Now, the other side of the story is based on this account on one of the least reliable dingbat wingnut sites, so take the details with an ocean-full of salt, but from the sounds of things, there was no brave standing-up-to-facism moment here, more like Hitchens' ego writing cheques his ass couldn't begin to cash.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Bring on the trials Unless it wants to become an isolated international pariah with which no other nation will sign agreements of any kind, the United States had better collect its excrement into a single place and start prosecuting people for torture. It has a legal obligation under several international treaties to do so and unless it plans to repudiate its treaty obligations, and thus invalidate all international treaties it has signed, it must fulfil those obligations. I am not a lawyer, but Glenn Greenwald is.
The U.S. really has bound itself to a treaty called the Convention Against Torture, signed by Ronald Reagan in 1988 and ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1994. When there are credible allegations that government officials have participated or been complicit in torture, that Convention really does compel all signatories -- in language as clear as can be devised -- to "submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution" (Art. 7(1)). And the treaty explicitly bars the standard excuses that America's political class is currently offering for refusing to investigate and prosecute: "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture" and "an order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture" (Art. 2 (2-3)).
Allow people who want to take an intoxicating substance that has been around for centuries without subjecting them to the dangers of robbery, inferior possibly even poisonous product, criminal violence and legal persecution and incarceration? Why would we do that?
During the golden era of prohibition, people made fortunes selling liquor in the United States. Once people realized they could go to a speakeasy instead of going blind drinking homemade bathtub gin, they went in droves. Such illegal hot spots thrived on gambling and prostitution (in for a penny, in for a pound) and stayed in business through a massive system of corruption and bribery. Empires were built and everyone made money! Real, unfettered capitalism thrived and entrepreneurs like Al Capone became rich and powerful. It was the American Dream in action!
And then Franklin D. Roosevelt a bunch of America-hating pinkos who hated freedom decided to punish success and ended prohibition, spoiling the whole thing.
Right now, just as during the good old days of prohibition, thanks to the strict laws against drugs in the United States, the drug trade is largely controlled by large, powerful, well-organized and heavily-armed groups who murder anyone who gets in their way and there is very little that law enforcement can do about it. It's that kind of ambition that has made America the superpower it is today!
Legalizing drugs would take money out of the pockets of hard-working dealers, smugglers, crack-house operators, gang-bangers, thugs and black-market gun-dealers and put it back into the hands of students, musicians, working people of all kinds and most especially desperate drug addicts who currently need to steal to support their addictions, thus creating jobs in law enforcement, security services, the prison industry and the legal profession. Why do you want to put hardworking narcs and lawyers in the poorhouse RossK?
Without being the source of desperately needed drugs, how will pimps control their prostitutes? By violence, that's how! Why do you want these poor fallen women to get beaten up RossK? Don't you know it's hard out there for a pimp?
Furthermore, legalization would give the oppressive forces of big government another source of tax revenue to squander on stupid things like drug rehab centers, schools and public health programs. And they would be able to stick their interfering fingers into controlling the strength and quality of drugs, taking all the mystery out of the market for buyers. What is the free market without some risk?
Being as how you're obviously some kind of drug addled hippie (who else would support legalizing drugs?) I bet you're in favour of the safe injection site in Vancouver that has taken heroin addicts off the streets where they belong and put them in a controlled environment where they won't die from overdoses or get AIDS from dirty needles. I mean honestly RossK, junkies are like cockroaches, they are the scum of the earth -- if they don't die from overdoses or AIDS, how the heckfire are we supposed to get rid of them? If an early death from drugs was good enough for jazz great Charlie Parker, it should be good enough for them.
And if we decriminalize addiction, won't that make it easier for junkies to get into rehab centers, thus taking up valuable space that could be used to incarcerate the children of wealthy families who have been thrown out of boarding school for smoking pot? Why do you hate successful people RossK? Don't you know that's class warfare? You who else was a big fan of class warfare? Mao!
So, there you have it: Legalization is a communist plot.
Four of these dispositions will be quite familiar: "a sympathy for equality," "an inclination to deliberate," "a commitment to tolerance," and "an appreciation of openness." We're used to the portrayal: liberals as talky, tolerant, open-minded, egalitarians. It's not surprising, then, that these types are at home in the garrulous world of the academy—or that bossy preachers, convinced they have the one true story, do not care for them much. But Wolfe's sketch of the liberal adds three unfamiliar elements to the picture: "a disposition to grow," "a preference for realism," and "a taste for governance."
All in all a fairly good summation if the Slate article linked above is anything to go by.
The first is straight-up domestic violence carried to an extreme, but we will hear all about it because of the religious beliefs of the people involved. There will be no shortage of ignorant loudmouths lining up to proclaim this "terrorism" and tell us it proves that "those people" are all bloodthirsty savages.
The second incident appears to be a backlash to domestic violence, normally somewhat newsworthy in and of itself, but one would have thought that the activities of the "victim" might have drawn a bit more attention. They certainly would have if someone hadn't put him down like the rabid animal he appears to have been.
"When in trouble or in doubt,
Run in circles, scream and shout"
Two thoughts on this video clip:
First, I see this kind of behavior every week. At my office, where some people need to work on their interpersonal skills and at the pool where I take my kids for swimming lessons, there is a bank of vending machines that sell canned coffee and soft drinks, bottles of cold green tea, water, sports drinks and, everyone's favorite -- ice cream. The room is stuffy and overheated and I'm there for a couple of hours along with all the other parents and the little brothers and sisters of the kids who are in the pool. I take my ipod and sit facing the ice cream machine and watch a succession of toddlers completely and utterly misplace their feces (occasionally this literally happens, but the diaper-throwing story is one for another day). I'm talking about two-, three- and four-year-old kids who see the ice cream machine and upon being denied a frosty treat, go straight to defcon 5 and launch the mother of all tantrums.
The duration record so far this year is held by a three-year-old girl who, being told she could not have a second ice cream, launched into a 35-minute fit of floor-pounding, screeching, purple-faced rage that culminated in running across the room and repeatedly kicking her mother (the kid, not me) before actually falling asleep/passing out from lack of air mid tantrum.
The intensity record was set by a three-year old boy who after jumping up and down hollering for a few minutes, ran straight into a concrete pillar in the center of the room and bloodied his nose, which seemed to calm him down a bit.
For the record, my kids, while they might occasionally whine, never threw tantrums when they were little. In fact, with one notable exception when I had to take my son outside and explain that no, he could not go to karaoke in the bar adjoining the restaurant and crying at the table wasn't going to get him anywhere, they have always been extremely well behaved where ever we go.
Second, the woman in the video is in the airport in Hong Kong. Its a good thing she's in a countrythat respects human rights as much as China. Imagine what might have happened if she had carried on like this in certain other places.
When The Geneva Conventions Were Thought to be "Quaint"
Just when you thought we'd hit the bottom of the barrel on the revelations of torture, abuse and crime under the Bush regime, you realize that buried under this barrel is a whole other barrel of festering evil.
"Third, the Nelly account shows that health professionals are right in the thick of the torture and abuse of the prisoners—suggesting a systematic collapse of professional ethics driven by the Pentagon itself. He describes body searches undertaken for no legitimate security purpose, simply to sexually invade and humiliate the prisoners. This was a standardized Bush Administration tactic–the importance of which became apparent to me when I participated in some Capitol Hill negotiations with White House representatives relating to legislation creating criminal law accountability for contractors. The Bush White House vehemently objected to provisions of the law dealing with rape by instrumentality. When House negotiators pressed to know why, they were met first with silence and then an embarrassed acknowledgement that a key part of the Bush program included invasion of the bodies of prisoners in a way that might be deemed rape by instrumentality under existing federal and state criminal statutes. While these techniques have long been known, the role of health care professionals in implementing them is shocking. " (emphasis mine)
Meanwhile, back in Iraq, it hasn't just been the big companies like Haliburton and Blackwater that have made a fortune shafting the taxpayer and the Iraqi people. It appears some of America's Shiny Perfect Heroes in Uniform aren't so shiny after all.
In one case of graft from that period, Maj. John L. Cockerham of the Army pleaded guilty to accepting nearly $10 million in bribes as a contracting officer for the Iraq war and other military efforts from 2004 to 2007, when he was arrested. Major Cockerham’s wife has also pleaded guilty, as have several other contracting officers. (emphasis mine again)
What the heck is Obama waiting for? He won the election. He has the votes he needs in the House and Senate even if every Republican decides to walk out on the vote. He has the public support. Is he afraid the truth will make bipartisan baby Jebus cry or something? Bring on the trials!
Thursday, February 12, 2009
A little weekend music
And since it is Feb. 14, here's a little something from Mr. Waits courtesy of Driftglass (see blogroll)
Did you enjoy it? Good, I thought you might. Oh, and congratulation, you may have just won a free eight -year trip to a glamourous CIA prison in an exotic location like picaresque Pakistan, historic Poland, exciting Afghanistan or everyone's favorite extra-territorial dungeon of the disappeared, Guantanmo Bay. Waterboarding, stress positions and sleep deprivation all included free of charge.
Monday, February 09, 2009
If you're so smart, how come you're not rich Since I've been resting here in my undisclosed location in the aftermath of the Canadian parliamentary crisis and the U.S. presidential inauguration, I've been very busy lately reading the conservative blogs and listening to the talk radio they pump into the lounge 24/7 to get the truth that the liberal MSM won't tell - you know about the victory in Iraq and how Barack Hussien Obama is really Malcom X's love child - that kinda stuff. This post started, as so many posts do, as a comment over on RossK's Gazetteer, so if it seems I am repeating myself, rest assured I am and that your engraved apology is on its way from the Woodshed's department of redundancy department.
One of the members of our blogging posse, RossK, is troubled lately. Troubled because grant money for research is drying up fast and as a researcher, that grant money not only pays for him to further humankind's knowledge and probably save lives in the future, but it also allows him to "put food on his family."
Science, bah! What has science ever done for us? Okay, the Internet, but what else? The only things more useless than science are liberals and maybe the roman empire.
Come on RossK, science has its place in high school and stuff, but do you think those freewheeling capitalist Masters of the Universe can get by on a measly half a million dollars a year (plus whatever they can steal) without a big fat bonus? Do you think those Lexuses and 3,000 square foot ski condos are going to buy themselves?
Don't you realize that if the government takes the $120,000 grant that supports your biomedical research and pays the salaries of the three people you work with, and instead gives that money to a needy bank, brokerage or multinational corporation, those companies can pay the bonuses they need to pay to keep the kind of executive talent around that got them where they are today. And that money filters down into the economy through sports car dealerships, caviar importers and expensive escort agencies. That bonus money plays a vital role in the economy in other ways too. Do you really want the banker in charge of asset-stripping a borderline profitable small manufacturer that the bank has foreclosed on being distracted by wondering if he can afford another Rolex or a third country club membership? Do you want the people who run our economy stressed out over not being able to get a decent tee-off time just so your "research assistants" can squander the money that could have been spent building a private company golf course on bulk lentils, bus passes and cheap instant ramen noodles and clothing imported from China (a nation of communists)? Do you RossK? All in the name of "learning" and "scientific inquiry" and all that other egghead stuff? My god, you science geeks are a selfish bunch!
Any conservative will tell you that science is overrated. Whether its climate scientists yammer on about melting ice caps and drowning polar bears or biologists with all their "Darwin this" and "evolution that" -- don't they know it snowed in Delisle, Sask. just the other day and that God made the world -- as is -- in 168 hours. Just look at the success the new government of Canada has had removing science from such areas as food inspection and nuclear regulation. Industry can take care of itself, why can't science? If you Pointedexters are so smart, how come you're not rich?
huh? What's that nurse? It's time for my medication? NO! NO! NO! I like the voices in my head, they are my friends! They want me to be a success, just like the other blogging tories here on the ward! Don't come any closer! PUT DOWN THAT NEEDLE! I'M GONNA REPORT YOU TO STEPHEN HARPE........zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
* * *
In all seriousness, Astro, one of the commenters over at RossK 's joint, suggests its time to stop letting the economists run things and start listening to the scientists. He's right, but I'll go him one better.
It isn't just time to listen to the scientists instead of the economists and moneymen, it's time to take most of econmists out behind the barn and put them down like diseased cattle. And it's long past time to take most of the moneymen and other latter-day would-be robber barons, strip them naked, and kick them out of the back of a moving van in Kabul or Dhaka or Port-au-Prince or Kitcisakik and see how far the Harvard MBA and the old boys clubs get them then. As far as I'm concerned, every single one of these bonus babies should be put in the stocks and the government should subsidize truck farmers by buy all their rotten produce and handing out to people to throw.
A little something for the Monday blahs
(With a grateful tip of the Fez to Rocky Torok from the Second Life posse.)
For added hilarity, read the comments and see 1)how some people can manage to get outraged by just about anything; and 2) why the vast majority of people who comment on YouTube posts should at the very least be marooned on an island somewhere if not just put up against a wall with blindfold and a last cigarette and Pop! goes the weasel. Honestly, sometimes I think the herd needs to be thinned.
This video is the second funniest thing I've seen this week, the funniest is here, (read it bottom to top) made even funnier by Harper fluffer Sandy Crux missing the boat entirely. I'm waiting for her outraged post about how This Hour Has 22 Minutes and SNL's Weekend Update are "using negative spin" and "disinformation."
Academy Award preview
A bit of guest blogging from my dad, fresh from screening the last of the five best picture nominees:
AUSTRALIA - This is a long but entertaining flick that reminds one of an old fashioned Saturday afternoon at the movies. It is an apparently serious epic with a side order of Roy and Dale, Indiana Jones and Gone With The Wind. The scenery is beautifully photographed and the performances are fine, especially the young Maori boy. Give it 3 out of 5 stars.
DOUBT - This is not a film for lightweights but it's a terrific, though provoking flick for drama lovers and great acting/screen writing afficionados. The title says it all. The viewer gets to make up his own mind on the issues raised. Doubt is everywhere throughout the whole effort. All four major acting roles have been deservedly nominated for acting awards. What can you say about a film featuring constant faceoffs between Hoffman and Streep. Absolutely rivetting! 5 out of 5 stars!
VALKYRIE - This is an above average film in the war, intrigue, action history genre. As with other reviewers, the only fault is in the casting. Every actor in the film is British (that's not a problem, they all do quite well, thank you) except for two. Tom Cruise in the lead role is one exception. While our boy Tom is quite ok, one has a difficult time at this stage in his career accepting him in this serious, good-Nazi role. His recent off-screen antics as a goofball, lightweight don't help him. The other exception to the all British thing is minor but made mechuckle. It occurs during the climactic sequence in the film when all hell is breaking loose and this Nazi officer rushes into the commandant's office to report on the hell-raising. Very serious stuff. However, the reporting officer is played by the German actor who used to play Sargeant Schultz on Hogan's Heroes. When he rushes into the commandant's office I expected him to announce, "I know noootthiiing! Anyway give it a surprising 4 out of 5 stars.
GRAN TORINO - A must-see for Clint fans. Clint plays himself, which is to say Dirty Harry with arthritis. Do not go if you are offended by racial epithets but you just have to understand Clint's character, you see. This is the guy's acting swan song for goodness sake so live with it. Anyway, the climax is surprising and there is a message. For auto buffs, you'll love the title "character" and Clint's garage shop. And I loved the bluesy song over the closing credits. The song is more Oscar-worthy than most of the junk that gets nominated. Anyway, "Make my day" and give it 4 out of 5 stars.
THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON - I went to this film prepared not to like it. I'd seen the previews and it didn't appear to be my cup of tea. However, it passed the stern test and won me over. It is an excellent film, period. The Art Direction and scenery are second to none. the special effects and make up are much more Oscar-worthy than some ridiculous science fiction or action junkpiece. And Brad and the rest of the cast are fine too. The story sounds really schmaltzy but it is well told and really interesting and emotional. Try it, you'll like it. A surprising 5 out of 5 stars.
SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE - As with Ben Button I went prepared not to like this film. It's not my cup of tea again. This time, however, I liked it but not enough to say that it won me over. Recently, I read a review that called it a "shameless fairy tale" and compared it to "It's a Wonderful Life" (without the snow, I suppose). The review was entitled "Mr. Capra Goes To Mumbai", which I thought was rather clever and accurate. It is extremely well filmed often with hand-held cameras and the scenes of the Mumbai slums are striking to say the least. But the plot is predictable and there is no challenge for the viewer. The dance scene and catchy song at the end is supposed to make us feel good I guess but I was left wondering where Donald O'Connor and Gene Kelly were. It's worth seeing but only 4 out of 5 stars from me.
FROST/NIXON - A terrific film highlighted by Ray Langella's portrayal of Tricky Dick. He is excellent and gives a portrayal of the former president that shows all of the pathetic warts. The climactic scene leaves one with a tight gut. However, the film is lifeless at other times, given to smiling and winking by Frost. It might have been interesting to let the viewer see more background on the formidable "talk show host" and his partner in crime Reston. On the other hand that might have detracted from the central character of Langella's Nixon. 4 out of 5 stars!
Thursday, February 05, 2009
Headline clinic As a professional word-using and language-rearranging guy I'm often called upon to listen to Japanese explain to me what the nuances of various English words are and why my 40+ years of speaking and writing my native tongue cannot possibly equal the fact that they went to a very famous Japanese university. Despite this, I still have yet to be arrested for assault and battery with a dictionary, so clearly I am a patient person. However, I am losing patience with my colleagues at CTV and Canadian Press. They seem to consistently grab the wrong end of the stick when reporting on political matters. Now I have to fix their headlines and copy too.
It is one thing to chase an evil incompetent smirking son of priviledge from the White House and elect a decent president, but there are more, a lot more, where he came from and something must be done about it eventually.
From the Huffington Post (click through for more juicy robber baron audio)
Despite crippling losses, multibillion-dollar bailouts and the passing of some of the most prominent names in the business, employees at financial companies in New York, the now-diminished world capital of capital, collected an estimated $18.4 billion in bonuses for the year. That was the sixth-largest haul on record, according to a report released Wednesday by the New York State comptroller.
And yet, when someone suggests that the progressive income tax could be a little more progressive after eight years of tax cuts for the rich, he's derided as a socialist who is engaging in class warfare. Sometimes I really wonder, in light of things like this, why there aren't angry pitchfork-and-torch wielding mobs in the streets of America