Truth, facts and opposites

I wish our nation's leaders understood this:

The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth.

-- Niels Bohr

Nuclear war

Please go read the article by George Lakoff entitled "The Words None Dare Say: Nuclear War". Lakoff makes the point that by not saying those words, but by using euphemisms instead, we are making it more likely. I really cannot do the article justice with an excerpt but I'll give you this:

The stories in the major media suggest that an attack against Iran is a real possibility and that the Natanz nuclear development site is the number one target. As the above quotes from two of our best sources note, military experts say that conventional "bunker-busters" like the GBU-28 might be able to destroy the Natanz facility, especially with repeated bombings. But on the other hand, they also say such iterated use of conventional weapons might not work, e.g., if the rock and earth above the facility becomes liquefied. On that supposition, a "low yield" "tactical" nuclear weapon, say, the B61-11, might be needed.

If the Bush administration, for example, were to insist on a sure "success," then the "attack" would constitute nuclear war. The words in [italics] are nuclear war, that's right, nuclear war — a first strike nuclear war.

We don't know what exactly is being planned — conventional GBU-28's or nuclear B61-11's. And that is the point. Discussion needs to be open. Nuclear war is not a minor matter.
...
Even if the attack were limited to nuclear installations, starting a nuclear war with Iran would have terrible consequences — and not just for Iranians. First, it would strengthen the hand of the Islamic fundamentalists — exactly the opposite of the effect US planners would want. It would be viewed as yet another major attack on Islam. Fundamentalist Islam is a revenge culture. If you want to recruit fundamentalist Islamists all over the world to become violent jihadists, this is the best way to do it. America would become a world pariah. Any idea of the US as a peaceful nation would be destroyed. Moreover, you don't work against the spread of nuclear weapons by using those weapons. That will just make countries all over the world want nuclear weaponry all the more. Trying to stop nuclear proliferation through nuclear war is self-defeating.

I really think this is going to happen. I don't want to think this but I think it has something to do with Bush and his manhood. He is immature enough to do it. And, from all accounts, he wants to.

Contrast

Prince Harry

The contrast is something else:

Here is a little difference between our country and Great Britain: Prince Harry -- third in line to the Royal Throne -- he's going to Iraq. He's going to be in a tank unit. ... On the other hand, the Bush twins are getting tanked ... and they are going to re-invade Margaritaville.

--Bill Maher

Three words: Draft the twins.

Technical problems

I apologize for the lack of posting yesterday. For some reason Blogger is not working in my usual browser and I had to change browsers to post this. I'll try to sort things out today and get up and running soon!

Severe poverty

I just discovered an article entitled "U.S. economy leaving record numbers in severe poverty". Take a look:

WASHINGTON - The percentage of poor Americans who are living in severe poverty has reached a 32-year high, millions of working Americans are falling closer to the poverty line and the gulf between the nation's "haves" and "have-nots" continues to widen.

A McClatchy Newspapers analysis of 2005 census figures, the latest available, found that nearly 16 million Americans are living in deep or severe poverty. A family of four with two children and an annual income of less than $9,903 - half the federal poverty line - was considered severely poor in 2005. So were individuals who made less than $5,080 a year.

The McClatchy analysis found that the number of severely poor Americans grew by 26 percent from 2000 to 2005. That's 56 percent faster than the overall poverty population grew in the same period. McClatchy's review also found statistically significant increases in the percentage of the population in severe poverty in 65 of 215 large U.S. counties, and similar increases in 28 states. The review also suggested that the rise in severely poor residents isn't confined to large urban counties but extends to suburban and rural areas.

The plight of the severely poor is a distressing sidebar to an unusual economic expansion. Worker productivity has increased dramatically since the brief recession of 2001, but wages and job growth have lagged behind. At the same time, the share of national income going to corporate profits has dwarfed the amount going to wages and salaries. That helps explain why the median household income of working-age families, adjusted for inflation, has fallen for five straight years.

These and other factors have helped push 43 percent of the nation's 37 million poor people into deep poverty - the highest rate since at least 1975.

The share of poor Americans in deep poverty has climbed slowly but steadily over the last three decades. But since 2000, the number of severely poor has grown "more than any other segment of the population," according to a recent study in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.

This is very distressing.

For those of you who keep Lent I offer the following:

Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen: to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free and break every yoke?

Is it not to share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter— when you see the naked, to clothe him, and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?

Then your light will break forth like the dawn, and your healing will quickly appear; then your righteousness will go before you, and the glory of the LORD will be your
rear guard.

-- Isaiah 58: 6-8

Sunday prayer blogging

Great Spirit!
Piler-up of the rocks into towering mountains!
When you stamp on the stones
the dust rises and fills the land.
Hardness of the cliff,
waters of the pool that turn
into misty rain when stirred.
Gourd overflowing with oil!
Creator . . .
who sews the heavens together like cloth,
knit together everything here on the earth below.
You are the one who calls the branching trees into life;
you make new seeds grow out of the ground
so that they stand straight and strong.
You have filled the land with people.

Wonderful one, you live
among the sheltering rocks.
You give rain to us people.
We pray to you,
hear us, O Strong One!
When we beg you, show your mercy.
You are in the highest places
with the spirits of the great ones.
You raise the grass-covered hills
above the earth,
and you make the rivers.
Gracious one!

-Rozwi, South Africa

No place to hide

I want to share a short, pointed article with you called "We Must Reverse Global Warming" by Jeffrey Sachs. Here's how it gets started:

The world is in the midst of a great political transformation in which climate change has moved to the center of national and global politics. For politicians in persistent denial about the need to act -- including President Bush, Australian Prime Minister John Howard and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper -- there is no longer any place to hide.

These political leaders have pretended that climate change is a mere hypothesis. For several years, the Bush administration tried to hide the facts from the public, deleting references to man-made climate from government documents and even trying to suppress statements by leading government scientists. Until recently, ExxonMobil and other companies paid lobbyists to try to distort the public debate.

Yet truth has triumphed over political maneuvers. The climate itself is sending a powerful and often devastating message. Hurricane Katrina made the U.S. public aware that global warming would likely raise the intensity of destructive storms. Australia's great drought this past year has similarly made a mockery of Howard's dismissive attitude toward climate change.

Scientists themselves have operated with great seriousness of purpose in educating the public. We can thank the United Nations for that. This year, the U.N.-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a worldwide body of hundreds of climate scientists, is releasing its fourth round of reports, starting with the one issued early this month.

That report was unequivocal: There is a powerful scientific consensus that human activity -- mainly the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas), as well as deforestation and other land uses (such as growing paddy rice) -- leads to massive emissions of carbon dioxide into the air. This is causing climate change, which is accelerating and poses serious risks to the planet.

An old friend of mine sent me an email today that was obviously also sent to everyone in her address book. She urged us all to see An Inconvenient Truth and then said something astonishing. She asked people to respond by sending her information about the "other side" to global warming if we didn't agree with her.

Hey! There is no other side. The evidence is in. Global warming is real and humans are causing it. This is the consensus of reputable scientists. People who dispute this are in serious denial - a denial that is threatening the continuation of life on this planet. The stakes are high, everybody. They couldn't be higher.

Ooooh. Biting.

Take a look:

The House passed a non-binding resolution against the surge. Bush says he can't wait to get it to his imaginary desk and veto it with his air pen. He said, "I've got my own non-binding resolution. It's called the United States Constitution."

--Bill Maher

Quote of the week

This is from the Sojourners newsletter:

Listen to candidates talk about religion and they seem to be following two rules: 1) Profess that nothing is more important to you than your religion. 2) Be as vague as possible about your religion.

- Paul Waldman, author and senior fellow at Media Matters for America, in a recent op-ed. (Source: The Boston Globe)

Friday cat blogging!

From Copyright Free Pictures

Change a bulb, change everything

Yes, I'm going to talk to you about lightbulbs again. I just now switched out the remaining bulbs in my kitchen so that room is all compact florescent now. I did my bedroom (where I spend most of my time) some time ago and also the lamp in my livingroom and the porch light. I have just a few more to go and my whole house will be done. As I've shared before, I switched out all the lamps in my office months ago.

I want to share with you an article called "Film maker, Yahoo team to fight global warming". Here's part of what it says:

SAN JOSE, United States (AFP) - Yahoo and the producer of the documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" launched a website devoted to rallying US consumers to fight global warming by switching light bulbs.

Lawrence Bender and US officials joined Yahoo at the Tech Innovation Museum in the Silicon Valley city of San Jose to announce an "18Seconds movement" and introduce the website http://www.18seconds.org.

The website is devoted to mapping how quickly cities are converting from energy-wasting incandescent light bulbs to energy-saving, longer-lasting compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs.

The movement was named for the typical amount of time it takes a person to swap an incandescent light bulb for a CFL.

The amount of electricity saved by using a 13-watt CFL instead of a conventional 60-watt bulb translates into a reduction of 450 pounds of greenhouse gases spewed by a coal-burning power plant, according to Yahoo.

"This movement is about empowering the individual -- to say to every person in America that with one easy step, they can become part of a movement that will literally change the world," said Bender, producer of the Oscar-nominated documentary 'An Inconvenient Truth.'

Now here's a fact from the website:

What kind of difference can one CFL make? Consider this: If every American swapped just ONE bulb for an ENERGY STAR labeled CFL, it would collectively save more than $8 billion in energy costs, prevent burning 30 billion pounds of coal, and remove 2 million cars worth of greenhouse gas emissions from our atmosphere. Just imagine the difference we could make if we replaced all of the lights we use most!

It's so easy. It requires no sacrifice beyond the cost of the new bulb and that will save you money in the long run. Please switch! You can buy compact florescent bulbs at the supermarket. Again, it's so easy.

The news media

This is very troubling:

CNN, Headline News and Fox News - live coverage of the Anna Nicole Smith custody hearing! This is news? No wonder the president feels free to start World War III. Nobody's paying attention.

- Zing!

On BBC

Our news in the US is definitely censored. Look what I found yesterday on MadPriest's site:

On BBC Newsnight tonight

CIA

When George Bush decided to blame the CIA for flawed intelligence over Iraq, he put a new man at the top of the agency.

Within two years - the chosen one - Porter Goss - was gone. His sudden resignation has remained a mystery until now. Newsnight has uncovered corruption allegations that go right to one of Goss's most senior aides.

I wonder if that will ever get reported on in this country?

Guantanamo detainees

Take a look at an article entitled "Bring America Back from the 'Dark Side'". It's about Guantanamo Bay.

Did you know how its inmates were rounded up?

Little-publicized information about how the detainees were rounded up, let alone their abusive treatment, should raise significant questions. An analysis by Seton Hall University School of Law found that of 517 cases, only 5 percent had been captured by U.S. forces. Nearly 90 percent had been captured by Pakistani or Afghan Northern Alliance forces or tribal warlords and turned over to U.S. custody, often sold for rewards as high as $20,000. Leaflets dropped by the U.S. military appealed to what they could do with that money — “wealth and power beyond your dreams …. enough money to take care of your family, your village, your tribe for the rest of your life.” It is not surprising that random and arbitrary arrest and detention would result.

In response to concerns that detainees were held wrongly, the administration set up military tribunals. These tribunals, overseen by panels of three military officers, were allowed to rely on coerced evidence, and detainees had no access to lawyers or secret evidence. Not surprisingly, this appalling process determined that 520 of the 558 detainees who had their status review from August 2004 to March 2005 were “enemy combatants.”

Despite these findings, not a single Guantanamo detainee has yet been convicted or even tried. Only 10 have been charged.

You KNOW that place is just full of completely innocent people. The existence of that detention center is beyond a disgrace. It's an abomination.

How true

Germaine Greer

Truly good snark:

You're only young once, but you can be immature forever.

-- Germaine Greer

Good snark

This time it's from Conan O'Brien:

President’s keeping busy. Yesterday, President Bush gave a speech warning Americans about the threat from Iran. Yeah. Afterwards, the President admitted he took an old Iraq speech and replaced all the q’s with n’s.