as Gasparilla in Tampa. “With the city in dire financial shape because of hurricane Katrina, companies are lining up for the opportunity to become the first-ever corporate sponsors of New Orleans' Mardi Gras celebration. At least 20 companies are offering to pay $2 million each to help cover the police and cleanup costs for next month's parades and parties. The city, which had to lay off half its employees after the storm, plans to select four main sponsors. Such sponsorships are a radical change for what is billed as the nation's biggest free party. The city's 150th Carnival season has begun and ends on Mardi Gras, or Fat Tuesday, which is February 28th this year.” (Source)

This is just the beginning. A successful Mardi Gras event will be the best publicity for a city that is coming back to life after being drowned. However, the parties are not the sum total of culture making a rebound in that fair city.

According to the Christian Science Monitor, “The petrochemical industry, once the bedrock of the New Orleans economy, had long since shifted most operations to Houston, where firms found the political climate friendlier, the tax incentives more generous, and tourism less of a darling of public officials.
It came as a surprise, then, when Shell Exploration & Production Co. announced it would return its 1,000 workers to the hurricane-scrubbed city - especially because the company had toyed with the idea of leaving even before Katrina.

Delighted city officials, who've learned the hard way not to play favorites, hope Shell's move will encourage companies still on the fence to return as well. Several key employers remain in the "undecided" category, and they appear to be watching how well political leaders plan the rebuilding - and how secure the levees can make the city - before committing to New Orleans.”

New Orleans is a city with rich historical heritage and it is more than just a place to see girls gone wild. More than beads and boobs, it’s a place that has unending cultural relevance and appeal. Though I realize that the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina hurt and killed scores of innocent people, to me these events represent a second chance. Now more than ever, NOLA has to prove that it too can be a shining city on a hill much the same way as other formerly corrupted metropolitan areas (like New York, Chicago, Cleveland, Los Angeles, Tampa etc.) have restored their former glory. And what better way to prove all of this than to shower naked co-eds with plastic jewelry : )

But I’ll settle for just getting rid of Ray Nagin.

Sen. Obama Criticizes Filibuster Tactic

Well at least he has some sense, as opposed to John Kerry. It would appear that the prospect of becoming president has apparently just ruined John Kerry's ability to formulate a coherent strategy. Nobody in their right mind believes that stopping or stalling Samuel Alito from becoming a Supreme Court Justice will translate into the votes needed in 2008 to first win the Democratic Party nomination and then the presidency. This kind of story illustrates why conservative pundits can get away with calling liberals elitists and their audience eats it right up, even though the accusation cuts both ways. Clearly Kerry is out of touch with the same contingent of voters that awarded his rival, George W. Bush the presidency. These are the people that don't even know who Sam Alito is, let alone that he'll be potentially fillibustered. Even if Kerry were to succeed, in two years wil this particular event even matter to the voters? Of course it won't.

It breaks down like this: for those that categorically will not accept Alito as a Supreme Court nominee and would react positively to a fillibuster, Kerry already has those votes. It's like religious or economic conservatives who were upset with Bush for a variety of reasons, it's not like we had anyone else to vote for. Opting to appease your solid base when they have no viable alternative candidate is a wasteful strategy.

The rest of the voters he would have to pick up to win in 2008 are generally people who don't want to see people like John Kerry marring any part of the government process. Plain and simple, short of nominating the cleaning lady (as Ann Coulter would say) we just want the Senate to get on with the confirmation process and then get back to work on the issues that actually mean something to us.

Obama hit it right on the head when he says, "There is an over-reliance on the part of Democrats for procedural maneuvers." That is absolutely true. The Democrats are losing elections year after year mostly due to their inabiity to persuade the vast majority of Americans that their views make a lick a sense. Now I'm somebody who can appreciate many of the liberal ideas and have called for their enactment myself. However, if I have to stand next to the people wearing Scream masks and all of that, I'll take my chances with the corporatists.

Here's the story:

To more effectively oppose Supreme Court nominees in the future, Democrats need to convince the public "their values are at stake" rather than use stalling tactics to try to thwart the president, said a senator who opposes Samuel Alito's confirmation.

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., predicted on Sunday that an effort to try to block a final vote on Alito would fail on Monday. That would clear the way for Senate approval Tuesday of the federal appeals court judge picked to succeed the retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Democrats fear he would shift the court rightward on abortion rights, affirmative action, the death penalty and other issues.
"We need to recognize, because Judge Alito will be confirmed, that, if we're going to oppose a nominee that we've got to persuade the American people that, in fact, their values are at stake," Obama said.

"There is an over-reliance on the part of Democrats for procedural maneuvers," he told ABC's "This Week."

Sens. John Kerry and Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts are urging fellow Democrats to support a filibuster, citing in part Alito's conservative record on abortion and deference to executive power.

Alito's supporters must produce 60 votes to cut off a filibuster; an Associated Press tally shows at least 62.

The AP tally also shows that at least 53 Republicans and three Democrats intend to vote to confirm Alito; that is well over the required majority.

President Bush said Saturday in his weekly radio address that senators should have an up-or-down on a nominee "who understands that the role of a judge is to strictly interpret the law."

Obama cast Alito as a judge "who is contrary to core American values, not just liberal values."

But Obama joined some Democrats, including Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Charles Schumer of New York, in expressing his unhappiness with the filibuster bid.

"There's one way to guarantee that the judges who are appointed to the Supreme Court are judges that reflect our values. And that's to win elections," Obama said.

Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., said he, too, would support the filibuster attempt but agreed that it was not particularly wise.

"I think a filibuster make sense when you have a prospect of actually succeeding," Biden said on CNN's "Late Edition.""I will vote one time to say to continue the debate. but the truth of the matter" is that Alito will be confirmed, he said.

New Review: House Poor

The following is a brief excerpt from a review posted on PopandPolitics.com:

It has been said that if you have money to burn, you should invest in the stock market. Sure you could make a killing if your stocks hit, but if they miss, you're out of luck and a whole lot of money. So when it comes to purchasing a house or many houses, why are some people treating these transactions like they're playing the stock market? Especially when the cost of doing so may land you back in Momma’s basement or government-provided public housing AKA da projects.

Instead of just buying a home to provide the best and safest necessity of life for their family, some investors are shying away from trading stocks and commodities and instead have opted to trade houses. Rapid buying and selling, especially in hot markets, have resulted in inflated prices that in many cases are not justified by the real property value. Therefore, though people have been taken in by the dream of getting rich off the housing market, a number of folks with good intentions have been undone and broken by an increasingly volatile market.

For those people who are still willing to take their chances on housing as investment rather than basic necessity, this is where June Fletchers new book, “House Poor: Pumped-Up Prices, Rising Rates, and Mortgages on Steroids,” comes in nice and handy. Fletcher is the former editor of “Homes Today” and “Builder Magazine” and is the current “Home Front” reporter for the Wall Street Journal.

“House Poor,” as it says on the front cover, is a readily usable guide to surviving the coming housing crisis. Like all good books, there’s some history to provide context, but mostly it’s a series of survival tips to help keep the novice home trader from losing their livelihood to the tumultuous housing market.

Fletcher doesn’t advocate either way in whether or not to buy housing. She covers all the bases by saying when one should buy a house to live in, buy extra houses as an investment, or when one should just rent. Now if someone suggested to my mother that there are times when one should rent over buying a place, well she’d simply plotz. But it’s true, according to Fletcher; there are clear signs to show when the housing market is rising, falling, bubbling, and just staying kaput. These investment winds are what the prospective buyer should be looking out for and they are clearly represented and explained by Fletcher in her book. Continued

Burning Down the House

The House of Bush and the House of Saud have been indelibly married to one another for several decades now. It’s a relatively simple deal when you boil it down to its core principles. The US energy industry needs cheap oil, which is easily attainable in the vast deserts of Saudi Arabia. The Saudi royals and business oligarchs need cash, and at one they needed protection from their Middle Eastern competitors, Iran and Iraq. For them it was a pretty good deal as the US always showed favoritism to Saudi needs, even when they were counterintuitive to our own strategic goals.

The Saudi’s for their part have always manipulated themselves into a position of being covered on both ends. As they cultivated a relationship with the US military-industrial complex, they were also propagating the public myth that we are the “Great Satan,” in the eyes of their oppressed people. On the backs of America’s reputation, they helped build a foundation of hatred and jealousy that would eventually create Osama bin Laden and then lead to a series of terrorist attacks, culminating in 9/11.

Needless to say, after Islamic fundamentalism brought down the Twin Towers, the jig was up. Saudi Arabia could no longer rely on plausible deniability that they were not responsible for promulgating anti-American Islamic fundamentalism. As many of us should know by now, the House of Saud was highly dependant on maintaining a distant hatred of America on the Arab Street, lest its people figure out who was really oppressing them.

For the last couple of years, Saudi Arabia has tried to throw its weight against the monster itself created, at least to stave off its own overthrow of power. For some time, it looked quite possible that UBL could have incited popular revolution and claimed his homeland for Islamic Nationalism has he defines it.

The Saudi’s have been walking a tightrope trying to appease their partners in Washington while not inciting anti-royal family riots. This endeavor was greatly marred by the US’ insistence in overthrowing Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq. After Baghdad fell, many Arabs, Persians, and Muslims rightly asked, “Are we next?”

It’s a valid question for sure. Shortly after “major combat operations” was declared over, former Searle CEO and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld suggested that we immediately being down Damascus and then possibly Tehran. Now just as Iraq and Iran had once been allies of ours, it’s entirely probably that the House of Saud so the writing and the lighter fluid on the wall and realized that it was only a matter of time before the US got to the business of “bringing democracy to Mecca and Medina.”

Not ones to idly watch their house get burned to the ground; the Saudi’s have been busy little bees trying to establish equal or greater trade with other countries. And who should be waiting with bated breath and billions in expendable cash, our friends the Chinese.

According to a story in Xinhua On-Line, Saudi Arabia has become China’s largest oil provider.

”Saudi Arabia has become China's largest crude oil provider, largest trade partner and second largest export market in the regions of west Asia and Africa, Chinese Minister of Commerce Bo Xilai said here recently.

Bo made the remark at the third meeting of the China-Saudi Arabia economic and trade committee.

In 1999, when the second meeting of China-Saudi Arabia economic and trade committee was held, bilateral trade was below 2 billion U.S. dollars. By 2005, the figure had risen to 15 billion dollars, with an annual average growth rate of 41 percent, the Chinese minister said.

In four or five years, the bilateral trade volume is expected to reach 40 billion dollars, he added.

China is willing to enhance economic cooperation with Saudi Arabia in areas of energy, mining, petrochemicals, investment, infrastructure construction, science and technology and human resources, he said.

The Chinese side will make concerted efforts with the members of the Gulf Cooperation Council including Saudi Arabia to push for the signing of a bilateral free-trade agreement as early as possible, he said.

The two countries should enhance coordination and cooperation under the framework of the World Trade Organization, he said, expressing the hope that Saudi Arabia will streamline visas issuance for Chinese business people and workers.

Saudi Arabia thanks China for supporting its entry to the World Trade Organization, said Minister of Finance Ibrahim Bin Abdel Aziz Al-Assaf of Saudi Arabia.

He expressed his wish that the two countries would enhance cooperation in energy, medical services, education and training as well as finance.”

It was only a matter of time before this was bound to happen. Aside from the financial implications, it is apparent to me, what Saudi Arabia has done. Look at the case of Iran. Barring troop deployment issues and all of that, under normal circumstances, does anybody think the US would have been this patient with a country it obviously sees as a militaristic and economic threat to energy interests? Of course not. Save for the interests of both China and Russia, there would be canyons where Iranian nuclear power plants once stood. But, because said countries have heavily invested in Iran and have strategic partnerships with the for Persian Empire, the US’ plan for regime is effectively stuck until those countries opt to step aside and participate.

Saudi Arabia has taken a page from the mullahs and has now erected wall made of Chinese yuan to protect itself from the callous war hawks in Washington (whomever they may be in both parties).

And just in case China isn’t a strong enough ally, the Saudi’s have also begun a strategic partnership with India, based on mutual needs in the War on Terror. Now ain’t that a kick in the head?

From The Indian Express, ”India and Saudi Arabia today took the first step towards combatting terrorism together through an agreement that opens the door for intelligence-sharing for the first time between both countries.

While the agreement signed today in the presence of Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is one on combatting crime, it does cover terrorism. This is extremely important from an Indian standpoint as it will help in gathering information and conducting investigations into terror networks and their financial support.

According to the MEA spokesperson, King Abdullah acknowledged the need to work together on fighting terror. ‘‘This is a long-term struggle, but this was one which will be carried on until this scourge is completely eliminated,’’ the Saudi King is believed to have said at the talks…Both sides will continue to look at broadening the scope of cooperation on fighting terror and related financial crimes.

Earlier, the Prime Minister and the Saudi King held a one-on-one as well as delegation level talks covering all important areas of the bilateral relationship. Singh, who has initiated the ‘Look West’ policy, views Riyadh as an important partner in expanding economic ties with oil producing states.

Both countries signed four agreements today. Apart from the MoU on combatting crime, the two sides also signed an agreement on avoidance of double taxation, investment promotion and protection agreement, and cooperation agreement in sports and youth affairs.”

We’re not breaking up with Saudi’s yet; they’ve just decided to see other people.

Failed in Your Duties

My lovely fiance wised me up to a pair of stories that illustrates just how much President Bush appears to have failed in his most important role as Commander-in-Chief. First, let me say that beyond all of the policy issues a president must contend with, your first loyalty must be to the armed forces, in my opinion. That is the job George Washington was entrusted with and strict loyalty to the troops has been the responsibility of each sitting president ever since. No leader, here or elsewhere, should ever flex their military muscle lightly. In the event that duty calls, as I believe it did in Afghanistan and Iraq, the president is beholdent to make sure that there are enough troops deployed, that they have all the tools they need, and when it's all over, each and every soldier is afforded all the accomodations befitting the hero's that they are.

In this task, President Bush has appeared to fail the men and women he is leading in the War on Terror.

First, there is this story: More Than 260,000 Can't Get VA Health Care

More than a quarter-million veterans considered to have higher incomes could not sign up for health care with the Veterans Affairs Department during the last fiscal year because of a cost-cutting move.

Those locked out - totaling 263,257 in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30 - have no illnesses or injuries attributable to their service in the military and earn more than the average wage in their community.

The VA suspended enrollment of such veterans beginning in January 2003 after then-VA Secretary Anthony Principi said the agency was struggling to provide adequate health care to the rapidly rising number of veterans seeking it.

That year the VA population was about 6.8 million. About 7.5 million are enrolled today, with more than 5 million treated.

"There is no reason for the VA to give the cold shoulder to veterans who have served our country honorably," said Rep. Lane Evans of Illinois, ranking Democrat on the House Veterans Affairs Committee.

VA spokesman Matt Burns said VA provides world-class health care to veterans, "particularly our newly returning veterans, those with low incomes and those who have sustained service-related injuries or illnesses."

Iraq veterans are guaranteed health care if they enroll within two years of leaving the military.

Under the Bush administration, there has been debate about providing veterans health care. President Bush's budgets have included proposals to require some veterans to pay a portion of their care with co-payments, but Congress has repeatedly rejected that idea.

The fact of the matter is that whether or not you "need" VA benefits based on income or health issues unrelated to ones service, the vets were promised these benefits in return for service to the country. Period. There should be no debate about this. Slashing VA budgets and leaving any veteran out in the cold, regardless of their need, sends a horrible message about what this administration thinks of its soldiers, former and current.

This leads me to the next story.

Study: Army Stretched to Breaking Point

Stretched by frequent troop rotations to Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army has become a "thin green line" that could snap unless relief comes soon, according to a study for the Pentagon.

Andrew Krepinevich, a retired Army officer who wrote the report under a Pentagon contract, concluded that the Army cannot sustain the pace of troop deployments to Iraq long enough to break the back of the insurgency. He also suggested that the Pentagon's decision, announced in December, to begin reducing the force in Iraq this year was driven in part by a realization that the Army was overextended.

As evidence, Krepinevich points to the Army's 2005 recruiting slump - missing its recruiting goal for the first time since 1999 - and its decision to offer much bigger enlistment bonuses and other incentives.

"You really begin to wonder just how much stress and strain there is on the Army, how much longer it can continue," he said in an interview. He added that the Army is still a highly effective fighting force and is implementing a plan that will expand the number of combat brigades available for rotations to Iraq and Afghanistan.

The 136-page report represents a more sobering picture of the Army's condition than military officials offer in public. While not released publicly, a copy of the report was provided in response to an Associated Press inquiry.

Illustrating his level of concern about strain on the Army, Krepinevich titled one of his report's chapters, "The Thin Green Line."

He wrote that the Army is "in a race against time" to adjust to the demands of war "or risk 'breaking' the force in the form of a catastrophic decline" in recruitment and re-enlistment.

Well it certainly sounds like we're ready to fight Iran now doesn't it? ::::rolls eyes in back of head:::::::

"We didn't know the insurgency would last this long," is not an excuse for this level of incompetance. The fact remains that the war plan, as designed by former Searle CEO, Donald Rumsfeld, did not call for overwhelming force in Iraq. He thought, mostly due to Chalabi, that overwhelming force wouldn't be necessary. This gross misjudgment has now resulted in over 2,000 and though that is the price of war, the situation in Iraq as it is right now, could have been avoided if this administration had just used some common sense. Have any of them ever played Risk before? You also send more than necessary to take over a territory. That's been the strategy since man began to fight an it will always be the strategy that wins wars. Once again, this is illustrative of this administrations failures to honor the integrity of the American military.

For shame.

Shades of a BJ

By BJ I mean, Bill Jefferson…you know, former President Bill Jefferson Clinton…what did you think I meant?

Your mind is in the gutter again dear reader.

But seriously folks, President Clintons second term was filled with scandal after scandal, the least of which featured him lying on the stand about getting oral (is it or isn’t it) sex. By the Bush/Gore election of 2000, it didn’t matter that Bush II was wholly unqualified for the position for the seat of the presidency, just that he didn’t look at the time like a guy who would further embarrass the country.

I’ll give you time to ponder that last sentence…come back when you are done crying.

…

Good, let’s move on.

Voters can be a skittish bunch. When the economy is flourishing and there are good jobs to be had, most voters will not want major changes in their government, even if your administration is mired in scandal. In North America, it used to be that people felt relatively safe on this side of the Atlantic because there was no force on Earth that could amass an army, navy and air force mighty enough to sustain an invasion of either the United States or Canada. Security wasn’t the biggest issue here because we had the best defense in history, the Atlantic Ocean.

From the onset of the Atomic Age to 9/11, we here on this side of the pond have learned the hard way that our security is now maintained ever so precariously. In today’s political sphere, security trumps all else, including personal freedom. As they said after this passed election in the US, “security moms” made all the difference. God only knows if that’s true but it does speak to a larger sentiment; so long as I can get MY kids to school, and stop at the store to buy MY family bread, without being blown to smithereens, I’m perfectly willing to live under fascism. Just ask any Russian still living there who would be willing to vote for Putin again because of Chechnya.

Scandal plus the promise of security in the face of Muslim fundamentalism and terrorism equals a new conservative government in Canada, our friends to the north. According to The Times Online UK:

Canada today elected its first Conservative government in 12 years as the traditionally peaceable voters decisively ended their love affair with the scandal-riven Liberals.

The Conservatives, led by Stephen Harper, will have 124 seats in parliament. Although 31 below the 155 required for an absolute majority, the party has 21 more seats than the defeated ruling party.

Harper states that the conservative agenda is to pass tax cuts for the middle-classes, increased military spending and closer ties to Washington, which includes possibly entering into a strategic defense initiative and passing an alternative to the Kyoto Protocol. One of Harper’s aims is to increase spending on the Canadian military, expand its "peacekeeping" missions in Afghanistan and Haiti and tighten security along the border with the United States.

Some of Harper’s social agenda involves backing away from rhetoric supporting abortion and gay marriage. It is assumed that under Harper’s leadership, there will be an endeavor to bring Canada and the US back together under friendlier terms since the division resulting from the Iraq War. This goes for social policy as well as military and international affairs as well.

In fact, according to Global Research, a Harper win will give Canada the opportunity assert itself in much the same way the US does, as a partner instead of a subordinate.

A historical analysis reveals that Stephen Harper affirmed the January 2003, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) New Frontiers Project to develop a strategy for shaping Canada's future within North America and beyond. Composed of the chief executive officers of 150 leading Canadian enterprises, the CCCE has been dedicated to building a stronger world influence for Canada, and believes that Canada's best path to growth is through openness to the world and deep integration with the United States. The CCCE together with the U.S. Council On Foreign Relations (CFR) has pioneered principles of security and prosperity that culminated in the drafting of the SPP.

Part of the New Frontiers Project is Reinvigorating the North American Defence Alliance. Since September 11, 2001, "security trumps trade" has become a political mantra in the United States. And, there is a perceived need for improved coordination on security well beyond military matters, thus there is to be an integration with NORTHCOM and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the United States, one capable of responding not only to future outbreaks of infectious diseases within Canada, but also of working seamlessly with its American counterpart in addressing health emergencies on a continental basis. New Frontiers: North American Security Prosperity

The New Frontiers Project is a document comparable in scope and significance to the Magna-Carta, or The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies' A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.

A Stephen Harper victory would ensure tight integration of Canada into a "One World Government" with the United States. Canada's military would be used by the Pentagon and NORTHCOM.

People only seem to like scandals when they benefit directly from it or when it is well hidden from them. “If you are going to rip me off, have the decency to do it behind my back,” is what most of us seem to say. In Canada, what appears to have led to this change in the political and philosophical structure is graft and cronyism (isn’t it always graft and cronyism?)

From the Times again, “The result was generally considered to be a deliberate punishment vote by the electorate in response to a series of scandals which have swirled around the Liberals. The most serious involved the diversion of tens of millions of dollars supposed to persuade Quebec to stay in the union in a 1995 referendum which ended up in the pockets of Liberal cronies.”

Now Harper isn’t Bush and nobody knows for sure if the Canadians have done gone and washed some of their freedom away for the sake of punishing Paul Martin or wanting to be able to buy bread in relative peace. Though if we’ve learned anything from our reaction to the Clinton era scandals, shame and attention deficit disorder will make a voter do strange and wonderful things, eh.

Bin Laden and the Black Knight

All weekend I received e-mails and comments asking me for my opinion of the new tape put out by Osama bin Laden in conjunction with Al Jazeera News. My first answer was, “Well it’s catchy and it’s got a beat I can dance to.” (Cue rim shot)

But seriously folks, I don’t pay too much attention to these bin Laden sightings. After 4 plus years of this nonsense, I feel about UBL (as the CIA calls him) much the same way I feel about certain elders in my family; stop with the constant updates and just tell me when he’s dead (long story).

I can only assume that the big thrill in this particular message is the much-ballyhooed “truce” he’s offered the West. In case you’ve missed it:

We don't mind offering you a long-term truce on fair conditions that we adhere to. We are a nation that God has forbidden to lie and cheat. So both sides can enjoy security and stability under this truce so we can build Iraq and Afghanistan, which have been destroyed in this war. There is no shame in this solution, which prevents the wasting of billions of dollars that have gone to those with influence and merchants of war in America who have supported Bush's election campaign with billions of dollars -- which lets us understand the insistence by Bush and his gang to carry on with war.

There are two sides to this “truce” offer in the United States. One side says that we should never give up and fight the terrorists to the death, no matter what the cost. As they say on the Fox News Weekend financial shows, you cannot measure the cost of freedom in bullets and body bags. In the minds of the people on this side, led by our president, George W. Bush, you can never give up, call a truce or negotiate with cold-blooded killers. These are the people that look at how we handled Vietnam and then scream with all of their breath, “Never again!”

The other side does not even see bin Laden as a terrorist. He and his followers are simply responding to years upon years of occupation by Western/Zionist forces. They are taking back the lands and the funds that were stolen by “imperialistic” Western regimes and the international lending institutions and corporations that they secretly work for. The folks in this camp would not only like to accept bin Laden’s call for a truce, but would also pay reparations to him and all Muslim countries that the West has unjustly molested since the end of World War I. These are the people that look at how we handled Vietnam and then scream with all of their breath, “Never again!”

(Yes I purposely repeated myself, figure it out history majors)

The problem here is that both sides are wrong. There is no “truce” to accept or reject for any reason – good, bad, or indifferent. The only person that can offer a truce is the leader of an army. People can find all the reasons in the world to justify terrorism or at the very least, anti-Americanism, but none of those justifications make Osama bin Laden a general of armies. The most generous descriptions of him have painted UBL as more of a CEO of a company that specializes in raising funds and training people to murder civilians. He was a spiritual leader of vast amounts of people for sure and he absolutely was part of the leadership that eventually led to a series of attacks on American soil and propriety culminating with 9/11.

But so what?

Neither Jerry Falwell nor Steve Jobs can declare war or offer truces and both command large bodies of people. UBL was closer to both of those individuals than he was a leader of armies. He has no country, no diplomatic rights and in reality, no protection or rights under the Geneva Conventions. It’s a nice offer and all but not one he can legally or logically make. Unfortunately, we couldn’t even accept a truce from Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq if we wanted to and he’s currently a bigger than the topper of charts UBL. Once again, there is no real legal foundation for a formal truce with a bunch of angry nuts running around with bombs strapped to their hairy chests.

But let’s assume there was; just how exactly would UBL secure that truce? How would he keep his followers from just blowing it off and continuing to blow stuff up? It’s nice that according to him and his followers, “We are a nation that God has forbidden to lie and cheat,” but somehow I am inclined to believe that that sentiments rings hollow for a crowd that uses children as walking bombs. His former country of Saudi Arabia states by law, a man can marry a girl as young as 9-years-old. Maybe it’s the social worker in me but that right there is clear indicator that maybe we’re not dealing with the swiftest bunch.

For the last couple of years, since at least the fall of the Taliban but definitely since 2003, most terrorism analysts have said that UBL has lost command and control of al Qaeda. As I recall, in one of the earlier UBL releases, he gave permission to his field commanders to operate with autonomy and to go ahead and blow up what they wished. To my recollection, that is still going on to this day. Not to mention, though they are described as “dangerous,” al Qaeda, with or without bin Laden is no longer the murderous global threat it once was.

According to the general manager of Al -Arabiya television, Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed, “Bin Laden does not hold anymore the keys of Al-Qaeda's armies, which have been cloned, and he and the other leaders have become mere commentators on their major events, which they hear about from the media like everyone else.”

He continues by stating that, “The new field commanders, like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq or Al-Qahtani in Afghanistan, do not belong to or know Bin Laden or Al-Zawahiri and sometimes do not heed their orders, including the public ones, as was the case in the public verbal dispute between the command of the Land of the Two Rivers and Al-Zawahiri when the latter denounced the bombings of civilians and the targeting of the Shiites and the former responded by rejecting his orders and continues to bomb to this day.”

And finally, “Bin Laden's truce cannot be taken seriously, particularly in view of his difficult position. He is moving from one hideout to another, unable to use telephones, and fears the treachery of his host everywhere he goes. His long absence and being content with a badly recorded single cassette confirm his isolation from the world apart from commenting on the news.”

So ostensibly, here we have a man who is stuck. He has no arms and no legs and yet he defiantly and with relish calls into the winds to his superior opponent, “Alright, we’ll call it a draw!”

If the bin Laden tape isn’t a Monty Python moment I don’t know what is.

New Review: Rogue State

The following is a brief excerpt from a review posted on PopandPolitics.com:

Have you ever wondered what would happen if the mob owned their own country? Obviously, this would be a country run strictly on guns, drugs, and sex. The only law and order would be the one that best serves the bosses' needs. A country run by a mob boss would most likely not be inclined to cooperate with international agreements. In fact, said country would be doing everything possible to undermine world security, if for no other reason than to provide a venue for their guns, drugs, and sex.
Friends, such a place exists and its name is North Korea.

When authors take on the subject of North Korea, they tend to center their themes on its nuclear weapons capabilities, factual or otherwise. Former chief Republican counsel to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and bestselling author William C. Triplett II, however, has written more than just the obligatory warning of nuclear Armageddon stemming from the Korean peninsula. He has written a short history of the connection between Communist China and North Korea that has enabled Kim Jong Il to become a greater terrorist than Osama bin Laden.

The book is called, “Rogue State: How a Nuclear North Korea Threatens America,” but it really is much more than a collection of warnings stemming from N. Korea's potential nuclear arsenal. Triplett takes at least a third of the book to illuminate the many historical events that have gotten us to a point in history where a criminal regime on a small peninsula in Asia can threaten world security with the push of a button. Continued

Study: Men Enjoy Seeing Bad People Suffer

Now I'm not the least bit surprised by this. Most days I'm confronted with men and teenage boys who have a very wrathful philosophical outlook on life. When asked most males of varying stripes will prescribe an eye for an eye as the solution to any degree of loss. I'm not just talking about the dysfunctional youth I treat on my day job, but also people such as men in my biological and extended family. They all have a near zealous belief in issues like the death penalty regardless of what evidence is shown in how ineffective it is or in cases where innocent people are executed.

Also, vengence aside, most men think that physical suffering of others is just damn funny. Only men tend to laugh at other men being kicked in the nuts. For some strange reason women just don't see the comedy in a good kick to the groin. Anywho, here's the story:

Bill Clinton said he felt others' pain. But a new brain-scanning study suggests that when guys see a cheater get a mild electric shock, they don't feel his pain much at all. In fact, they rather enjoy it.

In contrast, women's brains showed they do empathize with the cheater's pain and don't get a kick out it.

It's not clear whether this difference in schadenfreude - enjoyment of another's misfortune - results from basic biology or sex roles learned during life, researchers say. But it could help explain why men have historically taken charge of punishing criminals and others who violate societal rules, said researcher Dr. Klaas Stephan.

Stephan, a senior research fellow at the University College London, is co-author of a study led by Tania Singer at the college and published online Wednesday by the journal Nature.

Singer, in an e-mail message, said the sex difference in results was a surprise and must be confirmed by larger studies. The researchers said women might have reacted like men if the cheater suffered psychological or financial pain instead.

The scientists scanned the brains of 16 men and 16 women after the volunteers played a game with what they thought were other volunteers, but who in fact were actors. The actors either played the game fairly or obviously cheated.

During the brain scans, each volunteer watched as the hands of a "fair" player and a cheater received a mild electrical shock. When it came to the fair-player, both men's and women's brains showed activation in pain-related areas, indicating that they empathized with that player's pain.

But for the cheater, while the women's brains still showed a response, men's brains showed virtually no specific reaction. Also, in another brain area associated with feelings of reward, men's brains showed a greater average response to the cheater's shock than to the fair player's shock, while women's brains did not.

A questionnaire revealed that the men expressed a stronger desire than women did for revenge against the cheater. The more a man said he wanted revenge, the higher his jump in the brain's reward area when the cheater got a shock. No such correlation showed up in women.

Philip Jackson, who studies brain systems responsible for empathy at the University of Laval in Quebec City in Canada, said he found the sex differences intriguing and worth following up on.

The overall results elegantly tie together "a lot of things we either knew or suspected strongly" about how social interaction can affect the brain's activity, he said.

Conspiracy or Quack: The Secret War on Iran

Sometimes there are stories that are so wild sounding and so ridiculous that one assumes it’s all fantasy. Did we really land on the moon, or was it all faked? Many people have now bought the theory that it was all Hollywood magic. Are there aliens being kept in a secret base called Area 51? Some people seem to think so. Did Lyndon Johnson contribute in some to the assassination of John F. Kennedy? Lord knows that conspiracy theories abound about that topic.

In December of 2004, while writing a story about scientist having found a possible cure for AIDS, one reader tipped me to yet another conspiracy theory. Out of curiosity I looked at the information and like all themes of this nature, the story sounded so far out there that it was difficult for me to take it seriously. However, being an independent writer and not having anyone to answer to gives me the freedom to cover a wide swath of topics ranging from the serious to the sublime. So I wrote about it anyway under the heading of, “Conspiracy or Quack?” I figured if you the reader have all the information then you can make your own decision whether or not this stuff is true.

I have found myself in that quandary again. Iran and the multitude of permutations in dealing with it sucked up most of my attention last year when it came to covering foreign policy topics. First it seemed imminent, then not so much. Many writers such as myself began trying to cover the presidential elections in that country in the hopes that a more moderate leader would ascend into a position of Iranian authority. Instead, our hopes were dashed as Iranians seemingly elected an even more conservative and brazen president than the man whom was vacating the seat.

Despite calls from the expert community for “covert regime change,” it seems that the possibility of war is back on the table. But as I stated above, is there something more malevolent in the works?

While researching Iran last year I came across probably one of the most bizarre conspiracy theories I’ve ever read. The post is called, “The War of Gog & Magog AKA The Iran War.” The writer proposes that a war against Iran is biblical prophecy. It is believed, according to Michael Carmichael, that there are those in President Bush’s administration whom are purposely guiding us toward war in order to carry out God’s wishes. I swear I’m not making this up.

Carmichael writes, “According to current reports on the rapidly escalating preparations for a US war against Iran, it now appears that the prophecies of the Bible are driving President Bush, Vice President Cheney and their inner circle of neoconservatives to design a strategic platform for the prosecution of the final war for control of Planet Earth. In the Bible, this conflict is called The War of Gog & Magog, and the final battle of that war is Armageddon. This scenario has been graphically detailed in the best-selling Left Behind fantasies authored by the Rev Tim LaHaye, a true believer and a devout political supporter of George Bush.

You might well ask, "Who, what and where are Gog and Magog?" According to the literature of fundamentalist Christianity as it is peculiarly practiced in America, Magog, is the prince of Gog, an area that is frequently described as including many of the following nations: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Russia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Chechnya, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Afghanistan. While accounts of the geography of Gog vary, the consensus is that it includes the mass of central Asia, and may involve European nations as well who will form an alliance to attack Israel.”

As ridiculous as this may sound, there are some threads here that need further examination before casting this theory into the dustbin of insanity. First, though Bush has called Russian President Vladimir Putin a friend and there have been many moves to bring our former rival closer to the Western world, there are still old contrarians from the Cold War era in Washington that believe that no matter what changes in the world, Russia is still our enemy. If those people in both the Pentagon and the White are also fundamentalist Christians, it is possible that they might believe we are in the pre-stages of a final holy war.

Another important element of this story is the role of Israel. Carmichael suggests that along with the US, Israel is preparing for an aerial bombardment of Iran’s nuclear facilities at some point this year (the smart money says March). Now that’s not exactly earth shattering news as even the mainstream media has been reporting that Israel is readying itself for a military confrontation with Iran.

In fact, according to the Jerusalem Post, though the Israeli’s are denying that they had anything to do with last weeks plan crash in Iran that killed the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's ground forces, it has been suggested that covert action and sabotage is exactly the strategy that should be employed to take down Iran.

Israel and Russia are also enemies from the Cold War. However, these days it would seem that the lines between enemies and allies has been blurred by the almighty dollar. Russia and Israel now have joint oil concerns stemming from an Israeli pipeline called the Tipline. On the other hand, Russia is responsible for selling Syria anti-aircraft missiles and defended that sale when Putin visited Israel last year. Seeing has Syria has not serious enemies in the Middle East except Israel, I can only imagine what logic Putin used to sell this deal on Sharon.

The aforementioned piece titled, “The War of Gog and Magog,” sounds like it could be plausible when you read it due to the people highlighted within the administration whom are said to be pushing this agenda. John Bolton is mentioned as well as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and a whole host of “neo-conservative hawks.” Given what the mainstream press has reported about Bush’s White House, it’s not totally beyond the realm of possibility that biblical prophecy as well as global oil interests might actually drive this group.

It also doesn’t help that Iranian President Ahmadinejad says completely indefensible nonsense such as wanting to wipe Israel off the map and that the Holocaust was a myth. He’s not exactly a sympathetic character.

As with most conspiracy theories, I have no idea how true this all is. The mainstream media is reporting that Russia is now beginning to cool on its protection of Iran, mostly because Ahmadinejad is so completely hostile to the diplomatic world. It appears as if Putin is backing away from Iran in the hopes that if regime change comes to fruition, the next leader will still honor all of their trade deals and yet be less of a lunatic. China isn’t quite there yet but there is hope that where Moscow goes, Beijing shall follow.

Is this the entire precursor to biblical prophecy? Who knows? I’m putting it out there as something for you all to consider. I myself am inclined to believe that Washington is solely driven by monetary concerns but hey, religion has made people do some strange things over the years so again, even a wild conspiracy such as the “War of Gog and Magog,” is possibly true.

God Bless.

Vampire seeks governor's job

Like a good friend once said, "See this is what I mean, democracy doesn't work!"

But seriously folks, we've brought this sort of thing on ourselves. Corruption, graft and cronyism have so diluted the public trust that's it's no wonder people might consider a self-proclaimed vampire as a states executive leader. And why should the good people of Minnesota, or any state for that matter bother voting for a proper candidate? In most cases, by the time you've gotten to the point where you can viably contest an executive position anywhere in the US, you will be bought and paid for by resident lobbyists. You will also be expected to hold the party line, regardless of which party it is you belong to and no matter what that line happens to be in any given week.

With few exceptions, our political hemisphere has become wrought with America's homegrown aristocracy. Sure any yahoo can run, and in some cases he/she can win. Witness the ascension of the aforementioned pro-wrestler-cum-governor, Jesse "The Body" Ventura. He won that coveted seat as a populist candidate with the main goal of kicking the lobbyists out of Saint Paul. He failed miserably because the state legislators fought him like he was the devil. Though he managed to tone it down a notch, between the local media and his fellow politicians, this local upstart was driven from office after one term.

There have been others. Clint Eastwood was a mayor. Sonny Bono was the mayor of Palm Springs. Of course we all know about Arnold Schwarzenegger, but even he is American royalty. Some lesser-known politicians whom have tried to buck the system are San Francisco Mayor, Gavin Newsom, and Mayor of New Paltz, NY, Jason West. Both were given a sound beating in the press when they tried to circumvent their respective city councils and legalize same-sex marriage.

As for the vampire, I say good for him. Glad to see a sad, sad Goth kid taking some civic pride. Hell he might even win, who knows. Actually, winning the hearts and minds of a semi-literate public is the easy part, especially if he's a cutie patootie (you ladies know what I'm talking about). Once he gets to Saint Paul, that'll be a different story; especially if he thinks anybody in the state legislation would pass such a gruesome bill.

Here's the story:

Minnesota voters, who eight years ago elected a former professional wrestler as their governor, may find a self-proclaimed vampire on the ballot for the office this year.

"Politics is a cut-throat business," said Jonathan "The Impaler" Sharkey, who said he plans to announce his bid for governor Friday on the ticket of the Vampyres, Witches and Pagans Party.

Like Jesse "The Body" Ventura, who was elected governor as an independent in 1998, the 41-year-old Sharkey once was a wrestler, although he spent his time "The Unholiest of Kings: Tarantula" on obscure professional circuits.

"I'm a Satanist who doesn't hate Jesus," Sharkey told Reuters. "I just hate God the Father."

However, he claims to respect all religions and if elected, will post "everything from the Ten Commandments to the Wicca Reed" in government buildings.

Sharkey also pledged to execute convicted murders and child molesters personally by impaling them on a wooden pole outside the state capitol.

Sharkey told the Minneapolis Star Tribune that he's a vampire "just like you see in the movies and TV."

"I sink my fangs into the neck of my donor ... and drink their blood," he said, adding that his donor is his wife, Julie.

The field for the governor's race in Minnesota is far from complete. Republican incumbent Tim Pawlenty is widely expected to seek another term in November and his Democratic opponent has not been determined.

Sharkey said he planned to announce his candidacy Friday -- the 13th -- because that was "my lucky number."

New Review: How to Make Love Like a Porn Star

The following is a brief excerpt from a review posted on PopandPolitics.com:

Porn is considered to be a dirty, dirty thing. At the same time, since sex is important for the continuation of the human race, you would assume that visuals of adults having sex for an adult audience would not be such a monumentally big deal. However, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is religious objection, pornography is shunned, shamed and in some cases burned.
If pornographic material is something to be hidden away and never spoken about, you can imagine what it must be like for the people who participate in the creation of said materials. Most assuredly, it is assumed that those who actively create pornography are the devil incarnate. The men who engage in this behavior are said to be satyrs and should be condemned, and the women need a saving by God's good graces. It is only right and proper for people to be having sex in private, in the dark, in a closet, in a bomb shelter.

Please.

Pornography has been with human civilization for almost as long as there have been people. Many who participate in the adult sex industry are not without feelings or morals per se, but our society is so quick to condemn sex workers of all stripes that we end up dehumanizing them. In turn, porn stars only seek to lower the bar for acceptable, sexual human behavior because it benefits their line of work. And quite frankly, who are they trying to impress anyway?

These factors are what make a story such as porn icon Jenna Jameson’s so compelling. With Neil Strauss, co-author of the Motley Crue and Marilyn Manson biographies, she has shared with the world her tumultuous tale that resembles the bio-psycho-social of many of the clients with whom I have worked in my time as a substance abuse therapist. In Jenna’s own words she tells us about the tragedies she’s experienced in her life.

The rapes.

The deaths.

The drugs.

All of the dysfunctional sorrow her family thrust upon her tiny frame in the most important developmental years of her life are accounted for in this autobiography, “How to Make Love Like a Porn Star: A Cautionary Tale.” More

Russia Mellows to Send Iran to UN Security Council

...and the beat goes on.

Regarding the sending of Iran to the United Nations Security Council for resumption of its uranium enrichment program, Russia will not cause any trouble for the United States and its other western partners.

In the news based on western diplomatic sources, The Washington Post wrote Russia Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov guaranteed US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice not to object to sending Iran to the Council.

According to The Washington Post, Lavrov will cast Russia’s vote as abstaining at an International Atomic Energy Agency meeting to be held in the days to come.

With this latest development, American and western allies seemed to relax as interpretations are made.

Condemned At Birth

Sometimes when you read a story about a particularly heinous crime, you might start to wonder if it’s just an isolated incident or part of an on-going or brewing epidemic. However, there’s a third category that incorporates a little from column A and a little from column B. While checking the usual round of news sites I came across such a story that is both a personal and an example of a societal epidemic.

A man and woman have been jailed for raping a 12-week-old baby and photographing the abuse.

The couple were supposed to be babysitting the child for a single mother who needed help while moving home.

Alan Webster, 40, was jailed for life after pleading guilty at St Albans Crown Court to rape, indecent assault, permitting indecent images to be taken of a child and making indecent images in February and March 2004. The judge said he should spend a minimum of 12 years in prison before being considered for release.

His girlfriend Tanya French, 19, was jailed for five years and given an extended licence period of five years after admitting the same charges. Webster was also found guilty of indecently assaulting a 14-year-old girl who was a regular visitor to the home he shared with French in Hatfield, Hertfordshire. Continued

The silver lining in this terrible case is that these villains were caught and jailed, seemingly in an appropriate manner. Some would say that rape of a child warrants the death penalty but that is a debate for another time.

Instead, what I’d like to point out is that the story doesn’t really end here. The human body, even one as defenseless and fragile as an infants, is more resilient than I think many people realize. The victim lives. Barring any more unseen calamity’s, she will progress through the physical stages of development like any other child. Unfortunately, because of the above-mentioned monsters, she will be condemned to carry a burden. That burden is Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is something of an invisible epidemic. The events underlying it are often mysterious and always unpleasant. It is certainly far more widespread than most people realize. For example, a prime cause of PTSD is childhood sexual abuse. About 16% of American women (about 40 million) are sexually abused (including rape, attempted rape, or other form of molestation) before they reach their 18th birthday.

Childhood abuse may be the most common cause of PTSD in American women, 10% of whom suffer from PTSD (compared to 5% for men) at some time in their lives, but many other types of psychological trauma can cause the disorder -- car accidents, military combat, rape and assault. Symptoms of PTSD include intrusive memories, nightmares, flashbacks, increased vigilance, social impairment and problems with memory and concentration…Recent studies have shown that victims of childhood abuse and combat veterans actually experience physical changes to the hippocampus, a part of the brain involved in learning and memory, as well as in the handling of stress. The hippocampus also works closely with the medial prefrontal cortex, an area of the brain that regulates our emotional response to fear and stress. PTSD sufferers often have impairments in one or both of these brain regions. Studies of children have found that these impairments can lead to problems with learning and academic achievement.

Other typical symptoms of PTSD in children, including fragmentation of memory, intrusive memories, flashbacks, dissociation (or the unconscious separation of some mental processes from the others, e.g., a mismatch between facial expression and thought or mood), and pathological ("sick") emotions, may also be related to impairment of the hippocampus. Damage to the hippocampus, which processes memory, may explain why victims of childhood abuse often seem to have incomplete or delayed recall of their abusive experiences. Continued

Thankfully now there are social service agencies that provide the kind of therapy she’ll need to overcome this horrible attack on her young person. Maybe she will not only survive this ordeal but actually with the help of therapy and medication, go on to have a fruitful life. If there is a merciful god in Heaven, I believe she will. But if re-read the above statistics, it states that 40 million American women will be the survivors of childhood sexual abuse. That is 40 million women, with us right now, who may have never received treatment, suffering from a wholly treatable mental health disorder. And that’s just in America.

South Africa is reported to still be leading the world in child rape. It is estimated that 41% of those raped in South Africa are under the age of 12. In Meadowlands, Soweto, police say 90% of rapes are of children younger than 12. It has also been reported that there isn’t enough resources to treat nearly all of the victims that very much require immediate attention, and that’s just those whom report the attack. Just as in America, many South African children, and in fact many youngsters around the world will suffer their abuse in deafening silence.

So what is the bigger picture here? Why does this sort of thing happen. There’s a myth out there that in South Africa, it is believed that having sex with an infant will cleanse you of AIDS.

"The idea that having sex with a virgin cleanses you of AIDS does exist in South Africa and there have been reported cases of this as a motivating factor for child rape, but the predominant evidence suggests that this is infrequently the case," Dr Jewkes says. She quotes Mr Luke Lamprecht, the manager of the Teddy Bear Clinic in Johannesburg, which is the referral point for all child sex abuse cases in the metropolis. According to him, he has only seen one child rape case where the perpetrator believed the myth. This happened some 4 years ago - and the child's mother agreed that the HIV-positive man could rape her 4-year-old in exchange for cash.

"According to another report on child rape which investigated injury patterns, management and outcomes, there was a 1% sero-conversion rate.* This was, for most cases, in the absence of anti-retroviral therapy and therefore suggests that this myth is not an important cause of rape. If it had been, in view of the extensive injuries common in child rape, a higher rate of sero-conversion would be expected," says Dr Jewkes. Continued

If it isn’t crazy ideas on what prevents AIDS then one must take the next step and examine why else human beings would commit such a horrendous act such as child rape. The answer, as it is with many issues, is complex. There are many factors that set up an arena for attacks on children. Those factors are, lack of employment opportunities, lack of institutional support from police and judicial system, general tolerance of sexual assault within the community, settings that support sexual violence, weak community sanctions against sexual violence perpetrators, poverty, societal norms that support sexual violence, societal norms that support male superiority and sexual entitlement, societal norms that maintain women’s inferiority and sexual submissiveness, weak laws and policies related to gender equity, high tolerance levels of crime and other forms of violence.

In addition, this sort of crime tends to be generational in that those whom are victims in their youth may grow up to be perpetrators themselves.

This is more than just a human-interest story. We as a society, which is getting smaller every day, have to start making decisions collectively about where we want to go. Do we want to have a generation of children who will grow up and carry forward the advances we’ve created or shall we continue to condemn them at birth to devolution?

Toxic waste creates hermaphrodite Arctic polar bears

Well, it would appear that our lack of forsight in maintaining our environment has finally jumped the shark. Good night everybody...

Here's the sick, sad story:

Wildlife researchers have found new evidence that Arctic polar bears, already gravely threatened by the melting of their habitat because of global warming, are being poisoned by chemical compounds commonly used in Europe and North America to reduce the flammability of household furnishings like sofas, clothing and carpets.

A team of scientists from Canada, Alaska, Denmark and Norway is sounding the alarm about the flame retardants, known as polybrominated diphenyls, or PBDEs, saying that significant deposits have recently been found in the fatty tissues of polar bears, especially in eastern Greenland and Norway's Svalbard islands.

Studies are still being carried out on what impact the chemicals might be having on the bears, but tests on laboratory animals such as mice indicate that their effects can be considerable, attacking the sex and thyroid glands, motor skills and brain function.

There is also evidence that compounds similar to the PBDEs have contributed to a surprisingly high rate of hermaphroditism in polar bears. About one in 50 female bears on Svalbard has both male and female sex organs, a phenomenon scientists link directly to the effects of pollution. Continued

Bush pulls the plug on Iraq reconstruction

This one goes out to all my Bush-haters.

Now I could find a way to justify what is happening here. I could say that no war plan is perfect and that adjusting reconstruction efforts to deal with the on-going insurgency in Iraq is the price of freedom. I could say that it's not even the Bush administrations responsibility to rebuild Iraq and they should be gracious with whatever we could accomplish for them and furthermore, put more effort into rebuilding their country themselves instead of systematically blowing it to hell.

I could say all that, but I won't.

No matter what rationales there are for flat leaving Iraq and sticking them with the bill, the fact remains that yet again President Bush made a promise to rebuild Iraq into a First World Nation and now is looking for a way to nicely break that promise. Now if you'll recall, this is the same man that said he wouldn't nation build in the first place. Granted the world changed drastically after he made that promise so one can forgive him for that. But this, this is heinous.

From a strategic point of view, invading and occupying Iraq made sense. However, it does not appear as if we've really taken advantage of the strategic position we're in. Certainly the Iranians aren't impressed and continue to bob and weave around the nuclear question. China really hasn't made moves to rein in N. Korea. The only event that has really helped the Israeli-Palestinian question is the death of Yassar Arafat. And it is uncertain just how much Qadafi was ready to cooperate even before the war in Iraq began.

So as many sites have documented, Bush and Co have found every reason under the sun to invade Iraq, including ones that ended up being far removed from reality, only to then turn around and not fulfill their obligation to the people they may have needlessly hurt. That is the very element that undermines any and all justifications the Bush Administration may float out there. You wanted this war, and now you are leaving the job half done. Once again, that is heinous.

For those of you out there that like to dress up and protest in the streets, why don't you take on this cause? How about not abandoning the Iraqi people to absolute poverty, Africa-style? Sure it is not as sexy, "No Blood For Oil!" but maybe this time, the average tax-paying American, who I might add have floated this reconstruction effort with their tax money and have not seen a penny of their investment, might actually listen to you this time.

It's just a thought. Here's the story:

The Bush administration has scaled back its ambitions to rebuild Iraq from the devastation wrought by war and dictatorship and does not intend to seek new funds for reconstruction, it emerged yesterday.
In a decision that will be seen as a retreat from a promise by President George Bush to give Iraq the best infrastructure in the region, administration officials say they will not seek reconstruction funds when the budget request is presented to Congress next month, the Washington Post reported yesterday.

The $18.4bn (£10.6bn) allocation is scheduled to run out in June 2007. The move will be seen by critics as further evidence of the administration's failure to plan for the aftermath of the war.

A decision not to renew the reconstruction programme would leave Iraq with the burden of tens of billions of dollars in unfinished projects, and an oil industry and electrical grid that have yet to return to pre-war production levels.

The decision is a tacit admission of the failure of the US rebuilding effort in the face of a relentless insurgency. Nearly half the funds earmarked for reconstruction were diverted towards fighting the insurgency and preparations to put Saddam Hussein on trial. Continued

Poll Wrap-up/New Poll 1/7/06

Another year begins and thus I have a new poll up. The last poll, which featured the hotly debated question of whether or not there's a war on Christmas was answered by around 40 or so people with the majority of votes (26) stating it was all made up by Bill O'Reilly. That leads me to believe that I either have mainly liberal readers or at the very least, very pragmatic readers. Either way it's onward and upwards from here in the new year.

The new poll question reads:

Mid-Term elections will be this November. As my fellow blogger so eloquently put it with respect to the Democratic Party, "It's time to nut up or shut up!" So make a prediction on how they will fair in this years election cycle.

1) The Democrats will take enough seats in the House and Senate to control Congress
2) The Democrats will take seats in the House and Senate but not enough to control Congress
3) The Democrats will lose seats in Congress, break up and pursue solo projects
4) Hillary Rulez, W Droolz!

Now I have a small admission. Half of the language used in this poll was stolen outright from my good friend and fellow blogger John Brodigan, from his post on where he stands politically in the new year.

Happy now John ; )

New Review: Plows, Plagues & Petroleum

The following is a brief excerpt from a review posted on PopandPolitics.com:

The debate over our environment seems to be split into two camps. In the first camp are uber-conservatives who appear to believe that there is no such thing as pollution or environmental degradation. These are the people who are convinced that humans have no effect on the environment, thus making it perfectly fine and ethical to ignore environmental precautions and regulations. If you’ve ever listened to the Rush Limbaugh show, he perfectly sums up this attitude when he purports that the earth has been here for untold billions of years and no matter what we do to it, it’ll continue to live on, relatively unharmed by the hands of human civilization.

The other camp professes that the above belief is a bunch of hooey. The liberal/eco-friendly/environmentalist crowd believes that the earth is sacred and should be preserved above all else. That sounds just dandy at first, but when you take a closer look at how these people intend to go about bringing on this idea of mass-preservation, it is plain to see that the strict environmentalists are at the very least irrational and unreasonable. Many feel that our modern lifestyles of invention are a sin against this valuable planet. They have suggested, quite seriously, that we abandon our polluting cities and mass manufacturing and go back to the simple life of farming. Live off the land and mother earth will go on unmolested.

Neither side is correct, according to University of Virginia's retired Professor of Environmental Studies, William F. Ruddiman. In his new book, “Plows, Plagues and Petroleum: How Humans Took Control of Climate,” Ruddiman explains in acute detail how humans, since the dawn of civilization, have affected climate and what that means for our future.

What is particularly great about this book is that Ruddiman is not speaking from the pulpit of a particular political platform. By his own admission, he is merely presenting the pure scientific facts of his arduous studies. At the end of the book, he explains rather succinctly that part of the reason he wrote “Plows, Plagues & Petroleum,” was to provide clarity in a debate that has been hijacked by extremists on both sides of the fence. He also uses this text to answer the critics of his previous work on the correlation between climate and human manipulation of the earth in the advancement of civilization. Continued

MDMA (Ecstasy) may be useful in treating PTSD

I recently facilitated a group lecture and discussion at my substance abuse rehabilitation program about the effects of the club drug commonly called Ecstasy. What I learned as I was doing my research was that beyond it's psychedelic effects, under the right circumstances and supervision of a licensed and competent clinician, it can also be used as one of the many tools in treating Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

For those of you don't know PTSD, "is a psychiatric disorder that can occur following the experience or witnessing of life-threatening events such as military combat, natural disasters, terrorist incidents, serious accidents, or violent personal assaults like rape. People who suffer from PTSD often relive the experience through nightmares and flashbacks, have difficulty sleeping, and feel detached or estranged, and these symptoms can be severe enough and last long enough to significantly impair the person's daily life.

PTSD is marked by clear biological changes as well as psychological symptoms. PTSD is complicated by the fact that it frequently occurs in conjunction with related disorders such as depression, substance abuse, problems of memory and cognition, and other problems of physical and mental health. The disorder is also associated with impairment of the person's ability to function in social or family life, including occupational instability, marital problems and divorces, family discord, and difficulties in parenting."

Many of the clients that I currently treating have been exposed to on-going episodes of violence in the home or community, drugs in the home or community, sexual assault and/or rape and other events that can cause trauma in a young person in various stages of mental development. These same clients often self-medicate themselves abusing the very drug that might, again if used properly, be the very salvation in coping with their mental disorder.

According to the following article, ecstasy, or MDMA as it called in the clinical world, is being re-examined as a medication for sufferers of PTSD.

But recent research has seen a resurgence of interest in the therapeutic effects of MDMA. Successful results have been reported from trials in the use of MDMA on people suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, and in the relief of anxiety in patients with terminal cancer. It is a return to the spirit of the original use of MDMA: after its synthesis by Shulgin in the late 1960s, its first use was in psychotherapy.

This seems to be the pattern with medication. Many of the street drugs such as cocaine and heroin that we are so familiar with today started out as perfectly legal medicines. Of course as we know by now they also had such severe side effects that eventually they were prohibited by law in order to "protect" the average civilian. Though they are stimatized today, in some cases, certain countries like Canada and Switzerland offer prescription programs that allow users to obtain both drugs so long as they register and attend therapy. It is entirely possible that in the near future, MDMA may also be reconsidered for it's therapeutic uses.

Considering the propensity for active users to either abuse prescription drugs like Xanax (the kids call it Zanibars) or invent new ones (maybe you've heard of Triple C's - Cordicin Cough and Cold/dextromethorphan/DXM), we should not be so quick to condemn a possibly useful drug just because it might be abused. Remember, there was a time when people would do whippets and yet whipped cream in a can, can still be readily bought in your local grocery store.

War Is Money

This Post is also available at The Blogger News Network

I’ve been covering the possibility of war in Iran since early last year. I’ve also chronicled whatever changes there have been in the world economy vis-à-vis Iran. In that time one of the elements of this story that have become crystal clear is just how intertwined Iran has become with the regimes in Russia, China, North Korea and Venezuela. Furthermore, for one reason or another, these aforementioned countries are indelibly joined to one another mostly through strategic and economic partnerships.

When I first started covering Iran and the possibility of a second war led by President Bush II, I banged all kinds of pots and pans, and tried to alert as many people as possible using this writing space that we were headed down the same path that led to war in Iraq. A few years ago I was firmly on the side of the hawks in believing that eliminating Saddam Hussein was reasonable goal in the aftermath of 9/11. (For more on that last years, “Questions and Answers About the Middle East.”

However, after seeing just how badly Washington has handled the security of Iraq post invasion, I personally have lost faith in this commander-in-chief to lead an effective campaign against any nation. Let me couch this belief by saying that for what they’ve had to work with and the conditions therein, the US soldiers are doing a fine job and my beef is not with them nor their immediate commanders. In addition, it’s not the war plan itself I had a huge problem with. It was allowing every Arab/Muslim nut from Syria to Iran to come rushing over the border unimpeded that has really irked seeing as that’s the main reason we’re still dealing with an on-going insurgency.

Having said that, it appears to be that President Bush and company do not learn from their mistakes and one can only assume that a ground invasion of Iran would only bring the same results. Granted Iran is surrounded by Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan but that doesn’t mean that those country’s won’t be transit points, especially where their borders are porous, for other would be terrorists stemming from places such as Yemen, Oman and Saudi Arabia. In short, as much as I think regime change is needed in Iran, I no longer have confidence in this president to execute it effectively.

Lucky for anyone and me else who opposed war again Iran, for a while it looked as if we weren’t going to go through with it. As I stated before, the past year has been littered with all kinds of agreements between Iran and other nuclear powers. Even our allies such as India have acquiesced to the promise of good business with Iran and have been in talks to build a pipeline with them and their neighbors with whom they’ve recently established a tenuous peace with, Pakistan. My thinking was that now there’s too much money for all parties involved to lose so despite some of the insane rhetoric coming from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, I figured that all of this talk of war had to be hot air.

Well according to the Berkeley, Charleston, and Dorchester Libertarian Society, our esteemed leaders don’t so much care about whatever economic bridges have been across the seas. Apparently, their major concern, as it was in Iraq, is maintaining supremacy of the dollar. More to the point, it is maintaining the supremacy of the US petrodollar versus the petroeruo.

”In November 2000, Iraq stopped accepting U.S. dollars for their oil. Counted as a purely political move, Saddam Hussein switched the currency required to purchase Iraqi oil to the euro. Selling oil through the U.N. Oil for Food Program, Iraq converted all of its U.S. dollars in its U.N. account to the euro. Shortly thereafter, Iraq converted $10 billion in their U.N. reserve fund to the euro. By the end of 2000, Iraq had abandoned the U.S. dollar completely.

Two months after the United States invaded Iraq, the Oil for Food Program was ended, the country’s accounts were switch back to dollars, and oil began to be sold once again for U.S. dollars. No longer could the world buy oil from Iraq with the euro. Universal global dollar supremacy was restored. It is interesting to note that the latest recession that the United States endured began and ended within the same timeframe as when Iraq was trading oil for euros. Whether this is a coincidence or related, the American people may never know.

In March 2006, Iran will take Iraq’s switch to the petroeuro to new heights by launching a third oil exchange. The Iranians have developed a petroeuro system for oil trade, which when enacted, will once again threaten U.S. dollar supremacy far greater than Iraq’s euro conversion. Called the Iran Oil Bourse, an exchange that only accepts the euro for oil sales would mean that the entire world could begin purchasing oil from any oil-producing nation with euros instead of dollars. The Iranian plan isn’t limited to purchasing one oil-producing country’s oil with euros. Their plan will create a global alternative to the U.S. dollar. Come March 2006, the Iran Oil Bourse will further the momentum of OPEC to create an alternate currency for oil purchases worldwide. China, Russia, and the European Union are evaluating the Iranian plan to exchange oil for euros, and giving the plan serious consideration.”

March of 2006 just happens to be when some have said will be the start of Iran’s forced regime change. From the above article, “The plans to invade Iran are unspoken, but unfolding before our very eyes. The media has been reporting on Iran more often, and increasingly harshly. For the U.S. government to justify invading Iran, it must first begin to phase out the War in Iraq, which it is already doing. Next, it must portray the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as a threat to the region and the world. Finally, once naive American people are convinced the “weapons of mass destruction” that were to be found in Iraq are actually in Iran, coupled with the almost daily media coverage of Iran’s nuclear power / weapons program aspirations, and what we will soon have on our hands is another fabricated war that will result in tens of thousands of civilian lives being lost, all because the political elected pawns in Washington DC lack the discipline to return our currency to a gold or silver standard, end the relationship with the foreign banking cartel called the Federal Reserve, and limit the activities of the U.S. government to those articulated in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution for the United States of America.”

The news is already starting to hit the fan. Iran Mania is reporting that, “The United States threatened to seek international action against Iran if it resumes nuclear fuel research, suggesting the world's patience with Tehran could be wearing thin, AFP reported.”

Obviously this is a precursor to war as many analysts have stated in previous articles.

It no longer appears to matter what Russia or China do to rein in Iran. Where American money is concerned our enemies and we are alone in the world - alone with our bombs.

Green Fuel Dreams

This Post is also available at The Blogger News Network

Slowly but surely we as a global culture are looking to limit our dependence on fossil fuels. As I’ve written about on a number of occasions now, renewable sources of energy that are clean burning are the way of the future. While the oil industry is loathe to give up their near monopoly on automobile fuel, the fact remains that everyday more and more cities are switching to products like ethanol and biodiesel for their buses and government cars.

One of the programs set for 2006 to promote “green cars” is a plan to give tax credits to consumers who buy hybrid cars. According to CBS news, “The new year will bring more savings for buyers of at least 13 gas-electric vehicles, with those showing the most improvement in fuel efficiency scoring the biggest tax breaks for their new owners.

The breaks will come in the form of tax credits, and they range from $3,150 for buyers of the Toyota Prius to $250 for Chevrolet's Silverado pickup truck, according to an analysis by the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.

The credits give buyers of American hybrids incentives similar to those now enjoyed mostly by Honda and Toyota owners.”

This is the sort of promotion most eco-analysts have been clamoring for some time. Nothing motivates a consumer to change his/her buying habits like a sale or a tax credit and the aforementioned plan is just what the doctor ordered. You can expect to see many more hybrid cars on the road this year if more people in the new car market are privy to this tax credit promotion.

However, gas-electric hybrids are not the only choice we have. Many countries such as Brazil are making ethanol their fuel du jour.

Ethanol is, “a clean-burning, renewable fuel…distilled from fermented grain — usually corn — in production plants. Compared to regular unleaded gasoline, ethanol-enriched fuel burns cleaner and produces fewer harmful tailpipe emissions. It also has higher octane, which can help your car develop maximum horsepower.”

Ethanol has been compared to biodiesel in that it too helps the American farmer by finding a purpose for their over-production of crops while reducing our dependence on foreign oil.

Getting back to Brazil as compared to the United States, according to The Coloradoan, “Although Brazil and the United States produce about the same amount of ethanol each year - 4 billion gallons - Brazilians rely on sugar cane-based ethanol for 40 percent of their driving fuel.

By comparison, ethanol accounts for less than 5 percent of fuel use in the United States.

Most cars in America can run well on mixtures of 10 percent ethanol and 90 percent gasoline. About 3 million vehicles in the United States have "flex-fuel engines" that allow them to use 85 percent ethanol, a high-octane fuel.

But to replicate Brazil's success, the United States would need an energy policy that pushes higher ethanol use and the increased manufacture of cars with engines that can run on a fuel mixture of 85 percent ethanol. It also would take technological advances that give ethanol producers the option of using crops other than corn to produce ethanol.”

It has been said that if the government would only do its part in divorcing us from the oil oligarchy then we’d have a relatively easy go of restructuring our fuel economy to one that is renewable and more ecologically friendly.

That being said, the aforementioned article goes on to say that, “Congress gave a boost to ethanol production in a national energy bill it passed this year. Under the law's renewable-fuels standard, gasoline makers would have to use 7.5 billion gallons of ethanol a year by 2012. That would be nearly double the amount now produced.

Lawmakers are looking at ethanol - especially the kind produced from crops other than corn - as one way to achieve their goal of reducing oil use in the United States by 2.5 million barrels per day by 2016. They also see an environmental benefit to ethanol: It produces fewer greenhouse gases than oil when burned.

Bills introduced in the House and the Senate call for carmakers to produce more flex-fuel cars - those that can run on either gasoline or high ethanol mixtures. The legislation would provide for grants to build more alternative-fuel stations.”

This is not going to happen overnight. It took Brazil more than 20 years to be where it is now in ethanol use and production. Not to mention that politically speaking, we cannot up and completely abandon the fossil fuel market.

Many of the Middle Eastern countries such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are entirely dependant on the oil trade to keep their economies functional. Although we all wish that tomorrow we could be done with that entire region, causing an economic depression by devaluing the one regional commodity that keeps some semblance of civilization in that area would be akin to creating another million little Osama Bin Ladens. Remember, poverty is one of the many building blocks of terrorism.

The conversion from a worldwide economy driven by fossil fuels to one that is not needs to be slow and methodical. Though I support the dream of more “green cars” and “green power plants,” it needs to be in a way that doesn’t hurt the good citizens of the Middle East as well.

Parallel planning is the key. A little while back I reported on a story where Saudi Arabia and Brazil had signed a series of trade agreements. While we work toward a more green future free of Saudi crude, they must also work hard to diversify they economy and prepare for an end to their current single resource economy. This follows for all of the little oil monarchies.